Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

[Guest Joe Pasternak]

It's been a little over one year that I've been using XP64.

 

It is apparent to me by now that hardware drivers are hard to find for

this 64bit OS furthermore, I have NOT seen any software boxes in the

retail stores that claim to support Windows XP 64 bit. After Windows

2000, XP, comes Vista (the 32 bit version) so there is no mention

whatsoever about XP 64 bit or Vista 64 bit.

 

Photoshop CS runs on XP but WILL NOT run on XP 64

 

It seems that Photoshop CS2 will run on XP 64 but the retail box doesn't

say so. Some people do have luck running these types of high-priced

software on xp64 bit and Vista ultimate but why won't the manufacturers

admit one way or the other?

 

Personally, I like the 64 bit version of Windows XP64 - even though it

seems to me that even Microsoft doesn't fully support it (no 64 bit

flash, and no 64bit IE software update, it reverts to the 32 bit version

for that to which I say horse manure).

 

My question is: what the hell is going on with this 64bit nonsense? By

the time everyone wakes up and supports this 64 bit hot air, we'll be

ready for 128 and maybe 256 bit.

 

Microsoft, whasssup??

[Guest Gary Mount]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

Applications written for 32 bit are compatible with 64 bit. That is, a 32

bit application will run on the 64 bit O/S. As long as the application

doesn't require 32 bit drivers. Usually an application doesn't require

drivers, only hardware does.

 

 

"Joe Pasternak" <Joepatkit5768@aol.net> wrote in message

news:477019fd$0$11059$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

> It's been a little over one year that I've been using XP64.

>

> It is apparent to me by now that hardware drivers are hard to find for

> this 64bit OS furthermore, I have NOT seen any software boxes in the

> retail stores that claim to support Windows XP 64 bit. After Windows 2000,

> XP, comes Vista (the 32 bit version) so there is no mention whatsoever

> about XP 64 bit or Vista 64 bit.

>

> Photoshop CS runs on XP but WILL NOT run on XP 64

>

> It seems that Photoshop CS2 will run on XP 64 but the retail box doesn't

> say so. Some people do have luck running these types of high-priced

> software on xp64 bit and Vista ultimate but why won't the manufacturers

> admit one way or the other?

>

> Personally, I like the 64 bit version of Windows XP64 - even though it

> seems to me that even Microsoft doesn't fully support it (no 64 bit flash,

> and no 64bit IE software update, it reverts to the 32 bit version for that

> to which I say horse manure).

>

> My question is: what the hell is going on with this 64bit nonsense? By the

> time everyone wakes up and supports this 64 bit hot air, we'll be ready

> for 128 and maybe 256 bit.

>

> Microsoft, whasssup??

[Guest Tony Sperling]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

You are essentially correct, but you are not being entirely fair - Flash and

Java isn't developed by MS and MS have no way of dictating who should

develop what. Were these items supplied by their manufaturers, the OS would

support them. It is true, and equally sad that the outside world to a large

extent have bypassed XP x64 and concentrated on Vista (although a fair bit

of the Vista x64 software that has been released, is said to be working).

 

Tony. . .

 

 

"Joe Pasternak" <Joepatkit5768@aol.net> wrote in message

news:477019fd$0$11059$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

> It's been a little over one year that I've been using XP64.

>

> It is apparent to me by now that hardware drivers are hard to find for

> this 64bit OS furthermore, I have NOT seen any software boxes in the

> retail stores that claim to support Windows XP 64 bit. After Windows 2000,

> XP, comes Vista (the 32 bit version) so there is no mention whatsoever

> about XP 64 bit or Vista 64 bit.

>

> Photoshop CS runs on XP but WILL NOT run on XP 64

>

> It seems that Photoshop CS2 will run on XP 64 but the retail box doesn't

> say so. Some people do have luck running these types of high-priced

> software on xp64 bit and Vista ultimate but why won't the manufacturers

> admit one way or the other?

>

> Personally, I like the 64 bit version of Windows XP64 - even though it

> seems to me that even Microsoft doesn't fully support it (no 64 bit flash,

> and no 64bit IE software update, it reverts to the 32 bit version for that

> to which I say horse manure).

>

> My question is: what the hell is going on with this 64bit nonsense? By the

> time everyone wakes up and supports this 64 bit hot air, we'll be ready

> for 128 and maybe 256 bit.

>

> Microsoft, whasssup??

