Upgrading to 64-Bit

August 23, 2007

My system now supports 64-Bit OS including all Drivers and additional

hardware, Webcam, Scanner, Printer and Digital Camera.

I also have software that supports 64-Bit, Antivirus etc

Is it worth the move?

August 23, 2007

Re: Upgrading to 64-Bit

XP x64 is a wonder of stabillity. Some rather ordinary things do show off

better performance - even 32bit stuff, like the FlightSimulator. With most

things you probably won't notice any difference beyond the way that it's

chugging along without ever complaining.

If it really is worth the cost and effort depends on if you want to be able

to benchmark a speed benefit - something to show off - in this case, NO!

Tony. . .

"Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message

news:Odp95QU5HHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> My system now supports 64-Bit OS including all Drivers and additional

> hardware, Webcam, Scanner, Printer and Digital Camera.

> I also have software that supports 64-Bit, Antivirus etc

>

> Is it worth the move?

>

August 23, 2007

Re: Upgrading to 64-Bit

I agree, but would add that I have found Vista64 more trouble than Vista32.

Signed driver requirement is one problem, but my wife's Vista32 just works,

while my Vista64 has periodic problems. XP64 is based on the server code,

and that may be why it is so stable.

"Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

news:OHob0hW5HHA.5844@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> XP x64 is a wonder of stabillity. Some rather ordinary things do show off

> better performance - even 32bit stuff, like the FlightSimulator. With most

> things you probably won't notice any difference beyond the way that it's

> chugging along without ever complaining.

>

> If it really is worth the cost and effort depends on if you want to be

> able

> to benchmark a speed benefit - something to show off - in this case, NO!

>

> Tony. . .

>

> "Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message

> news:Odp95QU5HHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>> My system now supports 64-Bit OS including all Drivers and additional

>> hardware, Webcam, Scanner, Printer and Digital Camera.

>> I also have software that supports 64-Bit, Antivirus etc

>>

>> Is it worth the move?

>>

>

August 23, 2007

Re: Upgrading to 64-Bit

Now see, I have the exact opposite experience here. My Ferrari just works,

running Vista 64. My wife's Vista 32 is a source of pain and annoyance.

But neither is as rock solid as XP x64, frankly. Ah, well, the price of

progress, I guess.

--

Charlie.

http://msmvps.com/xperts64

http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

"John Barnes" <jbarnes@email.net> wrote in message

news:egeMxqX5HHA.3900@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>I agree, but would add that I have found Vista64 more trouble than Vista32.

>Signed driver requirement is one problem, but my wife's Vista32 just works,

>while my Vista64 has periodic problems. XP64 is based on the server code,

>and that may be why it is so stable.

>

> "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

> news:OHob0hW5HHA.5844@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>> XP x64 is a wonder of stabillity. Some rather ordinary things do show off

>> better performance - even 32bit stuff, like the FlightSimulator. With

>> most

>> things you probably won't notice any difference beyond the way that it's

>> chugging along without ever complaining.

>>

>> If it really is worth the cost and effort depends on if you want to be

>> able

>> to benchmark a speed benefit - something to show off - in this case, NO!

>>

>> Tony. . .

>>

>> "Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message

>> news:Odp95QU5HHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>> My system now supports 64-Bit OS including all Drivers and additional

>>> hardware, Webcam, Scanner, Printer and Digital Camera.

>>> I also have software that supports 64-Bit, Antivirus etc

>>>

>>> Is it worth the move?

>>>

>>

>

August 23, 2007

Re: Upgrading to 64-Bit

"John Barnes" <jbarnes@email.net> wrote:

> but would add that I have found Vista64 more trouble than

> Vista32.

I have to disagree, I had Vista64 running perfectly and now I have a

new computer with Vista32 installed and nothing but grief. Hardware

that was trouble free in Vista64 won't install in Vista32, go figure?

--

XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups

The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

August 24, 2007

Re: Upgrading to 64-Bit

I run both 32 and 64 bit vista. Neither has been 100% trouble free. x32 bit

seems to be network probs and x64 has had internet/network/DVD probs BUT all

in all to be honest i has more probs when i first installed XP Pro!!! In

fairness both installs have gone into brand new custom built PCs. The one x64

prob that cause a headache was the screen saver coming on during a defrag and

locking up the PC, after trying to restart several times, last good config,

etc, etc it did eventually start.

"XS11E" wrote:

> "John Barnes" <jbarnes@email.net> wrote:

>

> > but would add that I have found Vista64 more trouble than

> > Vista32.

