what is the difference between x64 and x86

[relic]

Not exactly correct. The first home computers had what IBM called a 386.
Then went to a 486.

8088,286, then the 386.

I remember seeing an old show from the 80's where the line was, "A 686?
Hell, the 486 was just put on the market and you've got a 686? What
happened to the 586?"
Then pentium was introduced. As a response to the more powerful AMD.

The '586' project became the XEON.

 

[Ed Cryer]

in message what is the difference between x64 and x86?

x86 -x64 = x22

Corrigendum.

x(86) -x(64) = x(22)
but
x86 -x64 = 22

Ed

 

[relic]

<snip>

Seems like you're overlooking a whole lot of fun hardware that came
before the 386. Notably, the 8086 & 8088, the 6502 & 6510, the
Motorola 680x0 series, and the list goes on.

He was referring to what IBM released, I don't remember IBM using any of
those except the 8088; did they? IBM has never been an innovator and used
anything 'new'.

 

[Rebecca]

"PRATIK" wrote in message what is the difference between x64 and x86?

x86 -x64 = x22

x86
- x64
_____
22

 

[charlie]

Well, if you are focusing on being correct, that's not at all
correct. The first home computers using Intel CPUs had an 8088 chip
as their processor. The next generation was 80286. The 80386 wasn't
until the third generation (and I've left out the 8086 and the 80186,
since they were generally used only in specialty machines).





No, it was a 32-bit chip.

Actually, there were home computers well before the 80286 and 386
6502 (Apple I & II) and others.
8080, Z80 Radio Shack, Heathkit, Zenith, Altar, others.

8008 (Industrial, embedded)
4004 (Industrial, controllers, etc.)

The 286 was the premier non windows processor in it's day, and the 80386
was really the first processor that allowed windows 3.whatever to be
fully functional.

The 8080 & Z-80 and it's successors were used in a fair number of dos
and a few CPM based computers in the late 80's. The Heathkit/Zenith Kit
(Z-80 based) was available in the early 80's.

8080's were used in a series of HP "smart terminals" in the 1970's and
early 80's, with some versions having HP basic built in. Those with
basic were used mainly to control HPIB instruments and test equipment.
The others were used as control consoles on minicomputer based systems.
The HP test systems were "state of the art", and so accurate that they
had to be "calibrated" with portable transfer standards that were one
level lower than the national standards. Typically, users such as DOD
and the USAF did not have standards accurate enough to do a complete
calibration.

 

[Char Jackson]

He was referring to what IBM released, I don't remember IBM using any of
those except the 8088; did they? IBM has never been an innovator and used
anything 'new'.

I didn't realize he was limiting his statement to IBM, (it doesn't
read that way to me), but even so, he's still overlooking a bunch of
fun stuff that came before the 386.

 

[relic]

I didn't realize he was limiting his statement to IBM, (it doesn't
read that way to me), but even so, he's still overlooking a bunch of
fun stuff that came before the 386.

Your correct. I interpreted "The first home computers had what IBM
called..." wrong.
<oops...>

 

[Char Jackson]

Your correct. I interpreted "The first home computers had what IBM
called..." wrong.
<oops...>

No problem, thanks.

 

[Char Jackson]

8080's were used in a series of HP "smart terminals" in the 1970's and
early 80's, with some versions having HP basic built in. Those with
basic were used mainly to control HPIB instruments and test equipment.
The others were used as control consoles on minicomputer based systems.
The HP test systems were "state of the art", and so accurate that they
had to be "calibrated" with portable transfer standards that were one
level lower than the national standards. Typically, users such as DOD
and the USAF did not have standards accurate enough to do a complete
calibration.

I was in the Air Force in the 1970's and 1980's, using an HP ALM-191
automated HPIB test console, and yes, it had HP BASIC built in. I was
using HP BASIC during the day and Commodore64 BASIC at night. Fun
times.

