Funnily, I have to ask why?  If there is to be 64-bit addressing, do 64-bit (unsigned) addressing for the sake of Saint Octaval!  They seem to quibble alot about this segmented space for the OS and that for drivers and this for whatever.  For Christie's SAKE, there are 17 ExaBytes of available space - you could put the OS in 900GB or so (as in ten million times that) and still have enough to simulate the entire universe for the first several million years - ya f&cks!  Again, seems like hemmin' and haulin' to me.  Either get down to it or say it as it is - 64-bit pseudo addressing as long as we can't figure out how to accomodate such large memory spaces.
Hands on forehead (as prophetic foreseer), I don't see any progress in this for the next five to ten years.  In five years, we'll have reasonable motherboards that support 64-128GB of memory (paultry, crumbs).  I mean, in the next six months I want to see the motherboard that addresses 1024GB (1TB) of memory for less than $10K.   Prophet - mispelling of 'profit'.  Deepak Chopra (whom I despise as a newagy technofile) said that - I am a profit.

Welcome to the machine - you have finally realized that money makes the world go round and that all power corrupts (the treasury).  Whence one mentioned that monetary equality was laughable - I note that without such, humanity will perish.  If only the ultra-rich survive the, say, impact of a multi-megaton asteroid, would you call that special survival? :)

C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes it harder, but when you do, you blow your whole leg off.

 -- Bjarne Stroustrup

Contact Me | Kuroyume's DevelopmentZone