[Guest S.SubZero]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

On Dec 24, 12:43 pm, Joe Pasternak <Joepatkit5...@aol.net> wrote:

> Personally, I like the 64 bit version of Windows XP64 - even though it

> seems to me that even Microsoft doesn't fully support it (no 64 bit

> flash, and no 64bit IE software update, it reverts to the 32 bit version

> for that to which I say horse manure).

 

As said, Flash was not invented, nor is it developed, by Microsoft.

It is an Adobe product, acquired when they bought Macromedia last

year. You should not feel that Windows 64-bit users are somehow

alone, Adobe currently does not have Flash for *any* 64-bit platform.

Adobe's support for 64-bit in general has been pretty lethargic.

XP64's been around for three years or so (part of that in beta), and

Vista X64 has been out about a year. The fact that there isn't even a

BETA of Flash for 64-bit is pretty depressing, especially since it's

just Flash.. Unless Flash is some super-duper complicated thing that

is harder to port to 64-bit than an entire operating system.

>

> My question is: what the hell is going on with this 64bit nonsense? By

> the time everyone wakes up and supports this 64 bit hot air, we'll be

> ready for 128 and maybe 256 bit.

>

> Microsoft, whasssup??

 

Microsoft's 64-bit support has actually been pretty strong. They have

64-bit versions of several of their mainstream products. A few holes

here and there, but they are at least trying. There was a 64-bit

Office being talked about a while back but nothing ever came of it.

That would definitely be the killer desktop app.

 

I run XP64 on my Dell Inspiron E1705 laptop. I have drivers for every

device in it. I have a 64-bit version of Firefox, 64-bit newsreader,

64-bit IRC client (why?!), and 64-bit bittorrent client, along with

other apps here and there. There's no real purpose to a 64-bit IRC

client but it's cute nonetheless.

[Guest Gary Mount]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

I have been developing software for about a decade now. Only last month did

I acquire my first 64 bit computer.

I have had a 32 bit computer ever since I bought a 30 MHz 80386 two decades

ago.

I don't know why the big shops are taking so long to come out with 64 bit

versions.

 

"Joe Pasternak" <Joepatkit5768@aol.net> wrote in message

news:477019fd$0$11059$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

> It's been a little over one year that I've been using XP64.

>

> It is apparent to me by now that hardware drivers are hard to find for

> this 64bit OS furthermore, I have NOT seen any software boxes in the

> retail stores that claim to support Windows XP 64 bit. After Windows 2000,

> XP, comes Vista (the 32 bit version) so there is no mention whatsoever

> about XP 64 bit or Vista 64 bit.

>

> Photoshop CS runs on XP but WILL NOT run on XP 64

>

> It seems that Photoshop CS2 will run on XP 64 but the retail box doesn't

> say so. Some people do have luck running these types of high-priced

> software on xp64 bit and Vista ultimate but why won't the manufacturers

> admit one way or the other?

>

> Personally, I like the 64 bit version of Windows XP64 - even though it

> seems to me that even Microsoft doesn't fully support it (no 64 bit flash,

> and no 64bit IE software update, it reverts to the 32 bit version for that

> to which I say horse manure).

>

> My question is: what the hell is going on with this 64bit nonsense? By the

> time everyone wakes up and supports this 64 bit hot air, we'll be ready

> for 128 and maybe 256 bit.

>

> Microsoft, whasssup??

[Guest XS11E]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

"Gary Mount" <gary_mount@telus.net> wrote:

> I don't know why the big shops are taking so long to come out with

> 64 bit versions.

 

Most software shops have, with others it's a matter of insufficient

demand and with hardware it's mostly greed, by not supplying 64 bit

drivers for existing devices they can get you to buy a new one with the

64 bit drivers.

 

 

--

XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups

The Usenet Improvement Project:

http://improve-usenet.org

[Guest Joe Pasternak]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

Gary Mount wrote:

> Applications written for 32 bit are compatible with 64 bit. That is, a

> 32 bit application will run on the 64 bit O/S. As long as the

> application doesn't require 32 bit drivers. Usually an application

> doesn't require drivers, only hardware does.

 

I know what applications require but I am not sure what your logic

requires though... If your logic is true then Photoshop CS (software, to

name a few), which DOES NOT REQUIRE 32 BIT DRIVERS, would be very much

compaatible and, according to you, should run under 64 bit WIndows XP

but it DOES NOT. So now what?

[Guest S.SubZero]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

On Dec 24, 5:09 pm, Joe Pasternak <Joepatkit5...@aol.net> wrote:

> What we need to do here is convince Microsoft that their marketing

> skills begin to suck so Ballmer needs to get off his rich ass and do a

> better job convincing developers that the 64bit Windows is really a good

> and fast product. Are you listening, Ballmer?

