cvs commit: www/en index.xsl

[Tom Rhodes]

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 17:53:18 -0400
John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> On Monday 20 September 2004 05:18 pm, David O'Brien wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 05:41:26AM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> > > "David E. O'Brien" <obrien at FreeBSD.org> wrote
> > > obrien>   Log:
> > > obrien>   Use consistent wording.
> >
> > ..
> >
> > > -		x86 compatible, AMD64 and Intel EM64T, Alpha, IA-64, PC-98
> > > +		x86 compatible, AMD64 compatible, Alpha, IA-64, PC-98
> >
> > ..
> >
> > >  I would like to make it clear that FreeBSD supports EM64T
> > >  by using the Intel's architecture name because the word
> > >  AMD64 can confuse the users.  Is that unacceptable?
> >
> > If I can list AMD Athlon, AMD K6, AMD K5, VIA, Cyrix, Transmeta, National
> > Semiconductor, IBM, etc... in the list rather than "x86 compatible".  For
> > Alpha we would need to add Samsung, who also made some Alpha dirivitives.
> > For Sparc64 we would need to add Fujitsu.
> > Where does it stop?
> >
> > People owning Intel EM64T machines well know that it is a copy of the
> > AMD64 platform.
> 
> x86 doesn't say Intel in the name, whereas amd64 does have AMD in its name.  
> Maybe if we just called it 'x86-64 compatible' rather than 'amd64 
> compatible'?

This sounds like the best way to go in my opinion.

-- 
Tom Rhodes