You misunderstood the point. i686 is more like the sub architecture of the cpu. Intel's cpu sub architecture went through 8080, 8086, i286, i386, i486, i586, i686 see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 1:00 AM, Peter C. Ndikuwera <[email protected]>wrote: > On 10 June 2010 16:35, brian muhumuza <[email protected]> wrote: > >> You should only be worried about i686 if your workstation processor is >> below pentium II. But i'm quite sure pentium II disappeared around 2001. >> >> Really? Unless I misunderstand the point you're making, Pentium 3's, as > well as older Pentium 4's & Xeon's were all 32-bit x86 processors. 64-bit > was only supported starting with next-gen Pentium 4, Xeon, Celeron D, Dual > Core as well as the newer Core i[3,5,7], Core 2 Duo, Atom, etc, etc. See > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit. > > Since I personally have a couple of older Celeron's & P4's lying around, > 32bit is definitely still important. > > P. > > _______________________________________________ > LUG mailing list > [email protected] > http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug > > LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ > > All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including > attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. > --------------------------------------- > > > -- //MB
_______________________________________________ LUG mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. ---------------------------------------
