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*
How about forceing them to give you the 64 bit disk / a iso link?
Linux doesn't "support" customers at all. Debian and Ubuntu have community support lifecycles, and you can buy support from Red Hat or Novell if you want.. but GNU/Linux is just some code, not a service.
Plus Microsoft isn't abandoning their customers. Windows 2000 extended support lasts through 2010 and XP extended support lasts through 2014. They just want to try to force OEMs to get with it and stop offering 32-bit processors.
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.
What? They're not ending support of the 32-bit installer. There's no "abandoning" occurring. It figures the trolls are the ones who read the summary backwards and upside down.
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.
But do systems ship with both or just a 32bit restore?
Logic prevailed.
"'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.
Freedom. In 32-bit versions of Windows, if you want to do something that requires kernel-mode programming, you can write your own drivers. In 64-bit versions, you have to pay Microsoft to get their approval for your driver, or else it will only load if you boot Windows in a test mode where multimedia functionality is crippled.
Fuck that totalitarian bullshit. 32-bit forever.
(And yes, there are legitimate uses for writing drivers even though you're not a hardware maker. Some examples: Process Explorer, Process Monitor, Sandboxie, VDK...)
Driver compatibility.
Because some drivers and applications don't work on 64-bit. HP doesn't make a 64-bit driver on XP for one of my printers, though they do for Vista. Some features of iTunes (like burning CDs) also don't work on 64-bit XP.
Not a typewriter
Note the silence of the "Mac Jihad" when you're the second person to post, and anonymously at that. Really sure of your argument there, sonny eh?
Apple are still supporting older versions of OS X to this day (just upped a PPC to latest 10.5 with a recent security patch to boot), and kept up with the Classic environment for a long time.
10.6 is Intel only, but that was not surprising at all.
Other than just getting in a cheap jab at Apple while you were (incorrectly) bashing Linux for "abandoning customers", do you have anything to back up your weak arguments or did you go to the Right Wing Talk Radio Host school of debating?
I wonder why 64bit Windows never really catches on... Ballmer, follow your own advice. Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Cue the Linux fanbois... ...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.
I guess you read the summary backwards and didn't even consider clicking on the article.
I'm no Microsoft fan (Linux purist of 6 years now) but they are merely requiring hardware makers to provide stable 32-bit and 64-bit drivers in order to get a "Works with Windows 7 Certification."
This is a good thing for every day people.
Just recently I tried to help out a friend with a Vista 64bit computer to get his Hauppauge WinTV PVR 150 to work. Apparently it does not support any more than 3GB of RAM and is basically unusable (he has 8GB of RAM). It causes programs to crash and flat-out will not work with Pinnacle Studio 9.
Hauppauge claims it has something to do with the 64bit memory allocation or something. I can't quite remember what it was.
Maybe this will require them to revisit their drivers and make it "Just Work" like it should.
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.
The problem with getting rid of 32bit Windows is this: While most machines being sold today have no problem with over 4Gb of RAM, and thus could benefit from 64bit addressing, unfortunately there is a whole lot of hardware out there that the manufacturer will NEVER EVER release 64bit drivers for. You would have a lot of really pissed off folks thanks to the fact that there isn't any way to run 32bit drivers on 64bit Windows, and after vista pissing off their customers even more is something that wouldn't be in MSFTs best interests.
So my guess is you'll have 32bit Windows until at least Windows 8, which by then most of the 32bit hardware out there will have been shitcanned by the owners, thus getting rid of the screams because their device doesn't work. I myself use XP X64 for everyday use yet still have to boot into XP 32bit when I want to use my capture card, as good luck getting an Easy TV FM 64bit driver. There are just too many pieces of hardware that folks are still using without 64bit support to just drop 32bit support.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
They are just trying not to get sued again by someone that tries to run the product on a PC 5 to 8 years old that barely runs XP well. As for backwards support (or abandoning it) that worked well for Apple.
"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.