 

[Rebecca]

Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On 3/21/2011 15:09, Frank ess wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:[email protected]"
type="cite">
<br>
"richard" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:[email protected]">&lt;[email protected]&gt;</a> wrote in
message
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="<br>
<br>
[...]
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<br>
Quite frankly, Microsoft's use of x86 and x64 is a nostalgic
misgnomer.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
You have to keep an eye on the MisGnomes of Redmond. Gnever gnow
what they will come up with gnext.
<br>
<br>
PCjr, anyone?
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<font size="+2">Oh yeah, 'BEST' keyboard ever offered in a PC.<br>
<br>
</font>
</body>
</html>

Is all that necessary (e-mail address removed)?
Post Plain Text in newsgroups (e-mail address removed)!

 

[Vic RR Garcia]

Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
/snip
<font size="+2">Oh yeah, 'BEST' keyboard ever offered in a PC.<br>

Is all that necessary (e-mail address removed)?
Post Plain Text in newsgroups (e-mail address removed)!

Of course NO, but blame your NewsReader more than me.

The response was send in both, HTML and PlainText. Most people using Win
7 use a newsreader able to handle HTML, clearly not your case and I
apologize.
But in this time and age, practically NOBODY is using a newsreader that
cannot handle HTML, if if were a Linux newsgroup, I'll never sent a HTML
response, but,
it's a Windows one, so most likely be seen in HTML.

Anyway, since it was available in both formats, your reader should have
picked the plaintext one, it did NOT, so it's not totally my fault, time
to update your newsreader.

We are in the XXI century.

 

[Tom Lake]

"Ed Cryer" wrote in message

in message what is the difference between x64 and x86?

x86 -x64 = x22

Corrigendum.

x(86) -x(64) = x(22)
but
x86 -x64 = 22

Ed
So why is 12x - 5x = 7x? 8^)

Tom L

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

<VBG> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+do+I+let+me+google+that+for+you

Actually, I hate lmgtfy, but I love your self-referent link!

 

[Paul]

Of course NO, but blame your NewsReader more than me.

The response was send in both, HTML and PlainText. Most people using Win
7 use a newsreader able to handle HTML, clearly not your case and I
apologize.
But in this time and age, practically NOBODY is using a newsreader that
cannot handle HTML, if if were a Linux newsgroup, I'll never sent a HTML
response, but,
it's a Windows one, so most likely be seen in HTML.

Anyway, since it was available in both formats, your reader should have
picked the plaintext one, it did NOT, so it's not totally my fault, time
to update your newsreader.

We are in the XXI century.

Nobody *wants* HTML, because of the potential for abuse.

Ordinary users posting HTML/text postings are not the issue.

It's hackers who craft specially constructed USENET postings that
are the concern. (You'll know, when you click on one by mistake.)
On occasion, these hackers have even managed to get around
server-side filtering.

To see a typical server admin policy, try here.

http://aioe.org/index.php?terms-of-use

"HTML articles of any sort are forbidden even if sent
to groups that allow the users to post HTML articles ; the
restriction is on this server."

Other server admins, block HTML on a per group basis. One admin has
claimed to allow HTML in microsoft.* groups as an exception, but why
there should be an exception wasn't made clear.

This has been discussed before, and there are enough technically
savvy users who don't want it, for the restrictions to stay in place.

When HTML was originally invented, it was pretty innocuous stuff.
All the bloated technologies added over the years, made it into a mine field.

We never have to worry about plain text, because it doesn't "bite you
on the ass".

USENET postings don't come with a "web of trust", and if any idiot
could post booby trapped HTML postings, think of what would happen.
Imagine if the poor web admin, had to construct additional filters
on the server, to remove booby traps and the like (like adding an
AV filter to the feed). What a mess...

Paul

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

You mean x22 don't you?

Go to your rooms, both of you

 

[Char Jackson]

On 3/21/2011 18:21, Rebecca wrote:

Of course NO, but blame your NewsReader more than me.

