Why do AMDlets get upset when you refer to x86 as Intel-x86 when they themselves refer to their 64-bit version of x86...

Why do AMDlets get upset when you refer to x86 as Intel-x86 when they themselves refer to their 64-bit version of x86 as AMD64? Should I say AMD-Intel-x86_64 or just drop the AMD entirely since all they did was make an addition to an existing architecture?

Attached: 1535905919250.jpg (701x515, 190K)

You should kys

DAWG intel punked out some scorching eternal blaze of unending horrors that set fire to everything you hold dear and love. Meanwhile AMD just made a huge improvement to the existing x86 architecture and kept backwards comparability a priority as well.

No they didn't. I don't even use x86. AMD just added something that every other architecture had had for 20 years beforehand. It wasn't that big of a deal. It should really just be called 'Intel x86', though.

Then why did intel fail to do so? Why did they scrap the whole architecture and build it from the ground up?

How the fuck should I know? It's a crap architecture anyway and needs to be destroyed.

>Why do AMDlets get upset when you refer to x86 as Intel-x86
Nobody gets upset about this

I have first hand experience that they do.

Prove it

But there's literally nothing better.

It's my experience, you stupid redditor. Why are the "New Atheist" followers so autistic?

There's nothing worse. Why do you think x86 is the best?

I think you're retarded for taking the time to call it Intel-x86 when x86 is sufficient in almost every use case. x86_64 is sufficient if you're so afraid of mentioning AMD's involvement.

I'm not afraid of mentioning them. Though they are a scummy company. I just think the credit of naming something after them is undue.

Because it's actually a lot better than most people realize. You do know modern AMD64 is just 90% RISC with a CISC translator, right?

Despite them literally stepping up to the plate when it mattered and when intel decided to squander billions on a meme architecture?

K

How is it undue to credit them for improving an existing architecture?

That is not quite true and I don't think you actually know what those terms mean.
The world would have been better off had they done nothing and let x86 die.
Learn to read.

You know, maybe we should call all cars Ford's because everyone else just copied them then. Thanks for sharing your insight into the world of business.

The Ford Motor company didn't invent anything in their motor vehicles, so that is not an apt comparison.

>Why do AMDlets get upset when you refer to x86 as Intel-x86 when they themselves refer to their 64-bit version of x86 as AMD64?
First off, I have never seen anybody get upset about that. Secondly, AMD called it "AMD64" and it has been pretty consistently called that since, this is not the case with "Intel-x86", that seems pedantic but we are mostly talking about autists here.

>Should I say AMD-Intel-x86_64 or just drop the AMD entirely since all they did was make an addition to an existing architecture?
x86_64 is the only reasonable option. x64 is pretty vague (x86 not explicitly mentioned anywhere) and possibly suggests to people not in the know that x86 is better/newer/86 bits. AMD64 is very confusing for people not in the know, who tend to assume it's special AMD feature. Intel64 has the same problems. x86_64 gets across the fact that's it's x86 and also 64 bit without implying it's specific to any vendor.

You have to disclose that you are being paid by israel.

I think it should be made more clear that it is an Intel creation. Not that it really matters, though, since it's a dying architecture at this point, only being kept alive by legacy software.

why?

Just so everyone is aware.

Why? We don't do this with much else, especially when the thing in question is not really a consumer product. When was the last time you saw it called Berkley RISC-V, or IEEE POSIX? Khronos OpenGL perhaps? VESA DisplayPort? Philips Semiconductor I2C? I can think of some examples, MIPI Camera Serial Interface for example, but it tends to be in cases where the name is otherwise extremely vague and needs clarifying.

It achieves nothing whatsoever and just adds confusion (Are AMD processors also Intel x86? Well yes, basically, try explaining that one to average Joe).

Everyone should know that AMD mostly make Intel processors. That's common knowledge.

It's not the 80s anymore grandpa

Grow up.

I'm not the one buried nearly four decades in the past here.

IA-64

Same reason we get angry when you call your mom "mom" - she was "slut", "whore" or "on your knees now bitch" long before she was "mom".

Attached: 1523404958749.png (668x768, 69K)

You know, if you yankees spelt mum correctly you wouldn't say it in such a nasally way. You have this awful habit of saying O as A, so when you say "mom" you actually say "maahm" in this awful nasally tone.

32 bit versions of the x86 architecture should be referred to as x86-32 or IA-32, and 64 bit versions should be referred to as x86-64, AMD64, or Intel64
all other naming conventions are cringe and shit

Because it derives from mother not muther. There is no uhm sounding part in mother, so your retarded ass mum abbreviation makes no sense. God I hate Euros so much, all of you are so self absorbed and all you do is talk shit about Americans and America. We don't care about you, stop riding our dicks.

It's mother, not maahther. Americans are just whiny pirates.

> It's my experience, you stupid redditor. Why are the "New Atheist" followers so autistic?
I have first hand experience that they don't get upset. There, someone close this thread.

fpbp
You might as well call it IA-32 as intel does. Stop being a moron.

the vowel is nasalized in both mom and mum. it's just that it's a long vowel in mom, and short in mum

>the vowel is nasalized in both mom and mum.
Maybe in muttland.