| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
6 Caveats – 64-bit Windows Vista | |
|
||
| Time: 05:36 EST/10:36 GMT | News Source: Softpedia | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
There is little doubt that 64-bit architectures are the future, as far as the parallel evolution of processors and operating systems goes. But when it comes down to Windows, the 32-bit version of the platform will survive not only with Windows Vista, but also with Windows 7. At this point in time, among the scarce details made available by Microsoft about the forthcoming iteration of Windows, to follow Vista, the only sure thing is that Windows 7 will come in both 32-bit and 64-bit flavors. According to estimates from the Redmond company, by mid 2008, the install base of the Windows operating system would surpass the 1 billion milestone worldwide. But the vast majority of those Windows copies will still be 32-bit, largely just Windows XP and Windows Vista. On the server side, Microsoft is preparing to ship the last 32-bit operating system with Windows Server 2008. The same is not valid with Vista, but perhaps maybe it will be with Windows 7. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 324 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:31:32 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 72426 (69.109.5.189) at 1/13/2008 3:27:05 PM |
|
Pure rubbish...
Half the information in this article is either outdated, wrong, or presented in a way to mislead people. 1) It says there is no benefit of running a 64bit OS if your applications are 32bit. Wrong, the OS running in native 64bit mode uses more registers, process data faser, and thus the underlying OS runs faster, making even 32bit applications run faster. 2) It warns of problems with 32bit applications on a 64bit OS. The only 32bit applicaitons that would have problems on a 64bit OS is an application that uses a specific 32bit driver that is run outside of the Usermode framework. There are about 10 applications in the world that do this, and the chance on anyone using them is about 1 in 1,000,000. 3) It gives several warnings about driver availability, yet Vista 64bit has MORE drivers available for it than WindowsXP (32bit) does even. And although Vista 64bit does have less drivers than Vista 32bit, they are both ahead of all other 32bit OSes. 4) It states that all drivers have to be 64bit and signed. The only drivers that have to be signed are non usermode drivers, and these are becoming more rare, as drivers in Vista can and are designed to run at user levels. Basically only things to be of concern are Sound, Video, Mainboard chipset, HD Controller - stuff like Scanners, printers, mice, etc all run in higher driver level modes and don't need signed drivers. And I could go on and on... These 'tech' editors/writers are hacks at best and possibility intentionally trying to start controversy to get viewers. It is possible that they are just too stupid to realized how little they understand before they start bloviating on a subject like this. This post was edited by anthonyspt on Sunday, January 13, 2008 at 15:28. |
| #2 By 7754 (75.72.153.112) at 1/13/2008 8:20:32 PM |
|
#1--yes and no. Besides the much greater addressable memory, the 64-bit procs do have double the registers, true... but according to most benchmarks I've seen, the 64-bit version of XP and Vista are usually on par with or slightly slower than their 32-bit counterparts (apart from actual 64-bit apps, of which there aren't many... yet).
Regarding compatibility with 32-bit applications, true, there shouldn't be much trouble--if all 32-bit apps were entirely 32-bit. There are 32-bit apps out there that have 16-bit installers, for example. On the other hand, 64-bit versions of XP and Vista open up some of the other memory limits (both hard-coded and adjustable via the registry, etc.) in Windows--beyond just the physical addressable memory. Nonetheless, most laptops are limited to 4 GB and desktops to 8 GB. I think at this point, unless you've got a workstation-class board that supports 32/64 GB of memory, there aren't many reasons to look at 64-bit Vista (or XP). |
| #3 By 1896 (68.153.171.248) at 1/14/2008 7:56:18 AM |
|
#1) I would love to use Vista 64 on my Toshiba Tablet M400 but... the vast majority of the Toshiba utilities are 32bit and will not install/work in a 64bit environment. In the desktop world things are a little bit better but not great too.
Evem MS was really slow in releasing 64 bit drivers for its own products. I am pretti sure that things will change with Windows 7; 4GB memory will probably be a standard so manifacturers will be more compelled to ship 64bit drivers. |
| #4 By 2960 (72.196.195.185) at 1/14/2008 12:02:49 PM |
|
Show-stopper for me.... VPN software. Namely, CheckPoint SecureClient.
TL |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 324 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:31:32 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