 

Did you even read my post? Flash does not exist for 64-bit *nix

browsers either. It's not about marketing. Adobe simply has no Flash

for 64-bit browsers and that's it.

 

A big reason for this I'm sure is that 32-bit browsers work just fine

under Windows and *nix. In fact on Windows 64-bit, the 32-bit IE is

the default browser, and there isn't even a facility for changing it.

(32-bit media player 11 is the default player in Vista x64 as well,

and MS didn't bother making a 64-bit MP11 for XP64)

 

Right now it's the best of both worlds; 32-bit apps work for the tasks

they need to work for. Any apps that are pushing the edge with 32-bit

are either already ported to 64-bit or are on their way. Did you know

in XP64 and Vista64 that *notepad.exe* is a 64-bit app? For all the

times you need to open 2GB+ text files.

[Guest David Manvell]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

If you are running the 64 bit browser and go to a site that requires Flash,

there is often a link that takes you to their website. There is a note on

there that 64 bit version (For which OSs?) of Flash is now in the works. No

date yet of course.

 

David Manvell

 

"S.SubZero" wrote:

> On Dec 24, 5:09 pm, Joe Pasternak <Joepatkit5...@aol.net> wrote:

> > What we need to do here is convince Microsoft that their marketing

> > skills begin to suck so Ballmer needs to get off his rich ass and do a

> > better job convincing developers that the 64bit Windows is really a good

> > and fast product. Are you listening, Ballmer?

>

> Did you even read my post? Flash does not exist for 64-bit *nix

> browsers either. It's not about marketing. Adobe simply has no Flash

> for 64-bit browsers and that's it.

>

> A big reason for this I'm sure is that 32-bit browsers work just fine

> under Windows and *nix. In fact on Windows 64-bit, the 32-bit IE is

> the default browser, and there isn't even a facility for changing it.

> (32-bit media player 11 is the default player in Vista x64 as well,

> and MS didn't bother making a 64-bit MP11 for XP64)

>

> Right now it's the best of both worlds; 32-bit apps work for the tasks

> they need to work for. Any apps that are pushing the edge with 32-bit

> are either already ported to 64-bit or are on their way. Did you know

> in XP64 and Vista64 that *notepad.exe* is a 64-bit app? For all the

> times you need to open 2GB+ text files.

>

[Guest Brian Smith]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

64-bit is years ahead of itself. I purchased a Dual Core 64-bit and find

myself in the same pit you're in.

If I only used IE 64-bit I'd be doing fine, but Office 64-bit, any year,

forget it. Any other software 64-bit, forget it. M$ dropped the ball on this

one. I plan on switching to Linux Ubuntu 64-bit in 2008. It's free. There

are drivers and software for it.

M$, Gawd I dunno I worked for them through a partner company, but I can't

walk the walk a talk the talk on XP64bit.

 

"Joe Pasternak" <Joepatkit5768@aol.net> wrote in message

news:477019fd$0$11059$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

> It's been a little over one year that I've been using XP64.

>

> It is apparent to me by now that hardware drivers are hard to find for

> this 64bit OS furthermore, I have NOT seen any software boxes in the

> retail stores that claim to support Windows XP 64 bit. After Windows 2000,

> XP, comes Vista (the 32 bit version) so there is no mention whatsoever

> about XP 64 bit or Vista 64 bit.

>

> Photoshop CS runs on XP but WILL NOT run on XP 64

>

> It seems that Photoshop CS2 will run on XP 64 but the retail box doesn't

> say so. Some people do have luck running these types of high-priced

> software on xp64 bit and Vista ultimate but why won't the manufacturers

> admit one way or the other?

>

> Personally, I like the 64 bit version of Windows XP64 - even though it

> seems to me that even Microsoft doesn't fully support it (no 64 bit flash,

> and no 64bit IE software update, it reverts to the 32 bit version for that

> to which I say horse manure).

>

> My question is: what the hell is going on with this 64bit nonsense? By the

> time everyone wakes up and supports this 64 bit hot air, we'll be ready

> for 128 and maybe 256 bit.

>

> Microsoft, whasssup??

[Guest Dominic Payer]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

There are many reports of Photoshop CS working well under x64 XP. If it

doesn't work for you there must be something unusual about your system which

is stopping it running.

 

 

 

#

"Joe Pasternak" <Joepatkit5768@aol.net> wrote in message

news:477054a5$0$10957$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

> Gary Mount wrote:

>> Applications written for 32 bit are compatible with 64 bit. That is, a 32

>> bit application will run on the 64 bit O/S. As long as the application

>> doesn't require 32 bit drivers. Usually an application doesn't require

>> drivers, only hardware does.

