YearOfTheLinuxDesktop wrote:Future versions of Windows will have to be "fundamentally different" in order to take advantage of multicore processors, according to Ty Carlson of Microsoft. "You're going to see in excess of 8, 16, 64 and beyond processors on your client computer," said Carlson, director of technical strategy at Microsoft, during a panel discussion at the Future in Review conference. Windows Vista, on the other hand, is "designed to run on 1, 2, maybe 4 processors," he said, referring to the fact that quad-core processors are now available from Intel and are on the way from Advanced Micro Devices.
The problem, as has been noted on many occasions, is that loads of PC applications were programmed with serial processing in mind, meaning that the performance of those applications increased as a chip's clock speed increased. That's not how it works anymore. The chip industy has decided that multiple cores are the best way to keep increasing performance, and that means applications now have to be designed with parallel processing in mind.
I don't understand this and think it was taken out of context. NT runs on 64 cpus today and could run 32 for some time. I had a 4 way server NT box ~8 years ago. I don't know anyone that actually buys those massive machines, but it can work. NT can support multiple cpus and cores, and thousands of threads - that is not the issue. The issue I think he is talking about is parallel libraries and apis that *easily allow the dev to actually use those cores and threads. 100 seperate user apps could use 1 core each on a 100 cpu machine (for example) and run fine. The hard part is getting 1 app to leverage the same 100 cores and use them. Big difference - that is issue. Personally, I don't think there will be a majic bullet here. They can make it a ton easier however with tools and libraries.