Windows 64-bit is awful.

Discussion in 'Windows 64 Bit' started by Disgusted, Feb 13, 2006.

  1. Microsoft has pushed strongly on vendors with drivers to get their X64
    support in line, and with Windows Vista we've stepped up the pressure in
    various logo programs and by enabling customer choice about which version to
    install. Despite what many people may think, Microsoft cannot force vendors
    to support X64. We can only strongly encourage and support them in doing so.

    As with most technology companies, being proactive is a difficult business
    decision to support so many vendors are taking a 'wait until we have
    sufficient customer demand' approach. Pointing the finger at Microsoft
    doesn't help when the problem is the larger Windows 3rd party industry
    support for X64.

    32-bit computing is reaching the breaking point. There are some transition
    technologies that will allow a single 32-bit application to break the 2GB
    barrier and use up to 4 GB of resources, but it only works if the user is
    running an X64 version of the OS. If your computer has more than 2 GB of RAM
    and a video card approaching 1 GB in size, a 32-bit OS is not going to let
    you get full use out all those resources for a single intensive application,
    although you can get some use from extra resources when running multiple
    applications. Once computers start coming with close to 4 GB of RAM, 32-bit
    versions of the OS stop making any sense at all.

    As with every technology transition, it is painful for those on the bleeding
    edge. The same was true for many years after the introduction of true 32-bit
    Windows instead of 16-bit Windows, although the total population of impacted
    users was smaller. The point is that we have to move to 64-bit computing if
    we are to keep up with hardware trends, and many companies are trying to
    delay that transition as long as possible rather than take it on
    Chuck Walbourn [MSFT], Jun 19, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. It's not Vista dumby, it's Windows XP Pro x64. Try to stay with us, if you
    wish to participate and be taken seriously. Geesh, some women!

    What you fools fail to realize is that a product needs an ecosystem to
    succeed. If the supporting ecosystem isn't in place, then guess what, things
    won't work. Therefore, the product will be found to be severely lacking in
    Therefore, your product will be a shame and a rip-off because you failed to
    manage your partners and build an effective ecosystem.
    Waiting until release and then blaming your partners is a lame and
    unproductive tactic. We see this same lameness is leading to the sparse
    deployment of Vista, for the same reason: lack of a partner ecosystem.
    Bottom line, there are too many high paid microsoft staff who think like the
    "pass-the-buck" clowns on this board and the customer ends up scammed.
    Windows 64 isn't aweful. It's a testiment of the imcompetence that today's
    Marketing & Lawyer run corporations call, management.

    Some here say they have been running 64 for 2 years. Right, and using it for
    what, surfing the web?
    After months of tweaking, I finally have my 2TB RAID stable enough to
    actually use, but my Firewire and optical Audio Studio equipment still can't
    connect through either port.
    This OS, Like it's New Big Brother Vista, is definitely not ready for prime
    time and a complete waste of time and mobey to the normal buyer. I advise
    everyone to stick with Windows XP Pro for the next 2-3 years. It is the only
    product at this point from Microsoft that offers any real value.
    GiveMeBackMyMoney, Jul 2, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. Disgusted

    Jud Hendrix Guest

    It must be a serious problem on your end. I capture, edit and output via
    firewire with Canopus Edius, Adobe Premiere Pro and Sony Vegas, on my
    XP64-system, since the day it was launched (officialy, I never participated
    in the beta's). Maybe it's time for another motherboard, because it sounds
    more like a hardware problem.
    Further I use a bunch of Adobe and Autodesk software, without a problem.
    No, I don't surf the web, as these are commercial production-machines, so
    not looking for a virus ;-)

    Jud Hendrix, Jul 5, 2007
  4. Disgusted

    NAIRB92225 Guest

    NAIRB92225, Jul 24, 2007
  5. Disgusted

    myoldpc Guest

    Look I've been running XP PRO 64 for the last couple years now and so has my
    we both like it we have very few issues wit drivers or software unless its
    that old it has DINO crap on it ! I play the latest games use the newest ver
    of Paint shop pro and so on and I have an XFI platinum card that all features
    work on very well !
    myoldpc, May 28, 2008
  6. MS is not pushing XP Pro x64. It is not even available in a retail box.
    They don't run ads for it either. Vista x64 is another matter, but not XP
    Pro x64. You had to look specifically for it and determine that your
    hardware could handle it before you even got it.
    Colin Barnhorst, May 28, 2008
  7. Disgusted