Application compatibility. We have a system at work that came with 64-bit Vista, and it's currently running a 32-bit OS, because the most important application it needs to run won't work on the 64-bit OS until we upgrade our entire network to the next version of the application. That means several hours of downtime and several hundred dollars in assorted other costs, plus some preparatory administrative work (which I'm currently studying up on how to do; it involves Active Directory, which I had successfully avoided learning much about until now).
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
Why would you run a 64 bit OS? How many users actually need to use more than 4GB of RAM?
because I have 64 bit hardware. Why would you run a 32 bit os and not take advantage of it?
Apart from anything else, apps run (slightly) faster when compiled for 64 bit.
There is free support for Linux via the newsgroups, forums, Wiki sites, HOWTOs, Man pages, and many other things. But beware of the trolls that like to bite the n00bz and say RTFM. You need to have actually read the Linux manual before asking questions which consists of man pages.
Man ls
For example will display a man page for the "ls" command which functions like the MS-DOS "dir" command and some Linux distros will have a "dir" batch file to help DOS users adapt.
Judging from you attitude this sort of thing happened to you.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
You just need to get the 64 bit version of the drivers for optical discs (available elsewhere). I have iTunes 8.0.2 running on WinXP x64 and disc ripping/burning work fine.
Mmmmm. Gotta love man (some odd argument) pages as a form of user education.
You can google/whateversearch both operating systems and get answers. Both have wikis, both have forums, both have newsgroups. There's also a mix of arrogant bastards and truly helpful types among those that support each.
If you want to get it fixed quick, have open source and someone that knows the difference between a compiler argument and a live hand grenade. If you want to use hand holding, pay for support and wait your turn for fixes from some coder burning midnight oil or trying to hold on to his/her job @ Microsoft (or a contractor).
That Microsoft has a seemingly real certification program is a good thing. 64-bit is good. I held on to 8-bit, then 16-bit, then 32-bit. They were all good. 64-bit is better, and it's dirt cheap, even the V/VT-compatible processors. But the people that actually need Windows 7 are few, and it will arrive on new hardware whether we like it or not, unless we choose the 'other' option.
So, much to-do over nothing is the theme of this thread. Let the flames begin.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Actually, for 64-bit mode to work in Windows Vista you need at least 4 GB of RAM installed and hardware that can run x86-64 instructions. My HP Pavilion a6400f could run Windows 7 in 64-bit mode, though I would have to upgrade my RAM from 3 GB to 4 GB and do a "fresh" install of Windows 7 on a new hard drive.
the newsgroups, forums, Wiki sites, HOWTOs, Man pages, and many other things
;-) so Never mind.)
Pretty much the same places most folks find support for "other" operating systems too. Well, "Man pages" do seem a bit "Unixy" and a proper HOWTO did come into its own during the Linux era, but still, Googling a random Windows or OSX issue is generally the fastest way to find a solution, rather than going to a particular vendors site first.
Who needs bookmarks when you can use a search engine? (Ironically, if you google "current slashdot", all the top hits are old... heh, some would opine that it is much like the actual site
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
I was not aware of that requirement on Vista. Shame on me for wondering why I could never get 64-bit install to work on 2GB systems... (I have a a6300f btw...)
I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
Hi! I see you're suffering from problems related to using closed source software. Have you considered upgrading?
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
Manpages are a godsend for the new and experienced user alike, although I have a few major gripes with how they're written. The manpage for ls is particularly bad, and suffers from some serious bloat. Here's the one from BSD/OSX (I'm pretty sure the GNU equivalent is mostly identical):
And this goes on for about 2,200 more lines of cryptically-written text. Yikes. That's a lot of options. Most users (myself included) have only used 3 or 4 for day-to-day use. If you're piping into sed/awk, some of the others can be useful, although scrolling through the whole damn manpage to find 'ls -l' or somesuch is maddening. The 80-20 principle definitely needs to somehow be applied here.
I frequently fault documentation for being too sparse, although in this case, we have the exact opposite extreme.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
I never did understand why a printer needed a "driver" as part of the OS. At the very worst, it takes an array of numbers, converts them to other numbers, and hands them to an actual "driver" which talks to some hardware. It isn't a "driver", it is a "filter".....
