What is the purpose for 64bit Windows?

[Guest Chris Purdue]

I purchased the 64 bit version of Windows XP and found out that many

hardware and software products are not supported hence, I had to revert back

to 32bit Windows XP. Now I see the exact same problems with Vista 64 bit. My

question is: What is the purpose of 64 bit Windows if support is lacking?

Just like Linux which I consider to be crap, I consider the same for the 64

bit Windows.

 

You lackeys don't need to reply unless your name is Bill Gates.

[Guest Charlie Russel - MVP]

Re: What is the purpose for 64bit Windows?

 

There are no lackeys here, just users trying to help those who are in need

of help. And you really should keep up with the changes at MS - Bill hasn't

been in charge of MS for several years, and is leaving the company in the

new year completely to focus on his charitable work around the world.

 

That being said, there are many reasons for moving to 64bit Windows.

Personally, I moved because I wanted to be able to use all the functionality

of my computer. And because I'm always most comfortable on the leading (not

to say bleeding) edge of what's out there and available. I have a few things

that I had to abandon due to lack of drivers, and a few others where I've

had to apply a significant amount of moral persuasion to the vendor to get

their act together. But absolutely none of these prevented me from doing

what I do on a daily basis. All my core hardware and software has worked

flawlessly. And continues to do so. My 6 GB of RAM on my desktop is seen

without problems, as is the 16 GB of RAM on each of my two servers. My dual

monitors are seen correctly (as long as I don't make the mistake of

downloading the latest drivers from ATI). My bluetooth mouse works

perfectly. My built in sound card works as well as it can (not a big area

for me, and I cut a corner or two on it, I admit). My printer has full and

complete functionality, as does the second printer on the network once Dell

FINALLY produced a driver for it. All my networking works as expected. I can

burn DVDs (though not from my iPOD, since Apple broke that in the 7.4

release.) I can connect my Zune. All my USB thumb drives work. IOW,

everything that matters to me works.

 

Now, it's true. I've been doing this sort of thing for a long time. And

always on the bleeding edge, so I've learned how to buy hardware. I never

buy peripheral hardware that has any sort of "special" interface. No "host

based printing", for example. Printers have to have PCL5 and PostScript both

on them. And I have an old JetDirectEX that I use to connect them up, if

they don't have a built in JetDirect card to get onto the network. In the

days when I needed a modem, I never, ever, bought one of those "WinModem"

things. Duh. I buy my servers from HP. I build my own workstations where I

can carefully control the parts and the mobo. I don't depend on USB for

networking - all my Internet connectivity is handled by a Router, and my

firewall sits behind the router, and the servers sit behind that, and my

workstations are all connected to the internal network.

 

None of this is an accident. It's just good planning and preparation for

running in beta versions of new operating systems. At the moment, I'm only

running two beta operating systems. It's the fewest beta OSs I've been

running in the last 15 years of doing this. (And thank goodness for

Virtualization! It is WAY easier to deal with than dual and multi-booting

multiple machines.)

 

--

Charlie.

http://msmvps.com/xperts64

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

 

 

"Chris Purdue" <chrise@eathbound.net> wrote in message

news:476564ba$0$2312$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

>I purchased the 64 bit version of Windows XP and found out that many

>hardware and software products are not supported hence, I had to revert

>back to 32bit Windows XP. Now I see the exact same problems with Vista 64

>bit. My question is: What is the purpose of 64 bit Windows if support is

>lacking? Just like Linux which I consider to be crap, I consider the same

>for the 64 bit Windows.

>

> You lackeys don't need to reply unless your name is Bill Gates.

>

[Guest David F]

Re: What is the purpose for 64bit Windows? ITunes 64

 

Re: What is the purpose for 64bit Windows? ITunes 64

 

This should help you with ITunes burning DVDs under Vista 64:

http://www.agileprogrammer.com/dotnetguy/archive/2007/11/22/23851.aspx

 

It worked for me.

 

Is there a FAQ that tells all the changes that should be made for Vista 64?

I read another posting about fixing searches.

 

Workaround for Windows Search and Office 2007 documents on Windows Vista

64-bit.

http://www.windows-now.com/blogs/kmkenney/archive/2007/11/29/workaround-for-windows-search-and-office-2007-documents-on-windows-vista-64-bit.aspx

 

 

"Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message

news:F4CF74F8-1D34-4676-AACE-A082518D6283@microsoft.com...

> There are no lackeys here, just users trying to help those who are in need

> of help. And you really should keep up with the changes at MS - Bill

> hasn't been in charge of MS for several years, and is leaving the company

> in the new year completely to focus on his charitable work around the

> world.

>

> That being said, there are many reasons for moving to 64bit Windows.

