64bit OS


  • Please log in to reply
184 replies to this topic

#41 Bomb Bloke

Bomb Bloke

    The Smily Admin

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tasmania (AU)

Posted 07 March 2011 - 02:14 PM

I am just a tad ticked off. That page asks what edition of Windows you're running, happily reveals all the download links once you tell it "Home Premium" (over half a gig worth of data I might add), then once you've installed it all and reconfigured your system BIOS (as per an error message written in Engrish I might add), then, and only then, does it decide to mention those bigass downloads require a payed upgrade before you can actually use them.

...

Or not. But seriously, it amazes me how 7 continues to find new ways to piss me off. Anyway, in the end I was able to get Dungeon Keeper running (with slight screen tearing - the VM kinda feels like remote desktop for some reason), but it entirely failed to deal with the low resolution used by the game and the mouse tends to jump randomly around the screen for who knows what reason. Meh.
BB's X-Com Projects Page - X-Com Games At GamersGate
You're just jealous 'cause the voices only talk to me :P
We love Tammy! :)

#42 Sgt. Strike

Sgt. Strike

    Seeker of truth, and also to kick some alien butt!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 309 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 March 2011 - 07:25 PM

BB, you could always double boot with XP, if you have the hard drive space.
When all else fails, CHEAT!!!

#43 Bomb Bloke

Bomb Bloke

    The Smily Admin

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tasmania (AU)

Posted 07 March 2011 - 11:19 PM

No, because driver support for XP long since went out the window. I wouldn't even bother dual-booting if I thought it an option - I'd just wipe 7 off completely.

Luckily I have more then one computer and the older model is still fully compatible. I've taken to using Team Viewer across my LAN recently.
BB's X-Com Projects Page - X-Com Games At GamersGate
You're just jealous 'cause the voices only talk to me :P
We love Tammy! :)

#44 silencer_pl

silencer_pl

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,387 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Poland

Posted 23 March 2011 - 11:57 AM

Whats to debate on

64bit > 32bit - period - bigger, better, faster, more secure.

And come on  - with Win7 - XP is just silly to have.
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#45 Space Voyager

Space Voyager

    I've got my eye on you!

  • Site Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,394 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Slovenia

Posted 23 March 2011 - 12:19 PM

View Postsilencer_pl, on 23rd March 2011, 12:57pm, said:

And come on  - with Win7 - XP is just silly to have.
You save the money for buying a new sOS?

#46 silencer_pl

silencer_pl

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,387 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Poland

Posted 23 March 2011 - 01:36 PM

MSDNAA :)
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#47 Space Voyager

Space Voyager

    I've got my eye on you!

  • Site Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,394 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Slovenia

Posted 23 March 2011 - 02:17 PM

I feel so yesterday... What is that?

#48 Thorondor

Thorondor

    Thorondoropedia - Your source to everything Aftermath

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,785 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 March 2011 - 03:45 PM

We can't have you getting that demodé now, can we? :)

Microsoft:

Quote

The MSDN Academic Alliance is the easiest and most inexpensive way for academic departments to make the latest Microsoft software available in labs, classrooms, and on student PCs.
Wikipedia:

Quote

MSDN Academic Alliance (MSDNAA) is a Microsoft program available to academic organizations, mainly colleges and universities, although there is also a high school version. The participating schools pay an annual fee for the MSDNAA service, in exchange for which, applicable departments (computer science, computer engineering, information technology, and related fields of that organization) as well as students and faculty can acquire licensed copies of Microsoft software such as Microsoft Windows, Visual Studio and other products.
::

There; consider yourself hip in techno-speak once again. :)

#49 Space Voyager

Space Voyager

    I've got my eye on you!

  • Site Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,394 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Slovenia

Posted 23 March 2011 - 08:03 PM

Ah, thanks Thorondoropedia!

