Slashdot Mirror
"Windows 7 Compatible" PCs Must Be 64-bit
Barence writes "Microsoft has started certifying PCs as 'compatible with Windows 7' — and is looking to avoid the mistakes that dogged the Vista-Capable scheme. Whereas Microsoft certified PCs that could only run Vista Home Basic last time around, this time PCs will have to work with all versions of Windows 7 to qualify for the sticker, including 64-bit versions of the OS. Microsoft also claims, 'products that receive the logo are checked for common issues to minimize the number of crashes, hangs, and reboots experienced by the user.'"
This will be another nail in the 32bit coffin.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
At this point why even bother releasing a 32bit installer at all?
On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
Cuz without the VT ability in the CPU, it ain't gonna work, is my understanding. A lot of companies who cheaped out and bought lower-end CPU machines are going to be unpleasantly surprised if they need this ability. :(
I know as a dev, I'm going to have to request an upgrade to a machine that's compatabile with Windows XP mode. *sigh*
...screaming about how Bill is abandoning their customers after YEARS of support, whilst the Penguin does the same with 2 years of a kernel release.
Note the silence of the Mac Jihad.
How about forceing them to give you the 64 bit disk / a iso link?
this time PCs will have to work with all versions of Windows 7 to qualify for the sticker
Nonsense, there are lot's of systems out there, particularly Netbooks, which will not. Certainly will not necessarily be 64-bit.
If it only ran on 64-bit-capable systems, why is there a 32-bit version of Win 7 at all?
The sticker needs to tell these people the feature set they'll be capable of running. They couldn't care less about the processor architecture.
I believe the install media contains both 32 and 64 bit installers now.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
There is plenty of old hardware out there which only has 32-bit drivers. 64-bit Windows is a pure 64-bit kernel space meaning no 32-bit code at all. So, if you have a device with 32-bit drivers, you have to use the 32-bit version.
Also there are also some apps that fall in to this category. If they have a kernel component (like a virus scanner) that has to be 64-bit. If you have an old app that you need that doesn't have a 64-bit kernel module, well again you need the 32-bit version.
Finally there are computers that are sufficiently powerful to run 7 that don't have 64-bit CPUs. Netbooks are a good example. My coworker has tested 7 on his netbook and found it to be plenty fast. However, Netbook CPUs are still 32-bit only.
So it is a compatibility thing. It isn't really for new PCs so much as old upgrade PCs. All new PCs should ship with 64-bit chips.
... whatever it takes.
Have gnu, will travel.
What about netbooks running 32-bit CPUs? Those will all be declared incompatible with Windows 7, even though 32-bit Windows 7 will run on them? I think I must be missing something.
If only Microsoft had done the world a huge favor, and made Windows 7 64-bit only. And if only they had dropped a few different flavors of Windows 7, too. It would all be so much less confusing and frustrating.
why do people with 64 bit hardware still run the 32-bit version of the os?
Is it just ignorance?
But do systems ship with both or just a 32bit restore?
Logic prevailed.
All right, there seems to be an awful lot of cluelessness about what this actually means. Let's check off all the wrong ideas spouted the "Microsoft WARGARBL" crowd a mere 22 comments in:
"Microsoft won't sell me Win 7 for an uncertified machine."
Wrong. You can buy Win 7 at retail however you like.
"Microsoft won't allow system makers to sell me Win 7 for an uncertified machine."
Wrong. A vendor can sell a system that doesn't meet certification with Win 7 installed, but that badge WILL color consumer purchasing decisions. The manufacturers that carry it would tout its merits, Microsoft will tout its merits, and a machine sold without it better come with a steep discount.
"Netbooks won't meet these certification requirements, so that automatically means the requirements don't exist."
That, or the netbooks will be sold without certification. Amazing concept, I know, but a computer can be sold without a sticker on it.
They should abandon the 32 bit OS version then. It makes no sense now. You can still run 32 bit executables under 64 bit. Offering 32 bit OS versions at this point adds an unnecessary test and support burden on developers for the rather marginal benefit of pointer size and shipped footprint.
"'products that receive the logo are checked for common issues to minimize the number of crashes, hangs, and reboots experienced by the user.'"
