64 Bit Dual Boot

If I had a version of ultimate which included both 32 and 64 bit systems
would I be allowed to install both on the same machine as a dual-boot for
comparison purposes?

You cannot have them both activated at the same time.

- Aaron

"Crow Mills" <Crow > wrote in message
newsEE0CCFF-7A94-45E5-BEE4-...
> If I had a version of ultimate which included both 32 and 64 bit systems
> would I be allowed to install both on the same machine as a dual-boot for
> comparison purposes?

I very much doubt that, there is but one product key that comes with it -
you would need some kind of volume license to do that, I'd suspect!

If, however, you wait six months before you install the second system there
is debate on the issue wether or not anyone will ever notice? ( If you don't
tell, which you just did!)

Then again, there's not much to compare - 64bit app's will NOT run on the
32bit version, but they SHOULD perform marginally better than the same 32bit
app UNLESS it involvs huge memory requirements - in which case the
performance difference WILL be significant!

If you really want to know how big the possible 'margin' might turn out to
be, it's your butt. My bet is that it will remain marginal to any standard.


Tony. . .


"Crow Mills" <Crow > wrote in message
newsEE0CCFF-7A94-45E5-BEE4-...
> If I had a version of ultimate which included both 32 and 64 bit systems
> would I be allowed to install both on the same machine as a dual-boot for
> comparison purposes?

"Tony Sperling" wrote:

> I very much doubt that, there is but one product key that comes with it -
> you would need some kind of volume license to do that, I'd suspect!
>
> If, however, you wait six months before you install the second system there
> is debate on the issue wether or not anyone will ever notice? ( If you don't
> tell, which you just did!)
>
> Then again, there's not much to compare - 64bit app's will NOT run on the
> 32bit version, but they SHOULD perform marginally better than the same 32bit
> app UNLESS it involvs huge memory requirements - in which case the
> performance difference WILL be significant!
>
> If you really want to know how big the possible 'margin' might turn out to
> be, it's your butt. My bet is that it will remain marginal to any standard.
>
>
> Tony. . .
>
>
> "Crow Mills" <Crow > wrote in message
> newsEE0CCFF-7A94-45E5-BEE4-...
> > If I had a version of ultimate which included both 32 and 64 bit systems
> > would I be allowed to install both on the same machine as a dual-boot for
> > comparison purposes?
>
>
>
Actually, I didn't tell anything. It was merely a question but thanks for
your insights. I think the intricacies of liciencing are a bunch of crap.
If I received two versions of a movie on a DVD I would be allowed to watch
either one. Two versions of Windows on one machine would be no different and
I certainly could only use one at a time so I'm not getting something for
nothing. As for comparing, why not? Everyone claims there will be little or
no difference but one never knows till one tries. I have tried beta's of
XP-64 in the past and noticed lots of subtle little differences. It's
obvious that 64 bit software can't be run on a 32 bit OS but comparing 32 bit
apps on each is a fair test to see what benefit a 64 bit OS can offer. What
I'm really curious about is the OS itself. Obviously 64 offers some
potential benefit or hardware manufacturers wouldn't be making them.

You can install either one (or both) for 30 days without activating. But
then you need to activate one or the other and remove the one you're not
using.

You have a _license_ for one copy. Not two. You may use one copy, your
choice, and it uses the same key.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64


"Crow Mills" <> wrote in message
news:88D3D9A0-9804-40C6-A83A-...
>
>
> "Tony Sperling" wrote:
>
>> I very much doubt that, there is but one product key that comes with it -
>> you would need some kind of volume license to do that, I'd suspect!
>>
>> If, however, you wait six months before you install the second system
>> there
>> is debate on the issue wether or not anyone will ever notice? ( If you
>> don't
>> tell, which you just did!)
>>
>> Then again, there's not much to compare - 64bit app's will NOT run on the
>> 32bit version, but they SHOULD perform marginally better than the same
>> 32bit
>> app UNLESS it involvs huge memory requirements - in which case the
>> performance difference WILL be significant!
>>
>> If you really want to know how big the possible 'margin' might turn out
>> to
>> be, it's your butt. My bet is that it will remain marginal to any
>> standard.
>>
>>
>> Tony. . .
>>
>>
>> "Crow Mills" <Crow > wrote in message
>> newsEE0CCFF-7A94-45E5-BEE4-...
>> > If I had a version of ultimate which included both 32 and 64 bit
>> > systems
>> > would I be allowed to install both on the same machine as a dual-boot
>> > for
>> > comparison purposes?
>>
>>
>>
> Actually, I didn't tell anything. It was merely a question but thanks for
> your insights. I think the intricacies of liciencing are a bunch of crap.
> If I received two versions of a movie on a DVD I would be allowed to watch
> either one. Two versions of Windows on one machine would be no different
> and
> I certainly could only use one at a time so I'm not getting something for
> nothing. As for comparing, why not? Everyone claims there will be little
> or
> no difference but one never knows till one tries. I have tried beta's of
> XP-64 in the past and noticed lots of subtle little differences. It's
> obvious that 64 bit software can't be run on a 32 bit OS but comparing 32
> bit
> apps on each is a fair test to see what benefit a 64 bit OS can offer.
> What
> I'm really curious about is the OS itself. Obviously 64 offers some
> potential benefit or hardware manufacturers wouldn't be making them.

Only with two different product keys. Ultimate comes with both the x86 and
x64 dvd's but one product key. You can switch versions but you can only
have one installed at a time using the one pk that comes in the box. To do
what you want requires that you purchase a second product key or a second
retail box.

"Crow Mills" <Crow > wrote in message
newsEE0CCFF-7A94-45E5-BEE4-...
> If I had a version of ultimate which included both 32 and 64 bit systems
> would I be allowed to install both on the same machine as a dual-boot for
> comparison purposes?