From: "Matthew" <104522 DOT 404 AT compuserve DOT invalid> Subject: Re: WARNING: DOS is about to die. Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer,comp.os.msdos.djgpp References: <7quo1t$94k$1 AT solomon DOT cs DOT rose-hulman DOT edu> <37D2ECE3 DOT 9BB2B63E AT unb DOT ca> <37D46EBF DOT 22AAC1C4 AT hmc DOT edu> Message-ID: <01befe96$5b45c080$58106ecb@matthew1> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1161 Lines: 24 NNTP-Posting-Host: ip88.net.voyager.co.nz X-Trace: ozemail.com.au 937302602 203.110.16.88 (Tue, 14 Sep 1999 19:50:02 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 19:50:02 EST Organization: OzEmail Ltd, Australia Distribution: world Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 09:50:02 GMT To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Micro$oft rewrote Windoze NT and it still turned out to be a dog... -- Replace the .invalid with .com to reply via e-mail Nate Eldredge wrote in article <37D46EBF DOT 22AAC1C4 AT hmc DOT edu>... > Endlisnis wrote: > > Word from Microsoft is that they will not be able to get > > a 64-bit version of Windows out until ~2003, and it will be a complete re-write > > (because of the large penalty for executing 32-bit code on the Merced > > processor). > > "Complete rewrite" sounds unlikely to me. There is already NT for the > Alpha, and I doubt it was a complete rewrite. > > The 32-bit code can be got rid of just by recompiling, and I doubt the > architecture differences require *that* much work. But I suppose it's > possible that Microsoft's code is so screwed up that it really is > necessary...