#50 Bomb Bloke

Bomb Bloke

    The Smily Admin

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tasmania (AU)

Posted 24 March 2011 - 12:15 AM

View Postsilencer_pl, on 23rd March 2011, 10:57pm, said:

64bit > 32bit - period - bigger, better, faster, more secure.

And come on  - with Win7 - XP is just silly to have.
The answers to both those points are "unless you care about compatibility and don't want to purchase new crap for the sake of having new crap".

And, as I've gone on and on about, functionality. When the bugs are finally ironed out of 7, and the missing features put back in, maybe I'll have a bit more respect for it.

I'll admit I didn't think much of XP when it came out, but by SP2 I was quite happy with it. Thing is, whenever any complaints get levelled at the 7 interface, MS just says "it's by design" and that's that. When I think "upgrade", I think of something that does more, not less. 7 adds hardware support, increases the font size, and does little else.
BB's X-Com Projects Page - X-Com Games At GamersGate
You're just jealous 'cause the voices only talk to me :P
We love Tammy! :)

#51 Azrael Strife

Azrael Strife

    Captain

  • Site Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,522 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Montevideo, Uruguay.

Posted 24 March 2011 - 02:38 AM

View Postsilencer_pl, on 23rd March 2011, 12:57pm, said:

64bit > 32bit - period - bigger, better, faster, more secure.

This is very inaccurate.
It is not intrinsecally faster, unless running a specially compiled for 64 bits, and even so nothing guarantees a speedup. 64 just basically increases your RAM cap, not really much else. Granted more RAM allows you to run more software faster, and software that consumes a lot of RAM faster, but you're not likely to see a really huge speedup in your daily routine. I switched to 64bit Win7 with 4GB RAM (from 2GB) and unless I'm doing heavy multitasking with really heavy software like multiple Visual Studios, it's pretty much the same speed.
Posted Image

#52 Sgt. Strike

Sgt. Strike

    Seeker of truth, and also to kick some alien butt!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 309 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 March 2011 - 06:16 AM

To me, Vista was a reversion back to ME. 7, well, I don't know yet about, but it does seem kinda like XP. And most places are selling computers loaded, now, with 7, rather than Vista. So, is 64-bit better, faster, more secure? It all depends on factors. Let me take them one by one.

Is a 64-bit operating system better than a 32-bit?  This is best answered by asking another question, are running a 32-bit cpu or a 64-bit? If you are running a 32-bit one, then the answer is your best bet is a 32-bit operating system. If it's a 64-bit processor, then you need to ask yourself a couple of questions. Do you have an Intel or an AMD processor? Also, you should factor in the age of the processor, the amount of RAM you have, and some other things. Also this may answer if it's faster. Again, speed is all dependent on your processor, RAM, etc. As for security, then have you, yourself made it cecure, rather than just leaving everything open wide? What have you done, put in an anti-virus, or a firewall, or even anti-spyware software? What other steps have you taken for your personal security?

Is 7 better than XP? I don't know. It could be, but I will wait and see.
When all else fails, CHEAT!!!

#53 silencer_pl

silencer_pl

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,387 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Poland

Posted 24 March 2011 - 09:28 AM

I was using VIsta x64 when it was released - all old programs and even games run faster. With every update it just went better.

W7 is not just upgrade. Whole system was written mostly from scratch.

Quote

"unless you care about compatibility and don't want to purchase new crap for the sake of having new crap".

What compatibility - everything works fine and dandy. Remember that all the CPUs you are using are not native 64bit CPU's.

A native 64 bit CPU would be Intel Itanium and client type Windows dosen't support this kind of CPU.
The only comatibility issues are with programs/games badly designed (example Silent Storm). But you can handle it with virtual machine -> In case of W7 you can download XP mode. It is just instaling Virtual PC with Windows XP.
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#54 Azrael Strife

Azrael Strife

    Captain

  • Site Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,522 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Montevideo, Uruguay.

Posted 24 March 2011 - 01:45 PM

View Postsilencer_pl, on 24th March 2011, 9:28am, said:

I was using VIsta x64 when it was released - all old programs and even games run faster. With every update it just went better.

