Windows 64-bit is awful.

Testing my two cents I think this is the appropriate spot. I build and test
for fun My 4800x2 with agp ati fireglx3 3gig pc500 and raptors wow my
projects for Woman of Studio Arena Theatre (creative suite 2) Maya 7
perfect,while i use my tv turner and office 2007 etc. I test vista with my
acer centrino duo nice eye candy but cannot be as robust as windows 64 I for
one am glad it surpasses my needs and never slows down nomatter what I
startup in the middle of my projects. Enough !I live on Vista but I usually
stay at windows 64.

 

Good point.

 

Right On! I have used X64 since last Nov, very stable. I have had the driver
and application problems others have mentioned. Neither Norton nor McAfee
would install, and I was stonewalled by both re. future availability. I stay
off the internet, use my Mac for that now. My printer works, sometimes. My
external HDs didn't seem to work properly. I will try again. I have kept my
old system just so I can access old data on these drives.

Re. AMD, I run crash simulations and the consensus amongst users seems to be
that the AMD chip is faster than the Intel. Intel denies this! I replaced a
single-XEON Dell WS (2.6 MHz, WIN-2000, 1024 MB) with a DELL dual 3.6 MHz
XEON, with 2X faster SCSI drives & 2X faster busses, etc. Using one CPU, I
can run a job in 10 hours that took 2 days before. Once I figured out getting
both CPUs working, I am running 3-day jobs in 10 hours. These times are
typical for what I am running. Memory isn't much of an issue with this
software (LS-DYNA), my 4096 MB is overkill, it uses about 800, typically. A
little over 1024 when I am looking at results or re-modeling as the job is
running.

I believe MS patched this together as a stop-gap while Vista is being
worked-out, and I'm glad they did -- warts & all. The vendors don't want to
spend money on what will soon be an orphan.

 

There are a number of excellent anti-virus programs that are x64 compatible
as designated by their manufacturers. I use Computer Associates' eTrust AV
7.1 (NOT EZtrust AV).

 

* justFEA:

And you are _sad_ about that? Be happy that crap like Norton doesn't run
on Winxp x64. As Colin already said there are antivirus programs which
a) run under Winxp x64 and b) are much better than anything Norton does.

Why? Afraid of getting anything you don't like? I hope you're not one of
the people that think internet without a personal firewall is russian
roulette....

There is no reason not to use the computer for the internet...

If both are USB devices then it's very likely that it has nothing to do
with Windowsxp x64. Check the power consumption of both, especially if
printer and/or disk get powered over USB...

Right, because the AMD64 processors have a better fp performance. With
integer (which most apps are primary using) it depends. I have both a
Dual XEON 3.6GHz workstation (13GB RAM) and a dual dual-core Opteron 285
workstation (16GB RAM), and not in all cases the Opteron system was faster.

What a surprise that a chip maker doesn't say "look, the chips of my
competitor are much faster than ours" ;-)

Right. But then I'm sure the final Vista x64 will be a good successor of
xp x64...

Benjamin

 

And I'm trying to keep the blog post on A-V up to date with known good ones.
So if you are aware of new ones that I don't have in there, let me know and
I'll update it.

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

 

____________s_n_i_p________________

_______________________________________________

Not here. PhotoshopCS installation hangs half way through the process under
XP 64. Did I miss something?

 

Don't let it try to install Distiller if that is included and see what
happens.

 

You may be right. I'll give it another try. Thanks.

 

I don't know what Distiller is?

 

Photoshop CS installed and ran fine here.
I might have had to run in admin and/or WinXp SP 2 compatible mode.

 

Software Printer. The driver is not 64-bit.

 

Red - Don't know what happened on your Adobe CS install... Mine went in
just normal with no problems and it registered itself just fine... I did
download the RAW converters and Multi Processor patches from Adobe...

Even though they always tell us to turn off all other programs before
installing, I've rarely had a problem installing with McAfee running as well
as a couple other small utilities turned on, but lately I have been turning
off most everything I can before installing new software, and when I
installed Adobe CS, I did turn off everything I could prior to
installation... You may want to turn everything off and try a re-install...

Could be too my Mobo, HD's, Video Boards, Processors, etc are different than
yours and just happened to install CS with no problem...