>

> I know what applications require but I am not sure what your logic

> requires though... If your logic is true then Photoshop CS (software, to

> name a few), which DOES NOT REQUIRE 32 BIT DRIVERS, would be very much

> compaatible and, according to you, should run under 64 bit WIndows XP but

> it DOES NOT. So now what?

[Guest Bo Persson]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

Gary Mount wrote:

:: I have been developing software for about a decade now. Only last

:: month did I acquire my first 64 bit computer.

:: I have had a 32 bit computer ever since I bought a 30 MHz 80386

:: two decades ago.

:: I don't know why the big shops are taking so long to come out with

:: 64 bit versions.

::

 

They are waiting for you (and everyone else) to get a 64 bit machine.

What took you so long?!

 

 

Bo Persson

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

Why do you want a 64-bit version of Office? It doesn't do anything that

needs it.

 

"Brian Smith" <b4d5y@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:entoiKtRIHA.4880@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> 64-bit is years ahead of itself. I purchased a Dual Core 64-bit and find

> myself in the same pit you're in.

> If I only used IE 64-bit I'd be doing fine, but Office 64-bit, any year,

> forget it. Any other software 64-bit, forget it. M$ dropped the ball on

> this one. I plan on switching to Linux Ubuntu 64-bit in 2008. It's free.

> There are drivers and software for it.

> M$, Gawd I dunno I worked for them through a partner company, but I can't

> walk the walk a talk the talk on XP64bit.

>

> "Joe Pasternak" <Joepatkit5768@aol.net> wrote in message

> news:477019fd$0$11059$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

>> It's been a little over one year that I've been using XP64.

>>

>> It is apparent to me by now that hardware drivers are hard to find for

>> this 64bit OS furthermore, I have NOT seen any software boxes in the

>> retail stores that claim to support Windows XP 64 bit. After Windows

>> 2000, XP, comes Vista (the 32 bit version) so there is no mention

>> whatsoever about XP 64 bit or Vista 64 bit.

>>

>> Photoshop CS runs on XP but WILL NOT run on XP 64

>>

>> It seems that Photoshop CS2 will run on XP 64 but the retail box doesn't

>> say so. Some people do have luck running these types of high-priced

>> software on xp64 bit and Vista ultimate but why won't the manufacturers

>> admit one way or the other?

>>

>> Personally, I like the 64 bit version of Windows XP64 - even though it

>> seems to me that even Microsoft doesn't fully support it (no 64 bit

>> flash, and no 64bit IE software update, it reverts to the 32 bit version

>> for that to which I say horse manure).

>>

>> My question is: what the hell is going on with this 64bit nonsense? By

>> the time everyone wakes up and supports this 64 bit hot air, we'll be

>> ready for 128 and maybe 256 bit.

>>

>> Microsoft, whasssup??

>

>

[Guest Greg Lamonte]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

I don't particularly care for for Office 64 bit but all other 64 bit

software is essential to go together with XP 64. If there is no support by

other than Microsoft for this product, those of us who bought XP-64 bought a

dud. I thought that Microsoft is going to top XP 64 with Vista 64 but going

back again to 32 bit vista is like stepping backwords and, if you install

the 64 bit version of Vista, I guess you're shit-out-of-luck, too..........

 

"Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

news:1074CED9-C8D3-4C79-888D-80E5CB13BB69@microsoft.com...

> Why do you want a 64-bit version of Office? It doesn't do anything that

> needs it.

>

> "Brian Smith" <b4d5y@comcast.net> wrote in message

> news:entoiKtRIHA.4880@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>> 64-bit is years ahead of itself. I purchased a Dual Core 64-bit and find

>> myself in the same pit you're in.

>> If I only used IE 64-bit I'd be doing fine, but Office 64-bit, any year,

>> forget it. Any other software 64-bit, forget it. M$ dropped the ball on

>> this one. I plan on switching to Linux Ubuntu 64-bit in 2008. It's free.

>> There are drivers and software for it.

>> M$, Gawd I dunno I worked for them through a partner company, but I can't

>> walk the walk a talk the talk on XP64bit.

>>

>> "Joe Pasternak" <Joepatkit5768@aol.net> wrote in message

>> news:477019fd$0$11059$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

>>> It's been a little over one year that I've been using XP64.

