[Beowulf] [craig.hunter@nasa.gov: Re: Intel?]
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Franz Marini franz.marini at mi.infn.itThu Jun 9 02:24:07 PDT 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] [craig.hunter@nasa.gov: Re: Intel?]
- Next message: [Beowulf] [craig.hunter@nasa.gov: Re: Intel?]
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 06:25, Jim Lux wrote: > WinXP and Win2K aren't all that hardware dependent at the lower levels. > There's a Hardware Abstraction Layer (HAL) in the OS that separates all the > icky interface details. Assuming your source code compiles for x86 with the > API and libraries, it will run just fine, regardless. True. For the OS. But you have to take into account the drivers, specialty code that makes direct access to the underlying hardware bypassing the HAL, and so on. Whereas there is indeed little code such as that, it is true that most firms won't be willing to rewrite (or modify) their drivers specifically for a *single* architecture (that is, Apple/x86). Dunno, I don't see neither Microsoft, nor most of the add-on cards manufacturers out there willing to spend time to port anything to a new, niche-market, architecture, when there is a well established one already based on x86... Maybe I'm wrong, at this point in time, they're almost all only speculations. Time will tell :) Franz --------------------------------------------------------- Franz Marini Sys Admin and Software Analyst, Dept. of Physics, University of Milan, Italy. email : franz.marini at mi.infn.it phone : +39 02 50317221 ---------------------------------------------------------
- Previous message: [Beowulf] [craig.hunter@nasa.gov: Re: Intel?]
- Next message: [Beowulf] [craig.hunter@nasa.gov: Re: Intel?]
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