Our hardware and software variations today are practically infinite and the
fact that they all run most of the time, as well as they do, still amazes
even me and I've worked on them day in and day out for the last 4 years since
I started my PC\Server repair business...

Recently I unpacked 2 new, identical, Compaq workstations for a client and
started installing them... Everything worked fine until I started to install
MS Office and one of them refused to install that program... Everything was
identical on both of the new PC's yet it seemed one chipset would install
office and the other refused... It's a wonder they work at all... ha.

 

http://www.printcomm.com/printspecs/issues/distiller.html

 

I appreciate you standing up for the pitfalls that Microsoft does not, in no
way shape or form, let you know about.

I now have XP Pro 64-bit on my computer, because it came with it. My father
bought the computer for me as a graduation present. Thinking it would
obviously help with all the 3d rendering and animation I do, he was pretty
much sold without them ever giving a distinct warning that some programs
would not work. It's an alienware computer, and the option to upgrate to
64-bit is all raves.

There is a sad little brief description on the microsoft website about how
some programs might not work, but nothing about A LOT of programs will not
work. Someone out there needs understand that even people who actually need
a 64-bit system still like to use media players, digital cameras (that they
already own and like), printers (that they already own and like), and other
regular programs that don't neccessarily have to have the capabilities of the
64-bit system.

I can't believe people can say, "Why do you use it if you don't like it?" or
"Why would you get if you didn't fully research it?" When Microsoft tells
you it's the thing to buy for the things you need to do, why would you
question that? I would never have questioned upgrading my OS before this!

Luckily all my modeling, rendering, and CAD programs should run on the
64-bit system, but it's still hard not to be a little dissastisfied when none
of the standards that I am so used to using will not work. Especially
dissapointing when microsoft themselves is not even jumping on the wagon very
quickly.

 

You can install XP Pro x86 to a different partition or drive and create a
dual boot system. Many in this group do that.

 

If you are disappointed now, just wait until you try Vista. I expected the
hardware (driver) problems with x64 and was disappointed with the slow
response by manufacturers and especially no support for many very recent
purchases. I, however, was even more disappointed by the number of programs
which failed to install or run. After a year, and at considerable expense I
have managed to replace most, but not all, functions, and still have to go
to XP several times a month for necessary functions and live without nice
features.
Having installed the 32-bit version of Vista, as a result, I have found
things to be even worse. 2/3 of the programs that I was able to get
installed in x64 won't even install or run on Vista (many by Microsoft).
Assuming that the software vendors even write replacements for Vista,
spending another $1,000 plus on replacement software in addition to the cost
of Vista, isn't going to happen here, at least for quite a while.
Hopefully, all the hardware I bought in the last year will end up with Vista
drivers.

 

Interesting thread but it has become more of a blanket. I'm enjoying x64 but
making the preperations for Vista. Here is my 2 cents and it is probably been
said a million times over.

We have been stagnating at 32 bit computer up until about 2 years ago and I
still remember the days where we trying to adjust to that change.
Unfortunately, alot of hardware manfacturers are in a pickle trying to sort
out what they will support in 64 bit. Financially speaking, it is virtually
impossible for a company to support EVERY piece of hardware ever produced.
While I understand the frustration, that is just a natural byproduct of being
a part of the technology shift we are presently in.

Not every company is going to welcome 64 bit computing with open arms
because now that have to rewrite drivers and redesign products to accomidate
64 bit and that can be a royal pain, especially if you have the
responsibility to develop new products as well. While some companies will
stay on the same page others will act with caution.

I believe MS has established it's expectations clear but as in all consumer
affairs, education is important to determine how fit it is for your personal
use. I am not sure of X64's future with Vista right around the corner but
this O/S has been a great learning experience and has furthered my knowledge
considerably. Would I purchase x64? The jury is still out on that one but if
I am reading Fry's Electronics advertising right, X64 is no limited to whats
in stock only so I can't imagine whats next.

I hope disgusted see this as a learning tool more than a pain to get it
working right. I think this was MS's first attempt at 64 bit and it wasn't a
bad one for the first try. It isn't perfect but what first try at anything
has been

 

The track record of the 64bit server editions is a better benchmark. That
has been much better than I expected.