The Vista USB issue was a good example. And this policy would not have prevented that.
A manager at work insisted their new laptop had Vista pre-installed several years ago(pre SP 1).
Initially all was well, till it started blue-screening at random after about 6 months. It was difficult for me to nail down until Ipods(itunes) new ver 8 came out and bluescreened the machine 100% of the time when the iPod was plugged in. That was the clue I needed. Investigation found a disparity between the OS and the some (not all) USB controllers.Remember, some laptops can have different contoller type for side and back. At the time a few hot fixes wasnt 100% reliable.
Then SP1 came out, and I found a reference to my problem in the release notes. Not one problem since with USB. The manager can use her Ipod, any and all usb sticks, her USB printer at home, her camera. The fix was a couple years in the making.
In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
The sticker in question (Windows 7 Compatible) is not intended for use on a computer -- it's intended for peripherals and add-ons. Mice, keyboards, graphics cards, network cards, routers, etc. etc.
.
What the hell is wrong this site? Are the editors becoming so lazy that they don't stop for two seconds to understand the stupidity of their headlines? You would think that Win7 isn't being offered in 32-bit mode from reading it. Instead, what it means is that any device you buy with that sticker will work with 32-bit windows and 64-bit windows.
What media. Most computers ship with a partition that will restore the computer back to factory default. If MS was being really nice, they would make companies ship computers with a real CD with just the OS on it, so people could install just the operating system from scratch if they see fit.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Why do we need 64-bits anyhow for desktops? For big RAM? Only if the OS is bloated do we need more. I don't wanna pay a 64bit tax when I buy a new computer unless there's a reason for it. And get off my lawn :-)
Table-ized A.I.
You're right, probable just one of the two on a restore partition. I've heard that your license for retail disks is valid for both 64 and 32, but I'm not sure if OEM licenses are the same way.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
What good is this OS then if the Penguin won't even take my tech calls? If Linus isn't willing to support this monstrosity, he needs to halt development.
Seriously, don't beg me to switch to the Linux if you're not going to support it. That is BAD BUSINESS.
THERE SHOULDN"T BE ANY REBOOTS HANGS OR FREEZES! FUCK! I don't run mickeysoft crap because of this! Half assed crappy software should be outlawed! Its not fucking impossible to do! The hangs crashes and need to reboot are because there are big fat flaws in the software! The hardware is designed by professionals! Engineers with stamps! The same hardware doesn't crash when running other operating systems (non-mickeysoft operating systems). Suddenly the problems go away! ALL OF THEM! AND THEY DON"T COME BACK EVER!!! So is the problem the money-grubbing company too cheap and not capable of fixing their own mess, or is it the naive great unwashed with their mentally retarded 'oh, computers are just like that, and they are all like that.' FUCK THAT! NO THEY AREN"T!
Don't get me started, just in case I start to rant or something.
"Buy our new 64-bit compatible embroidery machines" is the reply. The 64-bit transition is an upsell opportunity, just like the transition from 32-bit XP to 32-bit Vista.
Weird how they know of "common issues" in advance.
I reject your challenge, because you are no challenge. But however I'd be quite happy to destroy your specious vitriol in public. I'm too short to have a long conversation debunking every one of your fallacies, ad hominem attacks and general lunacy, so I'll give you the business short and sweet. SHORT AND SWEET, capiche?
Now before I dispense with you quicker than Obama and Oprah at an IOC meeting, let it be known I spit out organic tree humpers like you on a daily basis, before breakfast, before I get to the important business of what I do. THIS IS NOT DISPUTABLE.
Now that you've been hoisted on your petard, keep this in mind before you slink back again for another beating. RUST NEVER SLEEPS.
I hope they stop letting laptop makers put the CRAP Intel Graphics chips in.
My "Vista Experience" is above 5 for everything, except the video card which is 3.2.
This is on a C2D w/ 4GB RAM and Vista-64. It should never have been allowed.
We all need to demand that CRAP stop.
because a lot of people like me have several computers that are 32 bit, and work just fine. Companies have 32 bit computers they don't use to full capacity. There is a move to virtualize several (32 bit) computers on to 1 server just to get the server to 80% capacity.
