Windows 64-bit is awful.

Another thing to consider...

According to the people I talk to, the migration to 64bit will be pushed by
MS much faster than it was 16 to 32 bit. 64 bit will be the standard in the
near future. Just look at the current CPU architecture. And it only makes
sense from MS's perspective. Fewer limitations with regards to recourses,
memory, faster apps, etc.

-Larry

 

Agreed, I believe what is causing alot of the confusion is that hardware
development is far beyond the development of a O/S to support that hardware.
As we have all stated a million times before, this release isn't designed for
the "average" user and has no formal support. I think if they can keep Vista
on schedule without anymore delays and live up to it's expectations, then I
think it will bring 64 bit out of the closet. Until then people are more than
willing to play it safe with their tried and true 32 bit machines.

I am a bit concerned about XP64's lifecycle after the release of Vista. This
is OEM but I'm not seeing a big push in keeping XP64 updated with service
packs and the such. I'm also noticing companies willing to develop Vista
drivers and ignore XP64's need for those same drivers. Best I can figure that
once Vista is released and implemented on a large scaled, XP64 will no longer
be needed and be phased out.

As an OEM, MS can do this without much in the way losses because it was
never "packaged" and without any support. With the steep hardware
requirements for Vista and with the understanding that there is still quite a
bit of "legacy" hardware being used, Vista will take quite a bit of time to
attach itself to it's market.

I would like to see how it all pans out, this is better than who shot j.r.

 

Windows Server 2003 SP1 x86 and x64, and XP Pro x64 are scheduled for a
service pack release during Q4 of this year according to the service pack
roadmap.

 

Thanks for the info,
I am very comfortable with XP64 not very comfortable with Vista so it
reassuring that I don't have to switch immeadiatly, if at all. I have doing
google searches for any info and they have a "SP2 preview" but I'm leary due
to the fact this isn't straight from MS. Well anywho, thanks for the update.

 

Those testing it are not at liberty to discuss it here.

 

Thats ok Colin, I wasn't attempting to spark any discussion on it. I was
stating this as a personal observation only. I'm patient enough to let the
testers do their jobs and have the faith that when this goes RTM, it will be
ready. I do appologize if I gave the impression otherwise,

 

No prob. I was just indicating that it is underway.

 

Well Said Mr. Art.

The only thing I disagree with is the HD DVD part. Although the current
technology allows for rapid production of HD DVDs at a minimal cost, I think
the Blu-Ray technology is actually the technology of the future. HD DVDs will
probably win though.

 

Say, "NT v5.1 x64", isn't XP Pro x64 "NT v5.2"?

 

In all fairness to the "potential" end-user--why does Microsoft repeatedly
press for release their OS Software when they know it isn't ready for use?

The mere fact that the driver situation is tenuous at best means that all
you can do is play 32-bit solitaire on your 64-bit OS!

That is a waste of money and time.

Microsoft has had three years plus to get this right, and they won't correct
the simplest of issues--sharing OS command protocols with driver
manufacturers to keep this newer OS stable!

 

Is there something in the water in Mississippi that causes
you to make such ill informed statements?

The drivers are not Microsoft's responsibility!

Information required to write and publish drivers is on
Microsoft's web sites!

You need to educate yourself about the facts before you go
blowing off about something you apparently have little, if
any, knowledge of!

 

XP Pro x64 is not a consumer edition. It is not even available at retail.
Use the product for its intended uses and you will do fine.

"anonymousopinionsunsolicitedbeleif"

 

They don't. A better question would be: "Why do some end users rush
out to obtain and install the 'newest and shiniest' operating system
without first taking a few minutes to determine if the manufacturers of
their chosen hardware components have provided the appropriate drivers
for the devices they sell?"

Has absolutely nothing to do with Microsoft, and everything do to with
those manufacturers who have failed their customers by not providing
drivers for their own products.

It's a waste of time and money only for the clueless and unprepared.

Please provide documentation to substantiate this (so far, baseless)
accusation.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell

 

Do you have the correct drivers installed for these devices?

 

I've been using X64 for the past couple of months, albeit in a
much more passive environment. I use it mainly to provide
internal services to my 5-node home network.

For my use, it has the same rock solid reliability as did NT4--
the reliability that W2K never really had.

Flatus

 

That's funny as I am using that very product most successfully.

 

Hi everyone,

Below, "Jud Hendrix" wrote:

"I repreat: It is _not_ Microsoft's fault that there are no drivers," (full
post reproduced at the bottom).

Maybe not, but whose fault is it that Microsoft Producer for PowerPoint does
not install on x64 systems? Producer is a non-linear editor that synchronizes
PowerPoint presentations with audio and video to create a Windows Media
presentation. One might think that an application like this would communicate
to the OS through an API, so 32-bit or 64-bit would not be an issue. Not! One
might also think that a company interested in promoting the new 64-bit
standard would come up with coding standards and a compiler capable of
creating 64-bit versions of an application requiring little more than
changing the flag on the compilation command. Not! One would also think the
latest and greatest version of the OS would have the most complete repertoire
of features and tools for using the OS to its full potential. Not!

Apparently the difficulty in porting an app to the x64 system is so
difficult that Microsoft's own programmers don't do it unless they are forced
to do so. Ever wonder why there's no 64-bit version of Office 2007?

With the exception of a few niche markets where 64bits sells, it's going to
be a long, lonely wait for software manufacturers to start turning out
products that make x64 worth dealing with the headaches associated with it.

Marsh Feldman

 

There may be light at the end of the tunnel. I heard/read that the next
Windows OS may well be 64 bit only. Perhaps Vista is the 'staging post' to
full 64 bit takeup.

 

There may be light at the end of the tunnel. I heard/read that the next

Could be, but then again, might be a long tunnel -- after all, when did
XP arrive? Next version of Windows -- I'd guess we're talking 5 years
or more.

In any event, I'd echo the comment about Microsoft not making a big
push regarding 64 bit. In fact, MAPS for 2007 actually has less 64 bit
content than in the past. As a long time MAPS subscriber, I remember
getting XP Pro 64 (along with XP Pro and XP Media Center). The January
release this year was *32 bit only*, *business only*, and *upgrade
only*. Strikes me as a fairly lame combination. I guess I can
understand the 32 bit only position if Microsoft feels that Vista 64 is
simply an extension of the Proof of Concept that XP 64 mostly was.

Then again, for a large portion of the current marketplace, about the
only home for 64 bit is for situations where extra memory handling is
really needed (say for developer systems and servers).

 

You mean, like Windows XP Professional x64 ??