> Personally, I moved because I wanted to be able to use all the

> functionality of my computer. And because I'm always most comfortable on

> the leading (not to say bleeding) edge of what's out there and available.

> I have a few things that I had to abandon due to lack of drivers, and a

> few others where I've had to apply a significant amount of moral

> persuasion to the vendor to get their act together. But absolutely none of

> these prevented me from doing what I do on a daily basis. All my core

> hardware and software has worked flawlessly. And continues to do so. My 6

> GB of RAM on my desktop is seen without problems, as is the 16 GB of RAM

> on each of my two servers. My dual monitors are seen correctly (as long as

> I don't make the mistake of downloading the latest drivers from ATI). My

> bluetooth mouse works perfectly. My built in sound card works as well as

> it can (not a big area for me, and I cut a corner or two on it, I admit).

> My printer has full and complete functionality, as does the second printer

> on the network once Dell FINALLY produced a driver for it. All my

> networking works as expected. I can burn DVDs (though not from my iPOD,

> since Apple broke that in the 7.4 release.) I can connect my Zune. All my

> USB thumb drives work. IOW, everything that matters to me works.

>

> Now, it's true. I've been doing this sort of thing for a long time. And

> always on the bleeding edge, so I've learned how to buy hardware. I never

> buy peripheral hardware that has any sort of "special" interface. No "host

> based printing", for example. Printers have to have PCL5 and PostScript

> both on them. And I have an old JetDirectEX that I use to connect them up,

> if they don't have a built in JetDirect card to get onto the network. In

> the days when I needed a modem, I never, ever, bought one of those

> "WinModem" things. Duh. I buy my servers from HP. I build my own

> workstations where I can carefully control the parts and the mobo. I don't

> depend on USB for networking - all my Internet connectivity is handled by

> a Router, and my firewall sits behind the router, and the servers sit

> behind that, and my workstations are all connected to the internal

> network.

>

> None of this is an accident. It's just good planning and preparation for

> running in beta versions of new operating systems. At the moment, I'm only

> running two beta operating systems. It's the fewest beta OSs I've been

> running in the last 15 years of doing this. (And thank goodness for

> Virtualization! It is WAY easier to deal with than dual and multi-booting

> multiple machines.)

>

> --

> Charlie.

> http://msmvps.com/xperts64

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

>

>

> "Chris Purdue" <chrise@eathbound.net> wrote in message

> news:476564ba$0$2312$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

>>I purchased the 64 bit version of Windows XP and found out that many

>>hardware and software products are not supported hence, I had to revert

>>back to 32bit Windows XP. Now I see the exact same problems with Vista 64

>>bit. My question is: What is the purpose of 64 bit Windows if support is

>>lacking? Just like Linux which I consider to be crap, I consider the same

>>for the 64 bit Windows.

>>

>> You lackeys don't need to reply unless your name is Bill Gates.

>>

>

[Guest Charlie Russel - MVP]

Re: What is the purpose for 64bit Windows? ITunes 64

 

Re: What is the purpose for 64bit Windows? ITunes 64

 

Thanks. Though I don't actually care one way or another about burning from

within iTunes. I _only_ use iTunes to load my Audible books onto my iPod. I

don't use it for music at all. ;)

 

--

Charlie.

http://msmvps.com/xperts64

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

 

 

"David F" <dfumento@ATSIGNgmailDOT.com> wrote in message

news:05DD95A1-53BF-4EF6-846E-DF390AC29717@microsoft.com...

> This should help you with ITunes burning DVDs under Vista 64:

> http://www.agileprogrammer.com/dotnetguy/archive/2007/11/22/23851.aspx

>

> It worked for me.

>

> Is there a FAQ that tells all the changes that should be made for Vista

> 64? I read another posting about fixing searches.

>

> Workaround for Windows Search and Office 2007 documents on Windows Vista

> 64-bit.

> http://www.windows-now.com/blogs/kmkenney/archive/2007/11/29/workaround-for-windows-search-and-office-2007-documents-on-windows-vista-64-bit.aspx

>

>

> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message

> news:F4CF74F8-1D34-4676-AACE-A082518D6283@microsoft.com...

>> There are no lackeys here, just users trying to help those who are in

>> need of help. And you really should keep up with the changes at MS - Bill

>> hasn't been in charge of MS for several years, and is leaving the company

>> in the new year completely to focus on his charitable work around the

>> world.

>>

>> That being said, there are many reasons for moving to 64bit Windows.

>> Personally, I moved because I wanted to be able to use all the

>> functionality of my computer. And because I'm always most comfortable on

>> the leading (not to say bleeding) edge of what's out there and available.