So why spend thousands (with my small network) 100's of thousands (for companies) migrating to 64 bit? I really can't justify the added expense just to say oooo look at me i have 64 bit and 3% CPU usage.
I am a software developer, have my own company, host a test / prototype server for QA and customer demos over the Internet and NEVER been in a situation where I thought, "HUMM, I wish I had a 64 bit system, this 32 bit ain't cutting it anymore."
I'd really like to see a test case where by going from 32 to 64 bit was such a dramatic increase that the time has come for a "about frikkin time!" epiphany.
'products that receive the logo are checked for common issues to minimize the number of crashes, hangs, and reboots experienced by the user.'
Does that mean that products with the sticker come *without* Windows?
"Visual Studio 2008 is a 32-bit application and when installed on a 64-bit Windows operating system will run under WOW64".
Not to mention, VS and MS Office are still unmanaged C++ applications, not C# or managed C++ (or whatever term they use these days) .NET apps.
Pretty sure its different media. The RTM versions on MSDNAA have completely different discs.
Vista certified meant nothing. I got burned. I am still waiting to be made whole.
'certified PCs that could only run Vista Home'
Yep. Got one of those.
Kiss my ass Bill and Steve and Mr. Intel.
No. Let me rephrase that FUCK YOU! Clear enough?
The next box is gonna have ARM and Linux.
I don't care how good your next product is, or even if it comes with a free skittle shitting unicorn.
Your days are OVER.
This was my last fucking.
Works fine on my box, but, the Q8400 CPU is listed as "VT" approved. I installed it and it's really slick how it works, and funny seeing windows XP in a window
This time all versions of Windows 7 will have to work with PCs to qualify for release. But hey, the one who has a monopoly makes rules - and suckers must follow.
Do you know why people burn-out so quickly nowadays? No more coffee-breaks while compiling or waiting for a print-job.
Many office worker happily recharged with a cup of joe listening to the gentle banging of the line printer churning out reams of paper.
Ah, happy days... [puts on MP3 of line-printer]
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
640kb is enough for everyone!
Its almost 2010, time to give a flying **** about forward compatibility, and shove all the "omg critical" 60s/70s/80s era applications inside a simple VM/java applet/whatevertheheck where they belong. The solder on those "custom" interface cards talking to 30 year old industrial equipment with 1/1000th the transistors of my cellphone should be failing by now, even with the lead in it.
Today's multicore cpu can emulate a bajillion old old machines including all their amazing fancy custom hardware at the "native" speed of yesteryear, you can probably run the biggest corps entire operation from back then inside a single rack or far less.
BTW, all the other ways to go above 4gb (more like ~3gb in a typical system due to hardware remap and similar BS) have far worse drawbacks in the long run, especially in a few years when a $100 netbook will come with 16gb of ram.
Grandma's new computer won't be "slow" because of "64bit os/apps" it will be because of the malware running on it, combined with an overpriced shoddy internet connection.
Personally, I see it as nothing more than another ploy on Microsoft's part. Sure, only 64-bit machines will get the logo. But there will still be plenty of 32-bit machines sold with Windows 7 without the logo. Maybe not by the major players, but nevertheless... In addition, people who have spent a great deal on a machine and software that is only 32-bit, and may not work in a 64-bit environment aren't necessarily going to run out and upgrade all their hardware and software.
So, when all the bugs start cropping up, Microsoft can claim it is not their problem. They can claim it is because people are using un-certified hardware.
XP Mode won't work without it; I'd REALLY love to see only machines with support for VT/AMD-V and with it turned on in the BIOS by default be Windows 7 certified. I have a Gateway LT3103u which has an Athlon 64 processor, which has AMD-V; Gateway disabled it, because they are assholes. (I should have known better, but I honestly have been happy with every piece of Gateway hardware I've ever touched... until now) This machine currently ships with Vista but after the Windows 7 launch it will almost certainly come with 7...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
MUST run 64 bit code? How are they going to put Windows 7 on Netbooks?
Do Netbooks get special dispensation?
cool on sandboxie ...