W7 is not just upgrade. Whole system was written mostly from scratch.
W7 is Vista with bugs ironed out and new features, it's impossible that the whole system is rewritten from scratch.

Quote

What compatibility - everything works fine and dandy. Remember that all the CPUs you are using are not native 64bit CPU's.

A native 64 bit CPU would be Intel Itanium and client type Windows dosen't support this kind of CPU.
The only comatibility issues are with programs/games badly designed (example Silent Storm). But you can handle it with virtual machine -> In case of W7 you can download XP mode. It is just instaling Virtual PC with Windows XP.
This is not true either. Practically all modern CPUs are 64 bits. All. Maaaaaaaaaaaaaybe a very low end CPU could still be 32 bits, but I find that unlikely.

I've had compatibility issues with copies of Half Life 2 and Mass Effect 1. Changing to 64 bits can have an impact on compatibility.
Posted Image

#55 silencer_pl

silencer_pl

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,387 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Poland

Posted 24 March 2011 - 03:12 PM

Men - read up before you comment on this.

64 bit architecture isn't compatibile with 32 bit - current processors are x86-64 which means they are emulating some of the x64 commands.

Maybe read up on Intel Itanium technology, learn why AMD64 technology won with Itanium.

Wikipeida on x86-64

Quote

86-64 is an extension of the x86 instruction set. It supports vastly larger virtual and physical address spaces than are possible on x86, thereby allowing programmers to conveniently work with much larger data sets. x86-64 also provides 64-bit general purpose registers and numerous other enhancements. The original specification was created by AMD, and has been implemented by AMD, Intel, VIA, and others. It is fully backwards compatible with 32-bit code.[1](p13) Because the full 32-bit instruction set remains implemented in hardware without any intervening emulation, existing 32-bit x86 executables run with no compatibility or performance penalties,[2] although existing applications that are recoded to take advantage of new features of the processor design may see significant performance increases.

About Windows.

Read about project Longhorm - it was first plan for windows Vista but then something change and the project was canceled or postponed. Windows 7 is reincarnation of project Longhorn. So Windows 7 is mostly written from scratch. Of course many features from Vista are included only optimized. Again wikipedia has mostly written it up.
And of course I mean the Kernell - this is the heart of Windows.
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#56 Azrael Strife

Azrael Strife

    Captain

  • Site Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,522 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Montevideo, Uruguay.

Posted 24 March 2011 - 04:30 PM

View Postsilencer_pl, on 24th March 2011, 4:12pm, said:

Men - read up before you comment on this.

64 bit architecture isn't compatibile with 32 bit - current processors are x86-64 which means they are emulating some of the x64 commands.

Maybe read up on Intel Itanium technology, learn why AMD64 technology won with Itanium.
Please do your best to attempt to remain civil in a conversation.

All modern CPUs are 64 bit. They are not emulating it, they are.
Itanium is merely a different architecture, nothing else.

x86-64 refers to a instruction set, read up your wikipedia article. If it was not compatible with 32 bits, you would not be able to run 32 bit software, which you are (most of the time).
x86-64 is a 64 bit instruction set for 64bit CPUs which is backwards compatible with x86 (32).


Quote

About Windows.

Read about project Longhorm - it was first plan for windows Vista but then something change and the project was canceled or postponed. Windows 7 is reincarnation of project Longhorn. So Windows 7 is mostly written from scratch. Of course many features from Vista are included only optimized. Again wikipedia has mostly written it up.
And of course I mean the Kernell - this is the heart of Windows.
You're talking about features. We'll probably never know how many bits of the kernel have or have not been rewritten, but I seriously doubt they ditched Vista's kernel to completely rewrite it.
Posted Image

#57 Knan

Knan

    Napalm squaddie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 556 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:XCOMOSL

Posted 24 March 2011 - 05:59 PM

Eyeyey... move this to the religion forum already. :)