Ugh, searching for current slashdot will give you slashdot pages about current
As for backwards support (or abandoning it) that worked well for Apple.
Lots of things work well for Apple, including;
Let's see Microsoft try that and get away with it. Oh wait, they tried and didn't.
You were not aware of this because its bullshit. There's no minimum RAM requirement for 64 bit (beyond the requirement of the OS itself)
The real reason that people run 32 bit windows on 64 bit machines is that many drivers are not available in 64 bit form, signed or not.
Then there are compatibilty issues in terms of things like browser plugins, and other areas where things should just work, but don't because not every single component is available in a 64 bit version. Since you can't mix 32 bit and 64 bit code in a single process (although with extreme difficulty you can simulate it) many problems can be caused where they simply don't belong.
Also please consider the lack of the NTVDM, and WOW, so my old 16 bit code will not run. To this day I still have a few old 16 bit applications on my system, and I fully expect them to run just fine, to the point where if I were running a 64 bit Windows, I would actually be surprised that they do not run.
Windows XP's backwards compatibility is not quite perfect, but the vast majority of old software runs just fine, and nearly all will run if one fiddles with the compatibility settings. I'm sure there are a lot of businesses out there that depend on that.
Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
And this goes on for about 2,200 more lines of cryptically-written text. Yikes. That's a lot of options. Most users (myself included) have only used 3 or 4 for day-to-day use. If you're piping into sed/awk, some of the others can be useful, although scrolling through the whole damn manpage to find 'ls -l' or somesuch is maddening. The 80-20 principle [wikipedia.org] definitely needs to somehow be applied here.
Did you try `ls --help`? That's there exactly for the quick stuff.
There is free support for Linux via the newsgroups, forums, Wiki sites, HOWTOs, Man pages, and many other things.
Here we go again. You'll have all the documentation you could ever need, but none of them address your problem. You won't find anyone who can help you, since they read the same manuals. And the fun part: unless you describe in great detail all the fucking things you tried, you'll be blamed for not getting useful answers, and if you ask again, for having the problem in the first place.
Before you mod me down, go ahead and find the answer to the following example: I have a laptop (1280x800) and an external screen (1680x1050). How do I 1) enable both screens at full resolution, 2) enable only the external screen when it's connected, 3) disable Xinerama when it's not connected?
Where to begin?
a) compatibility of drivers and commercial software (yes, even on linux - flash, various codecs etc.)
b) smaller memory footprint (32 bit pointers and ints vs. 64 bit)
c) better cache utilization and thus performance (due to item b)
I'd like to return the question and ask why on earth you would want to go with 64 bit unless you really have a single process that needs over 4GB of memory (remember that even 32 bit computers can use more than 4GB, just not from within one process).
Applications limited to 2GB of RAM forever? No thanks.
How many people write drivers? And will this actually hurt hobbyists who want to write their own?
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
obviously things like can perform faster, but in consumer computing, it tends to be less noticeable, relatively.
Exactly. If you have a license for a 32-bit version of XP, why would you purchase a 64-bit version for a 2-8% performance increase.
Sounds like Hauppauge needs to hire competent programmers to develop a proper 64bit device driver. Other reputable hardware manufactures don't seem to have this problem. I'm just saying...
Life is not for the lazy.
I have no experience with 64bit vista or 7.
But XP64 just sucked. It did not have the drivers for a lot of hardware. It gave random errors with 32bit applications. I returned the license and got a 32bit one, which worked as usual.
Contrast this with 64bit Linux (SuSE) which has worked flawlessly since 2005, full with 64bit applications (gcc, python, gimp etc). And it made a difference when I had to load almost 3GB satellite images 4 years ago.
And, you know, the installation of Linux plus all the applications took half an a hour (please try to do this with windows).
The 80-20 principle [wikipedia.org] definitely needs to somehow be applied here.
