Do you recommend 64-bit system?

Do you recommend a 64-bit OS?
There seem to be a number of incompatibility issues with existing 32-bit
software and peripherals.
The supposedly main advantage of a 64-bit OS, as I understand it, is the
ability to have individual files larger than 4 GB. Is this something that I
am apt to need? What files would be that big? Maybe Blu-ray High
Definition movies or using my PC as a TiVo?
I am not aware of any user impact of the current limit of 32-bit precision
for calculations so I don't see how more accuracy would help.
Am I missing anything?

Hello Grey

The articles at this post below can help explain the difference
between 32-bit and 64-bit to help with this

http://www.vistax64.com/vista-news/9...n-just-ram.htm

You will need to have a 64-bit CPU and 64 bit driver versions for al
of your devices to be able to have the 64-bit Vista run on you
computer

Hope this helps
Shaw

Grey;912593 Wrote:
> Do you recommend a 64-bit OS
> There seem to be a number of incompatibility issues with existin
> 32-bi
> software and peripherals
> The supposedly main advantage of a 64-bit OS, as I understand it, i
> th
> ability to have individual files larger than 4 GB. Is this somethin
> that
> am apt to need? What files would be that big? Maybe Blu-ray Hig
> Definition movies or using my PC as a TiVo
> I am not aware of any user impact of the current limit of 32-bi
> precisio
> for calculations so I don't see how more accuracy would help
> Am I missing anything

--
Brin

*There are no dumb questions, just the people that do not as
them.*
'*Windows 7 Forums*
*and* '*::Vista Forums::*
*Please post feedback to help others.*

It is the file system used that limits the file size. For example Fat32 has
the 4GB file size limit. NTFS can handle file sizes larger than 4GB.
I record TV shows and if it is a long one and I up the quality level, I
often run over the 4GB file size.


"Grey" <> wrote in message
news:YMZ1l.20915$...
> Do you recommend a 64-bit OS?
> There seem to be a number of incompatibility issues with existing 32-bit
> software and peripherals.
> The supposedly main advantage of a 64-bit OS, as I understand it, is the
> ability to have individual files larger than 4 GB. Is this something that
> I
> am apt to need? What files would be that big? Maybe Blu-ray High
> Definition movies or using my PC as a TiVo?
> I am not aware of any user impact of the current limit of 32-bit precision
> for calculations so I don't see how more accuracy would help.
> Am I missing anything?
>
>

"Grey" <> wrote in message
news:YMZ1l.20915$...
> Do you recommend a 64-bit OS?
> There seem to be a number of incompatibility issues with existing 32-bit
> software and peripherals.
> The supposedly main advantage of a 64-bit OS, as I understand it, is the
> ability to have individual files larger than 4 GB. Is this something that
> I
> am apt to need? What files would be that big? Maybe Blu-ray High
> Definition movies or using my PC as a TiVo?
> I am not aware of any user impact of the current limit of 32-bit precision
> for calculations so I don't see how more accuracy would help.
> Am I missing anything?
>
>

You do not need a 64 bit operating system (Windows XP 64 bit or Vista 64
bit) to have a file larger than 4 GB. To have files larger than 4 GB you
need to have the hard drive formatted with the NTFS file system (and most
newer computers are formatted that way by default.) The older FAT32 format
would only allow files to be up to 4 GB in size. Windows XP and Vista will
only format partitions of up to 32 GB in size as FAT32 and if you want a
partition larger (using newer Windows versions to format it) you have to use
NTFS and that is why most newer computers are formatted that way by default.

The 4 GB limit that is overcome by any 64 bit operating system is more than
4 GB of main memory (RAM) may be accessed by the operating system in the
computer. Most persons do not need to have more than about 3 GB of RAM to
adequately use a computer with almost any application they would open so a
32 bit operating system would suffice. 32 bit operating systems (Windows XP
Home, Windows XP Pro 32, Vista Home basic & premium, Vista Business and
Vista Ultimate 32 bit) will only address up to 4 GB of RAM. The only time
more RAM is needed is if you are opening many programs at the same time, you
are editing extremely large images or running very large spread sheets or
the like.

Unless you have some legacy hardware or software that you can't live without
I'd go 64 bit. RAM is cheap. You need 64 bit to use lots of RAM. Once you
use a computer with lots of RAM (OS is irrelevant) it's hard to go back.
Eventually you will probably want to install a 64 bit OS. If you are
starting from 32 bit Windows there is no upgrade path to switch from 32 to
64 bit. It requires a clean install wiping out the 32 bit installation. This
is much easier to do at the start rather than later.

