cvs commit: www/en index.xsl

[David O'Brien]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 07:05:24AM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> "David O'Brien" <obrien at FreeBSD.org> wrote
>   in <20040920211839.GA15066 at hub.freebsd.org>:
> 
> obrien> On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 05:41:26AM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> obrien> >  I would like to make it clear that FreeBSD supports EM64T
> obrien> >  by using the Intel's architecture name because the word
> obrien> >  AMD64 can confuse the users.  Is that unacceptable?
> obrien> 
> obrien> If I can list AMD Athlon, AMD K6, AMD K5, VIA, Cyrix, Transmeta, National
> obrien> Semiconductor, IBM, etc... in the list rather than "x86 compatible".  For
> obrien> Alpha we would need to add Samsung, who also made some Alpha dirivitives.
> obrien> For Sparc64 we would need to add Fujitsu.
> 
>  These you mentioned are not architecture name.  And the terms
>  AMD64 and EM64T have a bit complicated history, so to mention
>  the both should help the users.

I'm sorry, I don't quite understand what you're saying.

 
> obrien> People owning Intel EM64T machines well know that it is a copy of the
> obrien> AMD64 platform.
> 
>  I think it should be explicitly stated as long as there
>  are questions like the following:
> 
>  http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?411B8E17.5020409
>  http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040807004555.14650.qmail
>  http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200408121227.51268.jkim

I could show you just as many (and more) puzzle users wondering if we
supported Athlon, or just Intel's ia32/i386 platform.  There will always
be confusion and ignorance.

-- 
-- David  (obrien at FreeBSD.org)