No, I don't think it does. Man pages should be long enough to detail exactly how all the command options work. No longer and no shorter. I don't want some information arbitrarily left out just because a newbie doesn't know how to search for -l instead of scrolling through the whole document looking for it. Remember, the obscure options are the ones people need man pages for the most. You'll probably look up the -l flag for ls once when you first start using Linux and never again. The obscure stuff is what you're going to come back for time and time again.
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
Ok, so the exceptions are the two Linux companies that frequently are used by corporations thus completely invalidating the rest of your post. Nice work.
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
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.
This is exactly why businesses don't use Linux.
They don't? Every company I've worked for has used Linux in some (fairly major) capacity - one of them used Linux exclusively and I currently run a company that uses Linux exclusively.
Real service calls aside, it is nice to have a software maker that is ultimately responsible for the product, as opposed to Linux where at best you can get a forum post on whatever software is broken.
If you think the vendor is "ultimately responsible" then you clearly didn't bother to read the EULAs on the commercial software you're using, which all pretty much universally disclaim responsibility for anything that goes wrong (as far as the law allows them to).
As for support, if you want commercial support for Linux then there are plenty of companies willing to sell it to you, so your argument seems bunk.
With consultants, Windows is FAR cheaper than finding someone who knows Linux in a production setting.
My experience contradicts this.
Very few people actually have worked on Linux in a true business production environment, and that expertise does not come cheap.
Most of the _clueful_ IT people I've dealt with (and some of the clueless ones) have got a reasonable amount of Linux experience.
http://blog.nexusuk.org
Microsoft does not support the majority of their customers because OEM versions are supported by hardware manufacturers.
...and, AFAIK, you can't buy extended support (from Microsoft) for OEM versions and the hw manufacturers are not required to provide extended support.
so, unless you are big business, you don't have any real technical support, "pls. reinstall and call back" is the best advice you are given.
I'm getting more proffessional support for Liunux from the Linux community and from paid Linux proffessionals than you can get for Windows from anyone!
...and Linux proffessionals do not tell you that you are using wrong hardware or running the wrong kind of Linux.
I've had no problem with IG chips, they run all my software just fine and can even play Oblivion. Unless you're gaming or running some eye candy OS, I don't see why you'd need more.
Then again, I suppose I'm judging a discrete graphics card vs integrated as two very different things. If I have a discrete graphics card I expect it to do more than "even play Oblivion".
93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
Sounds like Hauppauge needs to hire competent programmers to develop a proper 64bit device driver. Other reputable hardware manufactures don't seem to have this problem. I'm just saying...
But then quite a few seem to have it. I regularly see peripheral hardware that's 32bit only (due to driver issues).
Of course you only even see it in the user forums, not on the packages...
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
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.
That's absolute bullshit (or fud). You expressly do not have to pay Microsoft to get their approval. You just need to sign your application / device driver using a certificate from a bunch of trusted CAs.
.
See here for a list of trusted CAs: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms995347.aspx
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.'"
HP's driver package for many printers is now larger than a default Ubuntu installation.
What the hell?
MUST run 64 bit code? How are they going to put Windows 7 on Netbooks?
Do Netbooks get special dispensation?
Applications limited to 2GB of RAM forever? No thanks.
WTH are you talking about?! 2^32 = 4,294,967,296
So far, commercial customer support wasn't able to help me for questions that go beyond their FAQ. Might as well search the web.
NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
So it's the certificate from one of these trusted CAs that will cost you. What's the difference?
I used only open source software for over ten years, but not being able to simply tell if some piece of hardware will actually work with it finally got me. Laziness prevails. Even if i searched lists and lists of hardware that have been reported to work and asked on mailing lists i still got issues with hardware i would have never thought of. I've had it. Seriously.
Either they only have built a 32-bit driver and there is no technical reason why they couldn't do a 64-bit one,
or, their code makes assumptions about the size of a memory address, which means it cuts addresses short when they go over 32 bits or otherwise malfunctions or crashes. e.g. one of the most common mistakes is subtracting memory addresses and storing the difference in an "int" or "long int", which are both 32-bit integers on Windows.