>

> I have to disagree, I had Vista64 running perfectly and now I have a

> new computer with Vista32 installed and nothing but grief. Hardware

> that was trouble free in Vista64 won't install in Vista32, go figure?

>

> --

> XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups

> The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

>

August 26, 2007

Re: Upgrading to 64-Bit

So you think X64 is better than Vista64?

"phat28vr6" <phat28vr6@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:27C107B4-2525-428D-82AA-7088C736AAD1@microsoft.com...

>I run both 32 and 64 bit vista. Neither has been 100% trouble free. x32 bit

> seems to be network probs and x64 has had internet/network/DVD probs BUT

> all

> in all to be honest i has more probs when i first installed XP Pro!!! In

> fairness both installs have gone into brand new custom built PCs. The one

> x64

> prob that cause a headache was the screen saver coming on during a defrag

> and

> locking up the PC, after trying to restart several times, last good

> config,

> etc, etc it did eventually start.

>

> "XS11E" wrote:

>

>> "John Barnes" <jbarnes@email.net> wrote:

>>

>> > but would add that I have found Vista64 more trouble than

>> > Vista32.

>>

>> I have to disagree, I had Vista64 running perfectly and now I have a

>> new computer with Vista32 installed and nothing but grief. Hardware

>> that was trouble free in Vista64 won't install in Vista32, go figure?

>>

>> --

>> XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups

>> The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

>>

August 26, 2007

Re: Upgrading to 64-Bit

Different. Better? Well, I'm running Vista 64bit on 4 out of five of my

64bit machines in preference to XP x64. But some of that is just because of

what I do, not really a reflection of merit. There are things I like about

each.

--

Charlie.

http://msmvps.com/xperts64

http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

"Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message

news:enNQZ035HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> So you think X64 is better than Vista64?

>

> "phat28vr6" <phat28vr6@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

> news:27C107B4-2525-428D-82AA-7088C736AAD1@microsoft.com...

>>I run both 32 and 64 bit vista. Neither has been 100% trouble free. x32

>>bit

>> seems to be network probs and x64 has had internet/network/DVD probs BUT

>> all

>> in all to be honest i has more probs when i first installed XP Pro!!! In

>> fairness both installs have gone into brand new custom built PCs. The one

>> x64

>> prob that cause a headache was the screen saver coming on during a defrag

>> and

>> locking up the PC, after trying to restart several times, last good

>> config,

>> etc, etc it did eventually start.

>>

>> "XS11E" wrote:

>>

>>> "John Barnes" <jbarnes@email.net> wrote:

>>>

>>> > but would add that I have found Vista64 more trouble than

>>> > Vista32.

>>>

>>> I have to disagree, I had Vista64 running perfectly and now I have a

>>> new computer with Vista32 installed and nothing but grief. Hardware

>>> that was trouble free in Vista64 won't install in Vista32, go figure?

>>>

>>> --

>>> XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups

>>> The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

>>>

>

August 26, 2007

Re: Upgrading to 64-Bit

Misunderstanding lol, x64 IS vista 64 i was talking about. Vista 64 is faster

than the 32 bit version, BUT both are fast IMO. If fast is better for you

then yes.

At the moment both are trouble free and more importantly stable. However, of

the 2 i would say the 32 version has had the least probs, maybe i just sorted

the problems out quicker, like i said b4 these were mostly network probs. Bit

of advice, do your fresh installs with NO UPDATES, do them later otherwise

you will never know if the updates are causing a problem!

All in all both have had probs, only a few, usually niggling ones that

havent been obvious and have took a while to sort. Of the 2 versions I prefer

x64.

My advice would be go for it.

"Clayton" wrote:

> So you think X64 is better than Vista64?

>

> "phat28vr6" <phat28vr6@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

> news:27C107B4-2525-428D-82AA-7088C736AAD1@microsoft.com...

> >I run both 32 and 64 bit vista. Neither has been 100% trouble free. x32 bit

> > seems to be network probs and x64 has had internet/network/DVD probs BUT

> > all

> > in all to be honest i has more probs when i first installed XP Pro!!! In

> > fairness both installs have gone into brand new custom built PCs. The one

> > x64

> > prob that cause a headache was the screen saver coming on during a defrag

> > and

> > locking up the PC, after trying to restart several times, last good

> > config,

> > etc, etc it did eventually start.

> >

> > "XS11E" wrote:

> >

> >> "John Barnes" <jbarnes@email.net> wrote:

> >>

> >> > but would add that I have found Vista64 more trouble than

> >> > Vista32.