>>>

>>> It is apparent to me by now that hardware drivers are hard to find for

>>> this 64bit OS furthermore, I have NOT seen any software boxes in the

>>> retail stores that claim to support Windows XP 64 bit. After Windows

>>> 2000, XP, comes Vista (the 32 bit version) so there is no mention

>>> whatsoever about XP 64 bit or Vista 64 bit.

>>>

>>> Photoshop CS runs on XP but WILL NOT run on XP 64

>>>

>>> It seems that Photoshop CS2 will run on XP 64 but the retail box doesn't

>>> say so. Some people do have luck running these types of high-priced

>>> software on xp64 bit and Vista ultimate but why won't the manufacturers

>>> admit one way or the other?

>>>

>>> Personally, I like the 64 bit version of Windows XP64 - even though it

>>> seems to me that even Microsoft doesn't fully support it (no 64 bit

>>> flash, and no 64bit IE software update, it reverts to the 32 bit version

>>> for that to which I say horse manure).

>>>

>>> My question is: what the hell is going on with this 64bit nonsense? By

>>> the time everyone wakes up and supports this 64 bit hot air, we'll be

>>> ready for 128 and maybe 256 bit.

>>>

>>> Microsoft, whasssup??

>>

>>

>

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

Why? You can reinstall using Vista x86. It has to be a clean install

though. I tried it once and it appears that installing x86 over x64 does

not roll everything up into windows.old like it is supposed to so I would

format the drive first.

 

"Greg Lamonte" <lagre345@aul.com> wrote in message

news:4771954e$0$11164$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

>I don't particularly care for for Office 64 bit but all other 64 bit

>software is essential to go together with XP 64. If there is no support by

>other than Microsoft for this product, those of us who bought XP-64 bought

>a dud. I thought that Microsoft is going to top XP 64 with Vista 64 but

>going back again to 32 bit vista is like stepping backwords and, if you

>install the 64 bit version of Vista, I guess you're shit-out-of-luck,

>too..........

>

> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

> news:1074CED9-C8D3-4C79-888D-80E5CB13BB69@microsoft.com...

>> Why do you want a 64-bit version of Office? It doesn't do anything that

>> needs it.

>>

>> "Brian Smith" <b4d5y@comcast.net> wrote in message

>> news:entoiKtRIHA.4880@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>> 64-bit is years ahead of itself. I purchased a Dual Core 64-bit and find

>>> myself in the same pit you're in.

>>> If I only used IE 64-bit I'd be doing fine, but Office 64-bit, any year,

>>> forget it. Any other software 64-bit, forget it. M$ dropped the ball on

>>> this one. I plan on switching to Linux Ubuntu 64-bit in 2008. It's free.

>>> There are drivers and software for it.

>>> M$, Gawd I dunno I worked for them through a partner company, but I

>>> can't walk the walk a talk the talk on XP64bit.

>>>

>>> "Joe Pasternak" <Joepatkit5768@aol.net> wrote in message

>>> news:477019fd$0$11059$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

>>>> It's been a little over one year that I've been using XP64.

>>>>

>>>> It is apparent to me by now that hardware drivers are hard to find for

>>>> this 64bit OS furthermore, I have NOT seen any software boxes in the

>>>> retail stores that claim to support Windows XP 64 bit. After Windows

>>>> 2000, XP, comes Vista (the 32 bit version) so there is no mention

>>>> whatsoever about XP 64 bit or Vista 64 bit.

>>>>

>>>> Photoshop CS runs on XP but WILL NOT run on XP 64

>>>>

>>>> It seems that Photoshop CS2 will run on XP 64 but the retail box

>>>> doesn't say so. Some people do have luck running these types of

>>>> high-priced software on xp64 bit and Vista ultimate but why won't the

>>>> manufacturers admit one way or the other?

>>>>

>>>> Personally, I like the 64 bit version of Windows XP64 - even though it

>>>> seems to me that even Microsoft doesn't fully support it (no 64 bit

>>>> flash, and no 64bit IE software update, it reverts to the 32 bit

>>>> version for that to which I say horse manure).

>>>>

>>>> My question is: what the hell is going on with this 64bit nonsense? By

>>>> the time everyone wakes up and supports this 64 bit hot air, we'll be

>>>> ready for 128 and maybe 256 bit.

>>>>

>>>> Microsoft, whasssup??

>>>

>>>

>>

>

>

[Guest Greg Lamonte]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

Colin, I think you missed the point by a mile.

 

 

"Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

news:1B0D756F-220A-4AF6-9DAA-2C5DD2D57A83@microsoft.com...