That is not "support" (in the context of the parent) in the same way that, say, a passer-by providing first-aid at the scene of an accident is not health care. Availability, timeliness and quality is random - highly unreliable.
"You need to have actually read the Linux manual" is the first thing wrong with Linux, in terms of being suitable for mass-adoption. For some people obviously this is not an issue - actually I suspect it's often the main attraction.
"You need to have actually read the Linux manual before asking questions" compounds the first.
Dear Mr. AC,
Sandboxie charges for their software yet refuses to sign the driver so it will work on 64-bit Windows. Sorry to say, but eventually he's going to have to update or lose his customer base. Eventually we will move to all 64-bit Windows machines, and driver signing will be mandatory.
VDK hasn't even been updated in nearly 5 years so I would imagine that project is likely dead. It's also largely useless software.
Process Explorer and Procmon are both Microsoft applications. They work fine.
Have you every called Microsoft support? They dont support customers either.
In fact I have NEVER found a software company to actually support the customer.
This is why people call places like "Geek Squad" and other IT support companies. because Microsoft DOES NOT SUPPORT the customer. They leave it up to 3rd parties to do customer support.
Windows 7 is just some code, not a service. I am certain that is why Microsoft dropped the "Os as a service" track they had a few years ago. If the users pay a monthly fee for the software, then the customers expect and demand hand holding and full time support.
So let's be realistic when we talk about "support" from a company. Microsoft's customer support is no better than Anything else. As far as I am concerned, their expert technicians are useless even at the high level corporate stuff. I ran Server 2000 enterprise and MSSQL Enterprise and our in house team figured out the problem after microsoft outright gave up.
When your users know more about your products than your own experts, you cant offer support.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
And the exact same thing can and is said about windows.
If you call Microsoft they will not give you any answers to those questions either.
Just try and troubleshoot why windows wont display on a fricking projector... you dont have any config files to go looking through and the only suggestions are "reboot with the projector attached this time"...
Microsoft support SUCKS. it's as bad as anything else. It blows my mind when people come into discussions like this claiming they give support, they dont. Those of us that actually have tried to get some out of them know this.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
So Microsoft sends a guy to your house to hand hold you until you learn it?
Last I knew you had to read the manual for Windows as well.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Why should they? the PVR150 is a discontinued card. how about the cheapskate buy a current card that will work with vista64? Any NTSC only card was discontinued 3 years ago.
Honestly, you can not expect support or drivers for any discontinued hardware in windows.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
16bit applications don't even work on Windows Vista 32bit.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
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.
You have to pay the CAs, though. How is a small one-man operation coding up some Windows-based free software going to afford the hundreds of dollars needed to fund such a signing?
Half of it is reserved for the kernel and the other half is reserved for user applications.
Both are limited to 2 GiB on 32-bit Windows.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The problem with IG chips is they're almost 2-3 generations behind what's going on. While that's not bad, gotta figure. If Blizzard is having issues with compatibility on last generation already for WoW, you tell me where and what's going on with that one.
They're not aimed at gaming however, they're aimed at the business market. Big shock on that, but it seems like very cheap ass VAR out there who wants to make a couple of extra bucks, instead of spending the extra $6 for a good onboard video for the board, simply uses the cheapest. On top of that I blame consumers. You get what you pay for.
Om, nomnomnom...
don't beg me to switch to the Linux
Who's begging? None of us give a rat's ass what you use. Seriously.
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
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.
You're "knowledge" appears to come from nothing more than biases and stereotypes. You don't sound qualified or informed enough to operate anything more sophisticated than the buttons on a soda vending machine, much less make enterprise platform decisions.
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
If you have the money for a 100+ machines beowulf cluster then you have money to hire a Linux certified consultant to work on it for you.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
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
You have to pay the CAs, though. How is a small one-man operation coding up some Windows-based free software going to afford the hundreds of dollars needed to fund such a signing?
Same way he afforded the "hundreds of dollars" needed to buy the hardware and software he's using ?
