Will Windows 8 be 128-bit?

ThraxThrax 🐌Austin, TX Icrontian
edited October 2009 in Science & Tech
Will Windows 8 be 128-bit?

Comments

  • chrisWhitechrisWhite Littleton, CO
    edited October 2009
    Maybe this will mean all 3rd parties will get their act together and give us 64-bit support for everything.
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    Windows 8, codename Midori, is to be exclusively 64-bit.
  • MachineDogMachineDog New
    edited October 2009
    What would be the purpose of 128-bit?
  • SnarkasmSnarkasm Madison, WI Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    SUPER-unlimited memory addressability?
  • miragemirage
    edited October 2009
    I don't think 128-bit is coming any time soon, at least to the consumer space. What would require a larger address space than 17.2 billion gigabytes? Any ideas?
  • SnarkasmSnarkasm Madison, WI Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    Look, whether you like to admit it or not, Skynet is coming.

    And it's hungry.
  • ZuntarZuntar North Carolina Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    I'll believe it when i see it.
  • ardichokeardichoke Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    Snarkasm wrote:
    Look, whether you like to admit it or not, Skynet is coming.

    And it's hungry.
    Wait... how can an AI be hungry? It has no stomach

    /me 's brain asplodes
  • AlexDeGruvenAlexDeGruven Wut? Meechigan Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    It would make sense that 128-bit compatibility would be built into the kernel for both server and desktop OSs.

    Since MS has been using (essentially) a unified kernel architecture since XP/2003 (XP and 2003 share a kernel, Vista and 2008 share a kernel, 7 and 2008R2 share a kernel), it's been on the front-end user experience and back-end processes where the server and desktop OSs have differentiated themselves.

    At 128-bit, encryption and compression operations would be super-massive-insaneo-fast, as well.
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    Well, let's see... 128-bit is the key size for many of today's popular encryption algorithms, it can process quadruple-precision float/int (big deal for science). Those are the big two.
  • miragemirage
    edited October 2009
    Ok, it is not all about address space, it makes sense now.
  • MachineDogMachineDog New
    edited October 2009
    That's what I was asking. I had read about the encryption key sizes, but I wasn't sure if that actually made a difference.

    Also, can/do graphics cards do this kind of work currently?
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    GPUs are much faster at encryption and compression, but not so much double (and especially not) quadruple-precision float/int.
  • TimTim Southwest PA Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    We are just getting 64 bit to be widely accepted, and now they want 128 bit. Some people (like software engineers) are just never happy with what they've got.......
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    People being happy with what they've got has given us the last decade of misery under IE6. ;)
  • ButtersButters CA Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    Whether or not 128-bit is used or accepted 5 years from now, I think its a good move and proper planning. Besides I rather have an OS planned with 128-bit support rather than an afterthought.

    Cloud enviroments may require this- or at least Exchange 2015 will. Jerks!
  • ardichokeardichoke Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    Thrax wrote:
    People being happy with what they've got has given us the last decade of misery under IE6. ;)
    ... He says to the person that willingly uses IE6 still. >_<

    Being happy with what you have right now doesn't exactly fuel innovation.
Sign In or Register to comment.