Are 64-bit WIndows Programs "Better"?

[Phoenix64d]

Hey. Just wanted to know whether or not there would be any benefit to intalling Windows Media Player x64, Internet Explorer x64, NET Framework x64, etc. etc.


P.S. Is there a Dirext X 9x64? I can't find one, thats for sure.

[jdrom17]

Techincally they would run better I guess. WMP x64 lacks many plugins along with IE x64. Neither are really supported as of now, thus they aren't set as the defaults in Vista x64. Actually WMP x64 is nearly hidden away.

I don't believe theres a 64bit DirectX since theres only a couple 64bit games.

[dog2525]

i wonder what would happen if vista was x64 only. i bet that every software and game and driver from there on will be x64

[Phoenix64d]

Thanks for clarifying. I guess Ill want to stay with x86 for now.

I wonder what would happen if vista was x64 only. i bet that every software and game and driver from there on will be x64

Scenario 1: Software developers and customers alike would all hop on the 64-bit bandwagon.

Scenario 2: People would hate Vista even MORE than they already do, because not only would it still have compatability issues with existing 64bit software, but all software without x64 support (99.9999999999999999%) would be useless. Thus, in addition to the ridiculous price of Vista, the cost of buying more memory to make it run reasonably well, customers would have to buy x64 versions of all of their software -- and if no x64 alternatives exist, they would have to pitch all of their beloved legacy software in the trash.
The result? Microsoft would finally realize that they can't dig their razor spurs into our sides everytime they want us to run to the store and buy their crap.

Yeah, I wish Microsoft had made Vista x64 only alright...

[jdrom17]

Well guess what? Vista is the LAST 32bit consumer operating system. The official last one is Server 2008. Things better start migrating soon or else they are going to get hit hard when the time comes. Currently I believe it's called Windows Seven or simply 7. Simple enough codename as it's version 7.0 of Windows since Vista is 6.0

Vista x64 supports basically all 32bit programs anyways. It's mainly just driver issues.

I don't think x64 will be taking off with Vista unless OEMs start using it as that's where most of the sales are.

EDIT: Well today I find out that the above rumour is false. Apparently MS is keeping Windows 7 as 32bit as well and expected to be out in 2010. Obviously though, basically nobody will use it as we will mainly have 4GB+ RAM in our computers just to run it. Seeing as Vista already needs 2GB. Here's the full article: http://news.softpedia.com/news/Why-Won-039-t-Microsoft-Kill-32-bit-Windows-after-Vista-61747.shtml

[stlouis1]

ya, theres no need for a 64bit os right now. all 64 bit windows does is pretends to be 32bit windows

[Crax]

Windows 6.4 should be 64bit, imo...

[Ace]

all 64 bit windows does is pretends to be 32bit windows

... poorly ;)

I tried 64-bit XP Pro some time ago, and within a week had reverted to using a 32-bit version of the shell on there, and had reverted a lot of my apps to 32-bit versions. This was followed shortly by a format and reinstall of 32-bit Winblows.

The Winblows install will, soon, be starting a gradual process of migration to Linux.

There, that's customer satisfaction for you :devil:

[Phoenix64d]

Lol. I take it things didn't run well on XP Pro? I've heard that the extra conversion done by WOW64 will lessen performance a bit, but just barely. But you're saying that was it really *that* bad? What happened?

[Ace]

Well, don't get me wrong, WOW64 could have been worse. What was truly staggering was the incompleteness of the 64-bit build. 32-bit libraries that hadn't been converted, missing functionality, instability...

The "big" one for me was the fact that you couldn't view ID3 tag info in 64-bit explorer, and a lot of the context menu integration was missing. Instantly, that meant I was restricted to a 32-bit shell. And from there, it all started going downhill. I moved to 32-bit IE after there were unacceptable problems with plugin support and various major instability issues.

I can't begin to describe all the trouble I had with that awful installation - all I'm saying is that WinXP x64 was nowhere near ready to release when it was launched. The community was ready, but the hardware vendor support wasn't really there in time, M$ buggered the OS right up as usual, and they simply didn't have enough time to get it done properly anyway.

WinXP x64 was only ever going to be a stopgap before Longcrap anywho - it's just a shame it turned out to be total **** ;)

[stlouis1]

ya, theres alot more cons than pro's when comparing 64-bit windows to 32 bit windows, its definitely a long way away from being like linux

im converting my desktop to 64bit kubuntu next friday when i get a new hard drive. im ditching windows altogether, i hardly game anymore, and when i want to game, i got codega, and wine, and a number of games that have linux installers for them anyway. so no real need for windows. only thing i have left to figure out is mtpfs

[yahooadam]

Well windowx Vista x64 does emulate 32bit (not sure how well)

imo vista really should have been 64bit, 32bit has been on the way out for ages, and by going 64bit it would force people to start making all 64bit stuff

Instead we are in the same situation as with XP, we have both options but drivers and software are only made for 32bit and 64bit is poorly supported

Seeing as most people probably need an upgrade to run vista anyway, why not just make it 64bit only :fighty:

[Ace]

im converting my desktop to 64bit kubuntu next friday when i get a new hard drive. im ditching windows altogether, i hardly game anymore, and when i want to game, i got codega, and wine, and a number of games that have linux installers for them anyway. so no real need for windows. only thing i have left to figure out is mtpfs

Good call. Let's get a mass PCStats exodus to Linux as a primary OS ;) I'm tempted to do it now when my new parts get here (since I'm having to get a new mobo anyway now). I've even got a spare 200gig free to act as a spare data store while drives are formatting to ext3. Only problem is there's a 500GB drive in there too...