I have ben using 64 bit Vista and now 64 bit & for about a year and a half. Outlook itself works fine in 64 bit Vista and 7. As far as hardware support, the only hardware I have had that doesn't work is a 6 year old GE webcam and a 5 year old USB video capture device.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I'm sick and tired of people spreading FUD about how 64bit programs are larger due to 8-byte pointers. Yes, the pointers are larger, but the fraction of your program data used by pointers is so small, that any program will use an amount of memory not noticably larger than before. The hundreds of megs of RAM used by your browser and OpenOffice contain mostly your data (in really bloated format), in text, XML, ints, floats, or whatever.
Some people even go as far as to say that programs will run slower due to having to read 64-bit pointers from memory! Sure, it will take more time to load the pointers from memory. But considering the above point that pointers and longs comprise a very very small part of the program data, the effect, if any, would be unnoticeable. Furthermore, the x86_64 ABI allows passing function arguments in registers, completely bypassing memory accesses for a LOT of code, so 64-bit programs will run faster just because of that.
What is wrong with 32-bit systems? I have 8 computers running here, only one of which is 64bit. They can all do word processing, compile programs, run a spreadsheet, surf the web, manage email, edit photographs......
Now please give me a sensible answer as to why I should want to upgrade any of them. Because of marketing hype? No. Because I cannot do something that you deem to be important? No, again. Because they cannot do it as fast as you think is necessary? No, for me and my users they are perfectly adequate and meet our needs perfectly. So please tell me why I should spend money to upgrade my computers.
Have a look at soylentnews.org for a different view
Microsoft allows OEMs to ship an OS CD if they want. They don't because of their costs.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
It always amuses me to no end how people scream about increased memory usage on x64. Most don't have any numbers to back up their claims, of course, but those that do point to 10-20% increase in RAM usage. So "OMG OMG OMG x64 is bloated! We can't possibly use a platform requiring 10% more RAM!" That, in spite of DDR3 RAM (the expensive kind) now costing ~$100 for 6G triple channel, where 10% more RAM would cost $10. But, naturally, we're in a recession, and you might need those $10 to make rent.
What makes it even funnier is that those same people adopt an entirely opposite attitude when I point out that their code is bloated. "Guys, look here, I wrote a library that reduces your app's memory footprint by a factor of 6! Check it out!" And they look at me contemptuously and reply: "what, are you some kind of an embedded freak? Grow up man, RAM is cheap! We'll stick with the standard, 'cause that's more portable and, you know, more standard." To each his own contradictions...
They just want to try to force OEMs to get with it and stop offering 32-bit processors.
Why does a computer user at home or in the typical office environment need a 64-bit CPU? People used to use computers with mere 8-bit CPUs running at less than 2 MHz. This will only increase energy consumption at a time when we are being asked or legislated into living a more environmentally-friendly lifestyle. Web browsing, email, instant messaging, photo editing, listening to audio (streaming or local), watching media (DVD or streaming) should nor require such outlandish processing power.
READ the ARTICLE... This headline is misleading as all HELL. Time for a BURY BUTTON Slashdot!!
Dell does (at least, for all the machines I've bought from them.) That's why I buy Dell, or try to.
Comment of the year
Audacity 2009 doesn't even come close to the year 2000's weakest Commercial Pro Audio offerings. And let's not get started on worknig functional audio drivers for plain audio, much less on very crucial low latency ones for monitoring in real time.
There are a few scientists that need awesome math crunchers, but mostly, Microsoft needs huge memory models to contain their huge steaming pile of crap called Windows. After two decades of piling new code on top of old code until the operating system is piled high and deep, they need faster and larger machines because they have forgotten how to write rational tight code. I just don't see a product that is a million times better from Microsoft, now that the memory is a thousand times larger and the processor is a thousand times faster. I accept that we like graphic interfaces, but I remember clearly that when x86 based Unix needed to run X Window, the machine had to have 16MB of ram. Now we have machines with 16GB of ram, and I ask you, is the current Windows offering a thousand times more valuable then X Window system was back then. Not to my eyes it isn't. The processors are also orders of magnitude faster, but are the current versions of Windows significantly faster then the X Window system was back then. So just what is Microsoft doing that needs all these resources? It is hard to know since they do not disclose the source code. We do now what X and Unix was made of because they were open source and we can see exactly where the resources go.