> Why? You can reinstall using Vista x86. It has to be a clean install

> though. I tried it once and it appears that installing x86 over x64 does

> not roll everything up into windows.old like it is supposed to so I would

> format the drive first.

>

> "Greg Lamonte" <lagre345@aul.com> wrote in message

> news:4771954e$0$11164$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

>>I don't particularly care for for Office 64 bit but all other 64 bit

>>software is essential to go together with XP 64. If there is no support by

>>other than Microsoft for this product, those of us who bought XP-64 bought

>>a dud. I thought that Microsoft is going to top XP 64 with Vista 64 but

>>going back again to 32 bit vista is like stepping backwords and, if you

>>install the 64 bit version of Vista, I guess you're shit-out-of-luck,

>>too..........

>>

>> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

>> news:1074CED9-C8D3-4C79-888D-80E5CB13BB69@microsoft.com...

>>> Why do you want a 64-bit version of Office? It doesn't do anything that

>>> needs it.

>>>

>>> "Brian Smith" <b4d5y@comcast.net> wrote in message

>>> news:entoiKtRIHA.4880@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>>> 64-bit is years ahead of itself. I purchased a Dual Core 64-bit and

>>>> find myself in the same pit you're in.

>>>> If I only used IE 64-bit I'd be doing fine, but Office 64-bit, any

>>>> year, forget it. Any other software 64-bit, forget it. M$ dropped the

>>>> ball on this one. I plan on switching to Linux Ubuntu 64-bit in 2008.

>>>> It's free. There are drivers and software for it.

>>>> M$, Gawd I dunno I worked for them through a partner company, but I

>>>> can't walk the walk a talk the talk on XP64bit.

>>>>

>>>> "Joe Pasternak" <Joepatkit5768@aol.net> wrote in message

>>>> news:477019fd$0$11059$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

>>>>> It's been a little over one year that I've been using XP64.

>>>>>

>>>>> It is apparent to me by now that hardware drivers are hard to find for

>>>>> this 64bit OS furthermore, I have NOT seen any software boxes in the

>>>>> retail stores that claim to support Windows XP 64 bit. After Windows

>>>>> 2000, XP, comes Vista (the 32 bit version) so there is no mention

>>>>> whatsoever about XP 64 bit or Vista 64 bit.

>>>>>

>>>>> Photoshop CS runs on XP but WILL NOT run on XP 64

>>>>>

>>>>> It seems that Photoshop CS2 will run on XP 64 but the retail box

>>>>> doesn't say so. Some people do have luck running these types of

>>>>> high-priced software on xp64 bit and Vista ultimate but why won't the

>>>>> manufacturers admit one way or the other?

>>>>>

>>>>> Personally, I like the 64 bit version of Windows XP64 - even though it

>>>>> seems to me that even Microsoft doesn't fully support it (no 64 bit

>>>>> flash, and no 64bit IE software update, it reverts to the 32 bit

>>>>> version for that to which I say horse manure).

>>>>>

>>>>> My question is: what the hell is going on with this 64bit nonsense? By

>>>>> the time everyone wakes up and supports this 64 bit hot air, we'll be

>>>>> ready for 128 and maybe 256 bit.

>>>>>

>>>>> Microsoft, whasssup??

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>

>>

>

[Guest Mel Acme]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

S.SubZero wrote:

> On Dec 24, 5:09 pm, Joe Pasternak <Joepatkit5...@aol.net> wrote:

>> What we need to do here is convince Microsoft that their marketing

>> skills begin to suck so Ballmer needs to get off his rich ass and do a

>> better job convincing developers that the 64bit Windows is really a good

>> and fast product. Are you listening, Ballmer?

>

> Did you even read my post? ------------clip----

 

Is your name Ballmer???

[Guest John Barnes]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

Microsoft has provided two stable 64-bit consumer operating systems. That

very few other manufacturers have seen fit to provide 64-bit product

probably relates to the lack of need within most consumer products for

greater that 32-bit support.

 

 

"Greg Lamonte" <lagre345@aul.com> wrote in message

news:47724d40$0$5005$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

> Colin, I think you missed the point by a mile.

>

>

> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

> news:1B0D756F-220A-4AF6-9DAA-2C5DD2D57A83@microsoft.com...

>> Why? You can reinstall using Vista x86. It has to be a clean install

>> though. I tried it once and it appears that installing x86 over x64 does

>> not roll everything up into windows.old like it is supposed to so I would

>> format the drive first.