Seeing as most people probably need an upgrade to run vista anyway, why not just make it 64bit only
They might argue to support older machines, but what the heck, it doesn't even get close to doing that anyway.

The bottom line is MS should have accepted a much longer development period for "Longhorn" from the beginning. And it may well be that the sweet spot for release would have been a good time to do a only x64 release, especially since they're intent on making Windows as bloated a monstrosity as possible.

[yahooadam]

They might argue to support older machines, but what the heck, it doesn't even get close to doing that anyway.
firstly, you have driver problems with older machines anyway

and secondly, there are probably only a few machines that will run vista that aren't 64bit (i mean, the last couple of years of PC's have been 64bit now)

[Ace]

there are probably only a few machines that will run vista that aren't 64bit (i mean, the last couple of years of PC's have been 64bit now)

Oh, I'm sure plenty of big organisations and educational establishments are planning migrations to Vista (albeit not nearly as many as MS hoped). The University of Manchester's main library had some Vista trials going on months ago, and the boxes they're sticking it on aren't new. Whilst my library visits weren't all that frequent, I'm pretty sure they were all pre-x64.

I think these sort of scenarios are what MS is aiming a x32 vista at - where a crapload of machines are already in play, and the organisation in question might be prepared to get ripped of for a newer slower OS they don't really want, but might not be prepared to add humongous upgrade costs to that too.

At least in the UK, I would hazard a guess to say that most office/educational boxes are... pretty damn old ;) We lead the world with slow, capped net access... we lead the western world with old boxes... who said the UK isn't the best :woot:

[yahooadam]

ain't that the truth

but anyway, most of those 32bit machines aren't really up to vista, you need about 1gb ram min for vista
I know its possible to run vista on quite a few of the 32bit machines, but your experience is gonna be pretty crap

ill be so happy next year when i go to uni and its all Linux Linux Linux (& a bit of mac)

[Ace]

yeah definitely re: 1GB RAM minimum. I remember trying the Longhorn betas and stuff on 512, and that wasn't much fun on a clean install, even without Aero and all that crap. I just bet Vista's going to get stuck on machines with 512 all over the place here, and yep, they'll all slow to a crawl. That's progress for ya :)

Already had a year of the Linux branded uni experience @ Manchester, and it's going well. Which uni are you going to?

With regard to Linux v Windows, this is my take:

With Linux, you get an OS that may take a little time to learn the basics, but when you know them (and I'm not talking much), you have a hugely productive system right there. And thereafter it's a case of the more you learn, the more you can do, and the more productive you can be. Everything's changeable, everything's open.

With Windows, you get a system that you can use pretty slowly and clumsily almost from the word go, and you can never *really* develop *much* past that. In most cases, you're almost actively blocked from doing so.

Bearing in mind Linux can be made to look moreorless like Windows anyway, so it can offer the same kind of "experience" anyway... Windows can't offer Linux's functionality and openness though!

[yahooadam]

yeah definitely re: 1GB RAM minimum. I remember trying the Longhorn betas and stuff on 512, and that wasn't much fun on a clean install, even without Aero and all that crap. I just bet Vista's going to get stuck on machines with 512 all over the place here, and yep, they'll all slow to a crawl. That's progress for ya :)
Aye, i remember they were talking about gaming in vista, and your looking at 200-800mb more wasted space

Already had a year of the Linux branded uni experience @ Manchester, and it's going well. Which uni are you going to?
Hopefully imperial in London, second choice is Southampton

Get my results on the 16th, so 5 days till i find out :o

With Linux, you get an OS that may take a little time to learn the basics, but when you know them (and I'm not talking much), you have a hugely productive system right there. And thereafter it's a case of the more you learn, the more you can do, and the more productive you can be. Everything's changeable, everything's open.

With Windows, you get a system that you can use pretty slowly and clumsily almost from the word go, and you can never *really* develop *much* past that. In most cases, you're almost actively blocked from doing so.
Definitely, i don't think Linux is at mainstream potential yet, but i think its getting there, there are still a few problems with it in general
and then driver support is still a major stepping stone, but in the last year or 2 its progressed a tonne

[stlouis1]

in regards to vista's requirements.....i ran it on a celeron 1.3, with 512mb ram, and a geforce 2. and played requiem and a few other older games in compatiblity mode.....it ran fine so :P

far as linux goes, im converted. ditching my windows install in 6 days for kubuntu......speaking of which, i got some screenies of my setup on my laptop, ill try to post them later

also got some games going on my laptop, got deus ex, ut, ut2003-2004, the whole quake series, doom with doom legacy linux port, eduke sorta, kingpin, heroes 3, rtcw, morrowind, and some others. dont really have any new games to try though

anyway, the only thing i've used windows for in the last month, was to update the firmware on my zen.....i was gonna try running the updater through wine....but i wasnt sure it was a good idea or not