I blame the user for not configuring their posting software properly.

The response was send in both, HTML and PlainText. Most people using Win
7 use a newsreader able to handle HTML, clearly not your case and I
apologize.
But in this time and age, practically NOBODY is using a newsreader that
cannot handle HTML, if if were a Linux newsgroup, I'll never sent a HTML
response, but,
it's a Windows one, so most likely be seen in HTML.

You're making quite a few assumptions there that aren't supported by
facts, as far as I can tell. You may want to reconsider, and I hope
you will.

Anyway, since it was available in both formats, your reader should have
picked the plaintext one, it did NOT, so it's not totally my fault, time
to update your newsreader.

So everyone should accommodate you? Wouldn't it be a lot easier if you
accommodated the rest of us? This isn't an HTML group. Like most of
Usenet, it's a plain text group. HTML has no place here.

We are in the XXI century.

Thanks for your consideration.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On 3/21/2011 15:09, Frank ess wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:[email protected]"
type="cite">
<br>
"richard" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:[email protected]">&lt;[email protected]&gt;</a> wrote in
message
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="<br>
<br>
[...]
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<br>
Quite frankly, Microsoft's use of x86 and x64 is a nostalgic
misgnomer.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
You have to keep an eye on the MisGnomes of Redmond. Gnever gnow
what they will come up with gnext.
<br>
<br>
PCjr, anyone?
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<font size="+2">Oh yeah, 'BEST' keyboard ever offered in a PC.<br>
<br>
</font>
</body>
</html>

Is all that necessary (e-mail address removed)?
Post Plain Text in newsgroups (e-mail address removed)!

Use a different newsreader, (e-mail address removed)!

40tude Dialog displayed it normally, i.e., as text - I didn't even know
it was HTML.

But you're right, one should not post HTML in Usenet, so mulþumesc.

 

[Bob I]

Not exactly correct. The first home computers had what IBM called a 386.
Then went to a 486.
Wrong
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PCjr

I remember seeing an old show from the 80's where the line was, "A 686?
Hell, the 486 was just put on the market and you've got a 686? What
happened to the 586?"
Then pentium was introduced. As a response to the more powerful AMD.


Beginning with the 80386 chip in 1978, which was a 16 bit one, IBM then
began advancing the chips towards 32 bit.

Wrong again, the 8088 was/is 16 bit and the 80386 is/was 32 bit.

 

[relic]

Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On 3/21/2011 15:09, Frank ess wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:[email protected]"
type="cite">
<br>
"richard" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:[email protected]">&lt;[email protected]&gt;</a> wrote in
message
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="<br>
<br>
[...]
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<br>
Quite frankly, Microsoft's use of x86 and x64 is a nostalgic
misgnomer.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
You have to keep an eye on the MisGnomes of Redmond. Gnever gnow
what they will come up with gnext.
<br>
<br>
PCjr, anyone?
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<font size="+2">Oh yeah, 'BEST' keyboard ever offered in a PC.<br>
<br>
</font>
</body>
</html>

Is all that necessary (e-mail address removed)?
Post Plain Text in newsgroups (e-mail address removed)!

Use a different newsreader, (e-mail address removed)!

40tude Dialog displayed it normally, i.e., as text - I didn't even know
it was HTML.

But you're right, one should not post HTML in Usenet, so mulþumesc.

Rebecca uses WLM 14 (like a lot of us). It sees it alright. I believe she's
just telling the poaster not to poast in HTML (as I have done too).

 

[Bob I]

[...]

Quite frankly, Microsoft's use of x86 and x64 is a nostalgic misgnomer.

You have to keep an eye on the MisGnomes of Redmond. Gnever gnow what
they will come up with gnext.

PCjr, anyone?

Oh yeah, 'BEST' keyboard ever offered in a PC.

In this case "PC" stands for Pathetic Crap.