>>

>> "Greg Lamonte" <lagre345@aul.com> wrote in message

>> news:4771954e$0$11164$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

>>>I don't particularly care for for Office 64 bit but all other 64 bit

>>>software is essential to go together with XP 64. If there is no support

>>>by other than Microsoft for this product, those of us who bought XP-64

>>>bought a dud. I thought that Microsoft is going to top XP 64 with Vista

>>>64 but going back again to 32 bit vista is like stepping backwords and,

>>>if you install the 64 bit version of Vista, I guess you're

>>>shit-out-of-luck, too..........

>>>

>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

>>> news:1074CED9-C8D3-4C79-888D-80E5CB13BB69@microsoft.com...

>>>> Why do you want a 64-bit version of Office? It doesn't do anything

>>>> that needs it.

>>>>

>>>> "Brian Smith" <b4d5y@comcast.net> wrote in message

>>>> news:entoiKtRIHA.4880@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>>>> 64-bit is years ahead of itself. I purchased a Dual Core 64-bit and

>>>>> find myself in the same pit you're in.

>>>>> If I only used IE 64-bit I'd be doing fine, but Office 64-bit, any

>>>>> year, forget it. Any other software 64-bit, forget it. M$ dropped the

>>>>> ball on this one. I plan on switching to Linux Ubuntu 64-bit in 2008.

>>>>> It's free. There are drivers and software for it.

>>>>> M$, Gawd I dunno I worked for them through a partner company, but I

>>>>> can't walk the walk a talk the talk on XP64bit.

>>>>>

>>>>> "Joe Pasternak" <Joepatkit5768@aol.net> wrote in message

>>>>> news:477019fd$0$11059$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

>>>>>> It's been a little over one year that I've been using XP64.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> It is apparent to me by now that hardware drivers are hard to find

>>>>>> for this 64bit OS furthermore, I have NOT seen any software boxes in

>>>>>> the retail stores that claim to support Windows XP 64 bit. After

>>>>>> Windows 2000, XP, comes Vista (the 32 bit version) so there is no

>>>>>> mention whatsoever about XP 64 bit or Vista 64 bit.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Photoshop CS runs on XP but WILL NOT run on XP 64

>>>>>>

>>>>>> It seems that Photoshop CS2 will run on XP 64 but the retail box

>>>>>> doesn't say so. Some people do have luck running these types of

>>>>>> high-priced software on xp64 bit and Vista ultimate but why won't the

>>>>>> manufacturers admit one way or the other?

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Personally, I like the 64 bit version of Windows XP64 - even though

>>>>>> it seems to me that even Microsoft doesn't fully support it (no 64

>>>>>> bit flash, and no 64bit IE software update, it reverts to the 32 bit

>>>>>> version for that to which I say horse manure).

>>>>>>

>>>>>> My question is: what the hell is going on with this 64bit nonsense?

>>>>>> By the time everyone wakes up and supports this 64 bit hot air, we'll

>>>>>> be ready for 128 and maybe 256 bit.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Microsoft, whasssup??

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

>

>

[Guest Zootal]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

Manufacturers make 64 bit products if they think it will be profitable. If

not, then they don't bother. Maximizing the shareholders wealth is the main

driving force between the availability (or lack thereof) of 64 bit drivers

and applications. None of the software products I'm working on will likely

be released in a 64 bit version soon, nor are we likely to support 64 bit OS

soon. Why should we? Our stuff runs just fine as is, none of our clients

require 64 bit compability, why waste money making a 64 bit version? This is

how most manufacturers see it. And this is not likely to change until

Microsoft starts to seriously push 64 bit OS's.

 

I would push the blame for the lackluster support of 64 bit OS back into

Microsoft's lap. It's their OS, but they don't seem to care if anyone uses

it or not. Why? Because it's not *yet* profitable.

 

 

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

news:uxHvC3MSIHA.3516@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Microsoft has provided two stable 64-bit consumer operating systems. That

> very few other manufacturers have seen fit to provide 64-bit product

> probably relates to the lack of need within most consumer products for

> greater that 32-bit support.

>

[Guest Nero]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

Zootal wrote:

> None of the software products I'm working on will likely

> be released in a 64 bit version soon, nor are we likely to support 64 bit OS

> soon. Why should we? Our stuff runs just fine as is, none of our clients

> require 64 bit compability, why waste money making a 64 bit version? This is

> how most manufacturers see it. And this is not likely to change until

> Microsoft starts to seriously push 64 bit OS's.

>

> I would push the blame for the lackluster support of 64 bit OS back into

> Microsoft's lap. It's their OS, but they don't seem to care if anyone uses

> it or not. Why? Because it's not *yet* profitable.