--
Kerry Brown
MS-MVP - Windows Desktop Experience: Systems Administration
http://www.vistahelp.ca/phpBB2/
http://vistahelpca.blogspot.com/



"Grey" <> wrote in message
news:YMZ1l.20915$...
> Do you recommend a 64-bit OS?
> There seem to be a number of incompatibility issues with existing 32-bit
> software and peripherals.
> The supposedly main advantage of a 64-bit OS, as I understand it, is the
> ability to have individual files larger than 4 GB. Is this something that
> I
> am apt to need? What files would be that big? Maybe Blu-ray High
> Definition movies or using my PC as a TiVo?
> I am not aware of any user impact of the current limit of 32-bit precision
> for calculations so I don't see how more accuracy would help.
> Am I missing anything?
>
>

On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 20:49:36 -0600, "Grey" <>
wrote:

> Do you recommend a 64-bit OS?
> There seem to be a number of incompatibility issues with existing 32-bit
> software


There are some incompatibility software issues, but not very much
(except for older utilities). Check with the manufacturers of your
software to find out if you might have any such issues.


> and peripherals.


You will require 64-bit Vista drivers (instead of 32-bit ones) for
your peripherals (printers, scanners, etc.). They may not exist, so
again, you should check with the peripherals' manufacturers.


> The supposedly main advantage of a 64-bit OS, as I understand it, is the
> ability to have individual files larger than 4 GB.


Sorry, that's completely wrong. Both 32-bit and 64-bit Vista can deal
with such files. However, FAT32 files can not be greater than 4GB;
NTFS is required.


> Is this something that I
> am apt to need? What files would be that big? Maybe Blu-ray High
> Definition movies or using my PC as a TiVo?
> I am not aware of any user impact of the current limit of 32-bit precision
> for calculations so I don't see how more accuracy would help.
> Am I missing anything?


There are two (potential) advantages of 64-bit Vista:

1. You can run 64-bit programs, and they will run faster than their
32-bit equivalents. However, few 64-bit programs yet exist.

2. 32-bit Vista is limited to 4GB of RAM (of which you can use around
3.1GB). 64-bit can use more. However, few people (only those running
especially memory-hungry programs) will see an advantage to having
that much RAM.

In my view, point number 1 is the most significant, at least for the
future, and if you don't have to buy new peripherals to get 64-bit
Vista drivers for them, it's a good idea to run 64-bit Vista, since
you will see performance improvements as new 64-bit software gets
released and you acquire it.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

> Eventually you will probably want to install a 64 bit OS. If you are
> starting from 32 bit Windows there is no upgrade path to switch from 32 to
> 64 bit. It requires a clean install wiping out the 32 bit installation.

Not exactly. You can use Windows Easy Transfer to save all your settings
and programs. Do a clean install of the 64-bit version then restore your
saved file to the new install. Everything will be there although any programs
not compatible with the 64-bit setup won't run but all your emails,
favorites desktop layout, customized Start Menu, etc. will come over. This
is much easier than starting from scratch.

Tom Lake

It's much messier too. I tried this when I got my new Dell laptop and it
transferred every file that had ever been touched on my old Thinkpad.
Starting from scratch and manually copying Documents folder and emails is
better.

Earle

"Tom Lake" <> wrote in message
news:...
>> Eventually you will probably want to install a 64 bit OS. If you are
>> starting from 32 bit Windows there is no upgrade path to switch from 32
>> to 64 bit. It requires a clean install wiping out the 32 bit
>> installation.
>
> Not exactly. You can use Windows Easy Transfer to save all your settings
> and programs. Do a clean install of the 64-bit version then restore your
> saved file to the new install. Everything will be there although any
> programs
> not compatible with the 64-bit setup won't run but all your emails,
> favorites desktop layout, customized Start Menu, etc. will come over. This
> is much easier than starting from scratch.
>
> Tom Lake
>

I've found Easy Transfer to only be useful with very basic setups. I find it
much easier, quicker, and you end up with a cleaner system to copy your data
to/from an external hard drive. In any case it's not really relevant which
way is faster or better. The best case scenario is half a day's work with
either method. You have to back up, backup again, format partition, install
Windows, install Windows updates, install programs, install program updates,
and finally restore the data. I do this several times a week with various
OS'. The best case scenario is two to three hours. It's normally four to
five hours.

--
Kerry Brown
MS-MVP - Windows Desktop Experience: Systems Administration
http://www.vistahelp.ca/phpBB2/
http://vistahelpca.blogspot.com/



"Tom Lake" <> wrote in message
news:...
>> Eventually you will probably want to install a 64 bit OS. If you are
>> starting from 32 bit Windows there is no upgrade path to switch from 32
>> to 64 bit. It requires a clean install wiping out the 32 bit
>> installation.
>
> Not exactly. You can use Windows Easy Transfer to save all your settings
> and programs. Do a clean install of the 64-bit version then restore your
> saved file to the new install. Everything will be there although any
> programs
> not compatible with the 64-bit setup won't run but all your emails,
> favorites desktop layout, customized Start Menu, etc. will come over. This
> is much easier than starting from scratch.
>
> Tom Lake
>