>> I have a few things that I had to abandon due to lack of drivers, and a

>> few others where I've had to apply a significant amount of moral

>> persuasion to the vendor to get their act together. But absolutely none

>> of these prevented me from doing what I do on a daily basis. All my core

>> hardware and software has worked flawlessly. And continues to do so. My 6

>> GB of RAM on my desktop is seen without problems, as is the 16 GB of RAM

>> on each of my two servers. My dual monitors are seen correctly (as long

>> as I don't make the mistake of downloading the latest drivers from ATI).

>> My bluetooth mouse works perfectly. My built in sound card works as well

>> as it can (not a big area for me, and I cut a corner or two on it, I

>> admit). My printer has full and complete functionality, as does the

>> second printer on the network once Dell FINALLY produced a driver for it.

>> All my networking works as expected. I can burn DVDs (though not from my

>> iPOD, since Apple broke that in the 7.4 release.) I can connect my Zune.

>> All my USB thumb drives work. IOW, everything that matters to me works.

>>

>> Now, it's true. I've been doing this sort of thing for a long time. And

>> always on the bleeding edge, so I've learned how to buy hardware. I never

>> buy peripheral hardware that has any sort of "special" interface. No

>> "host based printing", for example. Printers have to have PCL5 and

>> PostScript both on them. And I have an old JetDirectEX that I use to

>> connect them up, if they don't have a built in JetDirect card to get onto

>> the network. In the days when I needed a modem, I never, ever, bought one

>> of those "WinModem" things. Duh. I buy my servers from HP. I build my own

>> workstations where I can carefully control the parts and the mobo. I

>> don't depend on USB for networking - all my Internet connectivity is

>> handled by a Router, and my firewall sits behind the router, and the

>> servers sit behind that, and my workstations are all connected to the

>> internal network.

>>

>> None of this is an accident. It's just good planning and preparation for

>> running in beta versions of new operating systems. At the moment, I'm

>> only running two beta operating systems. It's the fewest beta OSs I've

>> been running in the last 15 years of doing this. (And thank goodness for

>> Virtualization! It is WAY easier to deal with than dual and multi-booting

>> multiple machines.)

>>

>> --

>> Charlie.

>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64

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

>>

>>

>> "Chris Purdue" <chrise@eathbound.net> wrote in message

>> news:476564ba$0$2312$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

>>>I purchased the 64 bit version of Windows XP and found out that many

>>>hardware and software products are not supported hence, I had to revert

>>>back to 32bit Windows XP. Now I see the exact same problems with Vista 64

>>>bit. My question is: What is the purpose of 64 bit Windows if support is

>>>lacking? Just like Linux which I consider to be crap, I consider the same

>>>for the 64 bit Windows.

>>>

>>> You lackeys don't need to reply unless your name is Bill Gates.

>>>

>>

>

[Guest Chuck Walbourn [MSFT]]

Re: What is the purpose for 64bit Windows?

 

> You lackeys don't need to reply unless your name is Bill Gates.

 

FYI: Steve Ballmer is CEO, not Bill Gates. BillG hasn't run the company

day-to-day in some time. If you want to rant, you probably want to direct

your rant towards the people who actually still run Microsoft's Windows

business. BillG is the guy to rant to about saving Africa these days.

 

Major technology transitions take a while. Windows Vista x64 is better for

drivers than XP x64. More OEMs, hardware vendors, and software vendors are

focusing on x64 now than they were in 2005 when XP x64 was released. There

is still a long way to go to get the entire PC industry to consider x64

support mandatory. Even some Microsoft product teams are guilty of ignoring

x64 for development/test convienence.

 

If you were using PCs during the transition from 16-bit to 32-bit, this will

be a familiar experience. The 32-bit to 64-bit transition is technically

easier all-around, but business wise it's easier to just suffer through with

various hacks to get things to continue to squeeze into 32-bit and try to

ignore x64 a while longer than it was for 16-bit to 32-bit. This tactic is

not going to work forever, and in some segments it's no longer a realistic

option. High-end gaming, workstation applications (CAD, etc.), and servers

are the most compelling uses of 64-bit, and as the user base grows, so will

support for it. The CPU people have done their job. The Windows people have

done their job. The Windows logo program people have done their job. Now

it's up to 3rd party driver writers, hardware vendors, and all the thousands

of software teams out there to take supporting x64 seriously. They won't

until customers tell them they have to do it.

 

Many people on this list including myself have been happily running x64

Editions of Windows for years. The technology works, and the benefits are

there. The newer software runs pretty well, and if you find something

released in the last year or two that claims support for Windows Vista, you

should complain if it doesn't support x64.

 

--

Chuck Walbourn

SDE, XNA Developer Connection

 

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.