 

What is profitable for Microsoft, then? Vista? Right! Vista 64? Right

again :( Windows XP 64? We know where that one went... So, the

conclusion is that nothing really is profitable for Microsoft these days

(Office 2007 yikes) because users are reluctant to separate from the

comfort of XP 32.

 

Why the hell did I buy XP 64 Microsoft?

[Guest Nero]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

John Barnes wrote:

> Microsoft has provided two stable 64-bit consumer operating systems.

> That very few other manufacturers have seen fit to provide 64-bit

> product probably relates to the lack of need within most consumer

> products for greater that 32-bit support.

 

You are saying in essence that Microsoft really flopped when it comes to

consumer research and marketing intelligence. I agree with you :)

[Guest John Barnes]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

It would appear that the lack of research was on the part of someone who

bought an operating system for which they had no need, neither on the

hardware or software side. :-) Microsoft has provided the system which will

become adopted as the need arises, as it is doing in the server area which

due to the larger memory requirements has substantially adopted 64-bit and

if I recall, server 2008 will be the last one available in a 32-bit version.

I suspect that it will be many years before the consumer market has a need

for 64-bit.

 

 

"Nero" <noroac5490@ael.com> wrote in message

news:4774392c$0$15332$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

> John Barnes wrote:

>> Microsoft has provided two stable 64-bit consumer operating systems.

>> That very few other manufacturers have seen fit to provide 64-bit product

>> probably relates to the lack of need within most consumer products for

>> greater that 32-bit support.

>

> You are saying in essence that Microsoft really flopped when it comes to

> consumer research and marketing intelligence. I agree with you :)

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

Yes, Server 2008 will be the last 32-bit server. Exchange Server is already

64-bit only. The enterprise market is only buying 64-bit hardware these

days regardless of the software they are running on it so for the enterprise

market the 64-bit era is already here.

 

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

news:%23nqGKwPSIHA.5136@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> It would appear that the lack of research was on the part of someone who

> bought an operating system for which they had no need, neither on the

> hardware or software side. :-) Microsoft has provided the system which

> will become adopted as the need arises, as it is doing in the server area

> which due to the larger memory requirements has substantially adopted

> 64-bit and if I recall, server 2008 will be the last one available in a

> 32-bit version. I suspect that it will be many years before the consumer

> market has a need for 64-bit.

>

>

> "Nero" <noroac5490@ael.com> wrote in message

> news:4774392c$0$15332$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

>> John Barnes wrote:

>>> Microsoft has provided two stable 64-bit consumer operating systems.

>>> That very few other manufacturers have seen fit to provide 64-bit

>>> product probably relates to the lack of need within most consumer

>>> products for greater that 32-bit support.

>>

>> You are saying in essence that Microsoft really flopped when it comes to

>> consumer research and marketing intelligence. I agree with you :)

>

[Guest John John]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

John Barnes wrote:

> ...the server

> area which due to the larger memory requirements has substantially

> adopted 64-bit and if I recall, server 2008 will be the last one

> available in a 32-bit version. I suspect that it will be many years

> before the consumer market has a need for 64-bit.

 

Don't be so sure, game makers are always pushing the envelope. Also

many home users do video editing or run other memory demanding

applications (like PhotoShop), I think it won't be all that long that

the 4GB barrier will be busted by many home users. Nowadays most new

32-bit machines ship with 2GB of RAM, anything in the order of 3GB to

4GB on 32-bit is pretty well a waste because of the hardware memory

address space requirements so 64-bit for home users may be coming faster

than we think.

 

John

[Guest Bogey Man]

Re: Where is the software support for 64 bit Windows?

 

"John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message

news:eSgHo9PSIHA.5404@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> John Barnes wrote:

>

>> ...the server area which due to the larger memory requirements has

>> substantially adopted 64-bit and if I recall, server 2008 will be the

>> last one available in a 32-bit version. I suspect that it will be many

>> years before the consumer market has a need for 64-bit.

>

> Don't be so sure, game makers are always pushing the envelope. Also many

> home users do video editing or run other memory demanding applications

> (like PhotoShop), I think it won't be all that long that the 4GB barrier

> will be busted by many home users. Nowadays most new 32-bit machines ship

> with 2GB of RAM, anything in the order of 3GB to 4GB on 32-bit is pretty

> well a waste because of the hardware memory address space requirements so

> 64-bit for home users may be coming faster than we think.

>

> John

 

I think that Microsoft just blew it when they put out both 32 bit and 64 bit

versions of Vista. They should have just put out 64 bit versions and

announce at the same time that 32 bit operating systems would not be

supported after a certain date.