    Dominick Guest

    So I put together this rocking computer with a 64-bit AMD Athlon,
    If you were researching a custom system to build, I assume you
    researched issues like the memory chips are compatible with the
    motherboard and system bus, video card connectors match cables to
    monitors, power supply load required, etc., why wouldn't you confirm
    there were drivers for the OS you intended to use?
    Dominick, May 28, 2008
  8. Disgusted

    Michael Guest

    How to buy vista 64-bit business?
    Michael, Jun 5, 2008
  9. Colin Barnhorst, Jun 5, 2008
  10. So you didn't bother to check for driver availability before you installed
    the software? Whose fault is that? Anyway, you have to hunt for the
    software even on MS doesn't advertise it.
    Colin Barnhorst, Jun 7, 2008
  11. Why oh why did Microsoft push this operating system on their web site?
    Microsoft makes no more or less revenue by offering Windows x64 editions. In
    fact, we are increasing our development, testing, and support costs by
    having another version of Windows.

    The success of x64 computing is extremely important to moving past the
    current limtiations of 32-bit PCs. If your computer has more than about 3.5
    GB of RAM installed, you will not get full use of it without an x64 OS.

    No matter how much RAM your computer has installed, a single 32-bit
    application can never make use of more than 2 GB of it. Some special effort
    (a technology called Large Address Aware) can get it to support up to 3 GB,
    but that's it. Even that requires you boot your 32-bit OS in a special mode
    and hope the drivers you have loaded work in that configuration. There are a
    few other technology options out there for giving 32-bit a little more room
    without jumping to 64-bit, but they all really only work for Servers where
    you can tightly control the hardware and software running on the machines.

    For more details, see:
    Chuck Walbourn [MSFT], Jun 9, 2008
  12. I like the article and bookmarked it, Chuck. Thanks for the link.
    Colin Barnhorst, Jun 9, 2008
  13. Disgusted

    MickyB Guest

    Im a big fan of Vista 64bit. Otherwise I couldn't run my dual-channel 4gb RAM
    to its best.
    MickyB, Jul 7, 2008
  14. Disgusted

    cmd29 Guest

    im a musician and i have a gateway laptop that is 64bit and came with
    vista,and i use this pc mainly for music/audio recording,and i ended up
    downgrading to xp 64 bit,everything works fine,except the audio,i keep
    getting a choppy sound buffer problems,and alot of times i wont even hear any
    sound,but i'll see all the volume levels moving,i agree i think theres alot
    of bugs and glitches in 64 bit
    cmd29, Mar 16, 2010
  15. Disgusted

    Wiley Post Guest

    The point about laptops reflects a lack of understanding of hardware.
    Better quality dual-core laptops have CPUs and memory that is the same speed
    as better quality dual-core desktops. Desktops have better graphics and
    much more flexibility for installing expansion equipment of your choice but
    the idea that a good laptop is too "anemic" to run audio software is
    ludicrous. Laptops can use power schemes that cut performance but when
    running on AC just set your scheme for maximum performance. A musician
    would however be much better served by using a high quality soundcard that
    can be installed in a desktop as opposed to using the sound system native to
    a laptop motherboard or whatever sound card might be available in PCMCIA

    As for the general compatibility of XP-64 I have found the greatest problem
    to be in finding drivers for existing graphics cards.

    Also note that since commercial apps running under XP-64 are likely to need
    WOW to actually run in 32 bit mode you shouldn't expect any performance
    improvement relative to XP-32. That should change in the future when
    commercial 64 bit apps become more available.

    Wiley Post, Mar 17, 2010
  16. Disgusted

    TMA Guest

    Agreed, laptop audio is bad generally speaking.
    Unless you pay high dollar for a cutting edge equipment, you're doomed.
    As for 64 bit OS drivers, I sincerely believe that Win7 does magic. While in
    XP or Vista I had lots and lots of troubles finding drivers (which some were
    never released for these versions of windows), Win7 can find it by itself,
    right off the install DVD. It's amazing.
    On the other hand, if your fresh install of win7 won't find your driver, you
    better rush to a shop and get another hardware.
    TMA, Mar 20, 2010
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.