> >>

> >> I have to disagree, I had Vista64 running perfectly and now I have a

> >> new computer with Vista32 installed and nothing but grief. Hardware

> >> that was trouble free in Vista64 won't install in Vista32, go figure?

> >>

> >> --

> >> XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups

> >> The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

> >>

>

August 26, 2007

Re: Upgrading to 64-Bit

I run specialized software optimized for x64.

XP or Vista itself have proven no better for it.

Comparing x64 to x86, it's clearly night and day. But, this is specialized

software and hardware that is extremely math intensive for simulating

nuclear power plant thermohydraulics.

At home, I can't tell the difference.

Vista32 and 64 have a lot of annoyance factors, but once things are as you

want, they kind of disappear.

I was strongly surprised that Vista64 was so well supported in drivers.

(Compared to XP64 early days.) But, as far as applications, they are still

all 32 bit and, if clocked, probably run slightly slower. Not very good

anti-virus support (although there is some: NOD32.) Firewall support is a

joke unless you're a techie: Sphinx. Beyond that I would have to say I've

had the same experience with both. I only run with it to support my work.

"Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message

news:enNQZ035HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> So you think X64 is better than Vista64?

>

> "phat28vr6" <phat28vr6@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

> news:27C107B4-2525-428D-82AA-7088C736AAD1@microsoft.com...

>>I run both 32 and 64 bit vista. Neither has been 100% trouble free. x32

>>bit

>> seems to be network probs and x64 has had internet/network/DVD probs BUT

>> all

>> in all to be honest i has more probs when i first installed XP Pro!!! In

>> fairness both installs have gone into brand new custom built PCs. The one

>> x64

>> prob that cause a headache was the screen saver coming on during a defrag

>> and

>> locking up the PC, after trying to restart several times, last good

>> config,

>> etc, etc it did eventually start.

>>

>> "XS11E" wrote:

>>

>>> "John Barnes" <jbarnes@email.net> wrote:

>>>

>>> > but would add that I have found Vista64 more trouble than

>>> > Vista32.

>>>

>>> I have to disagree, I had Vista64 running perfectly and now I have a

>>> new computer with Vista32 installed and nothing but grief. Hardware

>>> that was trouble free in Vista64 won't install in Vista32, go figure?

>>>

>>> --

>>> XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups

>>> The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

>>>

>

August 26, 2007

Re: Upgrading to 64-Bit

My Vista64 requires booting from 'last known good' about once a month. I

have had to boot and do a restore from the DVD, 2 times, but one of those

was a driver installed from Windows update and I don't remember the reason

for the other, just a problem at first startup in the morning if I recall.

So far I have had no problems with Vista32 (used less and relatively light

duty). I also agree that the amount of driver support for Vista64. Some

pieces of equipment I retired during XP64 now have Vista64 drivers. Still

is a problem with signed driver support though.

"Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message

news:enNQZ035HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> So you think X64 is better than Vista64?

>

> "phat28vr6" <phat28vr6@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

> news:27C107B4-2525-428D-82AA-7088C736AAD1@microsoft.com...

>>I run both 32 and 64 bit vista. Neither has been 100% trouble free. x32

>>bit

>> seems to be network probs and x64 has had internet/network/DVD probs BUT

>> all

>> in all to be honest i has more probs when i first installed XP Pro!!! In

>> fairness both installs have gone into brand new custom built PCs. The one

>> x64

>> prob that cause a headache was the screen saver coming on during a defrag

>> and

>> locking up the PC, after trying to restart several times, last good

>> config,

>> etc, etc it did eventually start.

>>

>> "XS11E" wrote:

>>

>>> "John Barnes" <jbarnes@email.net> wrote:

>>>

>>> > but would add that I have found Vista64 more trouble than

>>> > Vista32.

>>>

>>> I have to disagree, I had Vista64 running perfectly and now I have a

>>> new computer with Vista32 installed and nothing but grief. Hardware

>>> that was trouble free in Vista64 won't install in Vista32, go figure?

>>>

>>> --

>>> XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups

>>> The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

>>>

>

August 27, 2007

FIXED IT! was Upgrading to 64-Bit

FIXED IT! was Upgrading to 64-Bit

XS11E <xs11e@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:

> I have to disagree, I had Vista64 running perfectly and now I have a

> new computer with Vista32 installed and nothing but grief. Hardware

> that was trouble free in Vista64 won't install in Vista32, go figure?

FIXED IT!

Of all the miserable hidden settings.... my new computer is a HP Media

Center PC with a keyboard with all the weird buttons for various

things. When setting up the keyboard you configure what the buttons

do, for example I've set the "Search" button to http://www.google.com.

