From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Aug  6 09:18:36 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43563106564A
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Thu,  6 Aug 2009 09:18:36 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from erich@apsara.com.sg)
Received: from babylon.webvis.net (babylon.webvis.net [202.157.163.226])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B5948FC14
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Thu,  6 Aug 2009 09:18:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.0.1.240] ([119.73.191.194]) by apsara.com.sg ;
	Thu, 06 Aug 2009 17:18:12 +0800 SGT
From: Erich Dollansky <erich@apsara.com.sg>
Organization: apsara green technology pte ltd
To: Mark Stapper <stark@mapper.nl>
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 17:18:09 +0800
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10
References: <200908051414.49468.david@vizion2000.net>
	<200908061631.04639.erich@apsara.com.sg>
	<4A7A9709.9070803@mapper.nl>
In-Reply-To: <4A7A9709.9070803@mapper.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200908061718.10505.erich@apsara.com.sg>
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64
	used	for	into quad core
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 09:18:36 -0000

Hi,

On 06 August 2009 pm 16:40:41 Mark Stapper wrote:
> Erich Dollansky wrote:
>
> > IA 64? Wans't this once - or still is - the term used for the
> > Itanium?
>
> The one that didn't stick... indeed.

do they really sell machines with this CPU in numbers?

I have not seen one in the wild.
>
> > Yes, also Intel can fail. Intel also failed with their first
> > 32 bit design. Wasn't iAPX-32 ist name? Long before the 80386
> > came up?
>
> As I was an embryo when the 80386 was first produced, I
> searched for this one...
> Possibally the same thing though:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_iAPX_432

Oh, yes, the 4 was missing.

Erich