First Windows 8 details emerge

[karachidude]

First Windows 8 details emerge

Leak reveals plans for 128-bit OS

The version of Windows that succeeds Windows 7 will include a 128bit architecture, according to an embarrassing leak from Microsoft's research and development team in the US.

Microsoft employee Robert Morgan appeared to detail the software giant's plans for Windows 8, and even Windows 9, on business networking site LinkedIn, where he listed his job as 'senior research and development'. His profile has now been removed from the main LinkedIn site, but is still viewable in Google's search cache.

In it, he says he's "working in high security department for research and development involving strategic planning for medium and longterm projects".

He goes on to say his R&D projects include: "128-bit architecture compatibility with the Windows 8 kernel and Windows 9 project plan". He's also responsible for "forming relationships with major partners: Intel, AMD, HP and IBM".

Windows 7, due to become available worldwide two weeks today on October 22, is available in both 32bit and 64bit versions.

Indeed, we've had the option of 64bit versions of Windows since Windows XP Professional x64 Edition was launched May 2005. But while XP's successor, Vista, is also available in both 32bit and 64bit versions, the latter has failed to take off in a big way.

64bit computers, which can address more RAM and are theoretically more powerful than 32bit equivalents, are likely to become more popular with Windows 7. A 128bit version of Windows 8 would represent the next leap in performance.

According to Microsoft's plans to release a new desktop version of Windows every three years, Windows 8 is scheduled to become available in 2012.

Source

K'dude

[Tucker]

bloody amazing! good find k'dude! ^_^

[SokraT]

a 128-Bit OS :o .THIS MEANS THAT THERE IS "340282366920938463463374607431768211456" MEMORY BLOCKS AVAILABLE.at the 1-byte memory block,this means that we can use a f***in "316912650057057350374175801344" GIGS of memory.what the hell are they thinking of ?!!.the 64-bit interface isn't yet fully exploited.

[Toshiro]

a 128-Bit OS :o .THIS MEANS THAT THERE IS "340282366920938463463374607431768211456" MEMORY BLOCKS AVAILABLE.at the 1-byte memory block,this means that we can use a f***in "316912650057057350374175801344" GIGS of memory.what the hell are they thinking of ?!!.the 64-bit interface isn't yet fully exploited.

BREATHE MAH MAN... BREAATHHHEE :lmao:

You guys know this could be some sort of spam? Just wait for some Official info about W 8/9..( Before people begin dieing here :lol: )

[DKT27]

I think it's too far to comment anythin now. First stick to Windows 7 and see it's positives. It's tech. It keeps on improving.

[Bizarre™]

Let's get 64-bit sorted out before we think about 128-bit!

So, it seems that Microsoft has its eye on 128-bit support for Windows 8, or possibly Windows 9, and this news has sent tech pundits into a spin. While it might not be too early for Microsoft to start thinking about 128-bit support, until we finally make 32-bit history, introducing new architecture into the mix isn’t helpful.

The problem is that for most users, outside of power-users, servers and specialist applications, 32-bit is enough. Most machines I come across have between 256MB and 2GB of RAM. Many OEMs are pushing higher amounts of RAM, but the truth is that beyond the 2GB barrier, for the the average user it’s a bit like a mule with a bicycle … it’s cool, but not really useful.

If Vista had taken off better than it did (and now that Microsoft CEO Ballmer admits that Vista flopped, that’s now fact rather than a point of debate) then it’s possible that 64-bit would have gained greater traction over the past few years. OEMs are now shipping increasing numbers of 64-bit systems lately, and rightly so given that for too long customers had been paying for RAM that they couldn’t use because of the 32-bit OS that the OEMs pre-installed on the PC.

Problem is, Windows 7 still comes in both 32-bit and 64-bit flavors. To make matters worse, the Starter edition of Windows 7 only comes in 32-bit, and since this likely to be popular on netbooks, and netbooks themselves are popular, gives developers just the excuse they need to cling to 32-bit programming for a few more years. Even if Microsoft announced today that 32-bit wouldn’t be supported in Windows 8, the existence of Windows 7 Starter guarantees that 32-bit code compatibility will plague the transition.

So, before Microsoft unleashes 128-bit on businesses, consumers and developers, let’s put the final nail into the 32-bit coffin and bury it once and for all. Sure, 128-bit support is a great bullet point to put on Windows 8 sales material, but unless we encounter a pressing need to break the 18.45 exabytes RAM barriers, introducing it in Windows 8 will cause more problems that it will solve.

Source: Link

[karachidude]

neatly put,specially the mule with a bicycle part :lol:

[SokraT]

if this was the low-end PCs survival news,i think i made it.i survived the news :lol: .

[RadioActive]

a 128-Bit OS :o .THIS MEANS THAT THERE IS "340282366920938463463374607431768211456" MEMORY BLOCKS AVAILABLE.at the 1-byte memory block,this means that we can use a f***in "316912650057057350374175801344" GIGS of memory.what the hell are they thinking of ?!!.the 64-bit interface isn't yet fully exploited.

My thoughts exactly, I highly doubt the whole "128bit" thing, 64bit is still a work-in-progress (software-wise) and it's still got a looooooongggg way to go before it completely replaces the x86 systems, so it doesn't make any sense to even consider develop such an overkill system yet, and most imoprtantly there's no point in developing a system that there isn't any hardware to even support it as if yet (unless I'm missing something).

[manpe]

Definitely something for the (distant) future.. but unless they're planning to release W8 in 10 years, then I can't see it happening in the next Win version. Windows 9 seems more likely for that kind of leap.

[Jota.Ce]

My security suite has raised and Spam alert xDDDDDDDDD

Where does 128-bit processors (*AMD Bulldozer isn't*) and memories are ?

Only some Intel i7 CPUs are 64-bit natively (*Core 2 isn't*). All memory modules have 64-bit channels.

And the only thing i've clearly seen about 64-bit is that 64-bit executables are bigger than 32-bit. Even 64-bit OS on 64-bit processors can be slower than 32/32 in some tests.

Most people i know (if not all) have 32-bit OS, people with 64-bit are people with 4GB+ RAM and they've usually many problems with 64-bit compatibility.

So... don't make people laugh, stupid M$ employee.