At the bottom of the configuration window there's a "Global

Preferences" button and on that screen is a check box "Disable support

for USB devices that require high power" which is checked by default.

I unchecked it, my scanner now installs and works but it sure took a

while to find that check box!

--

XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups

The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

August 27, 2007

Re: Upgrading to 64-Bit

John, ive had the same probs. Only this am the PC took 2 attempts to re-start

for no apparent reason! Only did a disc clean and re-booted? Mines more of a

weekly "last known good..." restart. Thort it was running ok but obviously

not 100%.

This may help you in the driver signing prob.

Open run command and type in "gpedit.msc", > administrive templates folder >

system > device installation. In the main window look for 'treat all

digitally signed drivers equally in the driver ranking and selection process'

and enable it.

Windows will not choose only digitally signed drivers over non microsoft

signed ones.

I have to agree with the support for drivers in vista x64 and 32.

So far ive never had to 'retire' anything due to lack of driver support,

fingers X'd.

"John Barnes" wrote:

> My Vista64 requires booting from 'last known good' about once a month. I

> have had to boot and do a restore from the DVD, 2 times, but one of those

> was a driver installed from Windows update and I don't remember the reason

> for the other, just a problem at first startup in the morning if I recall.

> So far I have had no problems with Vista32 (used less and relatively light

> duty). I also agree that the amount of driver support for Vista64. Some

> pieces of equipment I retired during XP64 now have Vista64 drivers. Still

> is a problem with signed driver support though.

>

> "Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message

> news:enNQZ035HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> > So you think X64 is better than Vista64?

> >

> > "phat28vr6" <phat28vr6@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

> > news:27C107B4-2525-428D-82AA-7088C736AAD1@microsoft.com...

> >>I run both 32 and 64 bit vista. Neither has been 100% trouble free. x32

> >>bit

> >> seems to be network probs and x64 has had internet/network/DVD probs BUT

> >> all

> >> in all to be honest i has more probs when i first installed XP Pro!!! In

> >> fairness both installs have gone into brand new custom built PCs. The one

> >> x64

> >> prob that cause a headache was the screen saver coming on during a defrag

> >> and

> >> locking up the PC, after trying to restart several times, last good

> >> config,

> >> etc, etc it did eventually start.

> >>

> >> "XS11E" wrote:

> >>

> >>> "John Barnes" <jbarnes@email.net> wrote:

> >>>

> >>> > but would add that I have found Vista64 more trouble than

> >>> > Vista32.

> >>>

> >>> I have to disagree, I had Vista64 running perfectly and now I have a

> >>> new computer with Vista32 installed and nothing but grief. Hardware

> >>> that was trouble free in Vista64 won't install in Vista32, go figure?

> >>>

> >>> --

> >>> XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups

> >>> The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

> >>>

> >

>

September 2, 2007

Upgrading to 64-Bit

Huh?

"XS11E" <xs11e@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message

news:Xns99996C4BF3F7Axs11eyahoocom@127.0.0.1...

> XS11E <xs11e@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:

>

>> I have to disagree, I had Vista64 running perfectly and now I have a

>> new computer with Vista32 installed and nothing but grief. Hardware

>> that was trouble free in Vista64 won't install in Vista32, go figure?

>

> FIXED IT!

>

> Of all the miserable hidden settings.... my new computer is a HP Media

> Center PC with a keyboard with all the weird buttons for various

> things. When setting up the keyboard you configure what the buttons

> do, for example I've set the "Search" button to http://www.google.com.

>

> At the bottom of the configuration window there's a "Global

> Preferences" button and on that screen is a check box "Disable support

> for USB devices that require high power" which is checked by default.

>

> I unchecked it, my scanner now installs and works but it sure took a

> while to find that check box!

>

> --

> XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups

> The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

Sign In

Upgrading to 64-Bit

Recommended Posts

Guest Clayton

Popular Days

Popular Days

Guest Tony Sperling

Guest John Barnes

Guest Charlie Russel - MVP

Guest XS11E

Guest phat28vr6

Guest Clayton

Guest Charlie Russel - MVP

Guest phat28vr6

Guest Mark

Guest John Barnes

Guest XS11E

Guest phat28vr6

Guest Clayton

Similar Content

Taskbar disappear after memory upgrade BITS does not work

شلون احمل ويندوز فيستا 64 bit

Windows 7 SP1 64-bit AIO with in-place upgrade support ISO

Bit Locker Key

No admin rights on the PC and no bit-locker recovery key

Browse

Activity

Site Info