#58 Sunflash

Sunflash

    SC's Resident Pony

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 584 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma, USA

Posted 24 March 2011 - 10:40 PM

View PostKnan, on 24th March 2011, 12:59pm, said:

Eyeyey... move this to the religion forum already. :)


SECONDED! :)

*runs from brick-brigade*

#59 Bomb Bloke

Bomb Bloke

    The Smily Admin

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tasmania (AU)

Posted 25 March 2011 - 12:54 AM

The typical 64-bit processor is a 64-bit processor. The "extension of a 32-bit processor" simply means they're 64-bit processors with full backwards compatibility. That may not be the same thing as the new ones you're talking about, Silencer, but you get the point.

Your average programs doesn't get to talk directly to the processor, it has to go through the operating system. That means 32-bit programs have to deal with the 64-bit OS, or more accurately, the 64-bit OS has to accommodate for 32-bit programs (or no one will use it!).

Microsoft put some work into this matter, and so 64-bit Windows comes with 32-bit versions of a fair chunk of it's code. However, not everything is covered (the DOS VM for starters - 64-bit Windows comes with no 16-bit support at all!), and stability between code bases still seems to lean in favour of 32-bit at the moment. That will change, and things are a lot better then they were (certainly acceptable for many users), but that's how it is now.

Longhorn was the initial codename for Vista, just as Chicago became Windows '95. I'd be interested to know where you picked up the idea that it was cancelled, as you're not the first person I've heard that from.

Windows 7 is a heavily modified version of Vista, rushed out the door because Vista was failing badly. Larger businesses, who would normally be bulk-purchasing new licenses, were sticking with their XP rigs and purchasing new XP machines when they needed new computers.

I suspect the name "Windows 7" is a joke poking fun at this. Vista is version 6.0, but 7 is internally marked as version 6.1! However, the entire point of 7 was so Microsoft could distance themselves from the image Vista was giving them, so I'd assume that's where the name comes from; to make it seem further "away" then it really was. This is just conjecture on my part; but it's obvious 7 isn't the seventh release of Windows (there's tons of them out there!), so...  :)

Rush job though it was, 7 really is a great improvement over Vista. I just don't see it as an overall improvement over XP.

Things like "XP mode" are a nice gesture (even if MS isn't offering it to the average OEM user, see my rant earlier in the thread), but they don't beat the performance of an actual physical computer running the older operating system.
BB's X-Com Projects Page - X-Com Games At GamersGate
You're just jealous 'cause the voices only talk to me :P
We love Tammy! :)

#60 silencer_pl

silencer_pl

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,387 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Poland

Posted 25 March 2011 - 07:13 AM

Adding turbo-charge to a family car dosen't make it a sports car.

About Longhorn - basic article from wiki

Quote

Originally, a version of Windows codenamed Blackcomb was planned as the successor to Windows XP (codename Whistler) and Windows Server 2003. Major features were planned for Blackcomb, including an emphasis on searching and querying data and an advanced storage system named WinFS to enable such scenarios. However, an interim, minor release, codenamed "Longhorn," was announced for 2003, delaying the development of Blackcomb.[13] By the middle of 2003, however, Longhorn had acquired some of the features originally intended for Blackcomb. After three major viruses exploited flaws in Windows operating systems within a short time period in 2003, Microsoft changed its development priorities, putting some of Longhorn's major development work on hold while developing new service packs for Windows XP and Windows Server 2003. Development of Longhorn (Windows Vista) was also restarted, and thus delayed, in August 2004. A number of features were cut from Longhorn.[14]

Other information I found by reading tech sites like x-bit, guru3d or anandtech and my local similar sites.
Maybe saying canceled was a bad word, but surely Windows 7 is what Vista should be in first place.
There were tests that what XP can do, W7 does it better (the only thing that is faster in XP is file copying) but that is marginal.

Have you read initial reviews when W7 was in state of beta ? Most review I read was filled with excitement.
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users