On Saturday 17 February 2007 12:10, Ben Scott wrote: > On 2/17/07, Jason Stephenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If end users are defined as home users and office users, then 64 > > bits will never matter to them, just like 32 bits doesn't matter to > > them today. > > That's not really true. 16-bit machines are *very* limited. There > is not a whole lot you can do in 64 kilobytes of RAM (all you can > directly address with a 16-bit address word).
Not quite so. As a programmer of embedded systems, I would point out that sales of microprocessors with address spaces of 16-bits (or less) exceed those of the larger machines by orders of magnitude. There are many things done by 16-bit address space computers that can't be done by the larger ones. Like make cheap, low powered, small consumer products. Everybody has a place in the chorus. The reference to the automobile engine cylinder count in another post is a good one. Four, six, and eight cylinder engines each continue to be commonly used. The Lotus has a 12 or 16 cylinder engine, I know of no other. By analogy, does the 64-bit machine run on 8-cylinders or 12-cylinders? Jim Kuzdrall _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/