Well, that's what happens when you call consumer level support. They are for helping granny make that big E icon open to get to the interwebs. Now, if you have a problem with Windows 2008 Adv Server, it's a bit of a different story, but like getting REAL support for Linux, it's not free. Most companies don't have the time or money for some geeks to sit around spitballing on forums while their database server is offline. They usually pay someone to help when productivity is on the line.
I don't know why this sort of thing is such a topic. It's well-known people do not call support for their operating system for home systems. They usually bug a geek in the family, drag it down to microcenter/compusa/etc to have Windows reinstalled, or just buy another cheap computer. On a personal level, I've never known a single Win95/98/XP/Vista user who actually called Microsoft unless they needed a new activation code.
Anyway, the whole point of them pushing up the requirements for "Windows 7 Compatible" is to reduce the need for support to begin with. Look, I remember when Vista came around. I installed it on a once fancy AMD box with all the bells and whistles for 2005 and it ran like garbage. Now, I've got an i7 with all the current-day bells and whistles and have not had as much as one driver or compatibility issue while running 64 bit. Don't get me started on the lack of joy running Debian or Ubuntu desktops 64-bit. That'll head me down troll avenue as far as mods are concerned, but it's honestly more effort than joy regarding apps just working out of the box, or trying to run older 32-bit games without trouble. Usually if it isn't in the package tree, I just leave it alone at this point.
I'm getting more proffessional support for Liunux from the Linux community and from paid Linux proffessionals than you can get for Windows from anyone! ...and Linux proffessionals do not tell you that you are using wrong hardware or running the wrong kind of Linux.
Oh yes they will. I've seen more than one flip out over package management and break the company mold by putting their preferred distribution on a system to quickly solve a problem rather than spend the time carving up the currently installed distro to fit a need.
Think database servers and Redhat.
Amen to that. Every crazy Vista issue I've heard about in the last year or so is due to hardware vendors dumping garbage products into the market and not writing proper drivers.
Honestly, I shop for my Windows hardware the same I shop for Linux hardware. Get a list of potential parts, google their part numbers with common key words like "supported", "drivers", etc. Hit the manufacturers forums and look for patterns, and if there's something noteworthy, like "doesnt work on computers with more than 3GB of RAM", I take it off my list.
There's just too many hardware/software vendors out there who will slap an unauthorized "Vista Certified" sticker on the box of random trash to make money. In the end, responsibility of being a smart consumer lies with the end user. I know it sucks, but people are mean.
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...
Hey, at least he HAD drivers at one point. (I kid, I kid.)
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...
[1] You probably can store a code pointer in a long, because I think the program counter is still 32 bits.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
That exact issue, and another unrelated problem (Ubuntu loudly beeping instead of playing the proper alert sound) was the reason I dumped Linux on my laptop. The best I found is that it could kind of cope if you plugged in the monitor, then rebooted it-- I didn't find anyway of making it just work when you plugged the monitor in (or removed it) like every other OS does.
Comment of the year
Discrete video costs battery life (if you use it, they can usually be turned off)
93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
What's the difference?
.
"you have to pay Microsoft to get their approval for your driver"
.
Fuck that totalitarian bullshit. 32-bit forever.
So you see, it isn't totalitarian. It isn't bullshit (it's there to protect users, and it's a Good Decision). That makes GP's post either FUD or uninformed.
See my reply to the other poster. This is a Good Thing all around. Signed software is a Good Thing.
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
Performance + I don't want to shoot my hardware in the foot.
Right now, maybe. But why not offer better designs if they're available? And no they don't use more power.
"worknig functional audio drivers for plain audio"
Working functional audio driver for plain audio are fine.
Now admittedly there might not be some ports of "professional apps" sold to people
for more than what people pay for their entire PC. However, my comment wasn't about
that. What is going to keep the other 95% of the userbase from using Linux.
It's certainly not the bullshit claim about "plain audio" drivers.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Your post doesn't make any sense. By Bill you mean Microsoft, and isn't Steve B. in charge now? And how is this abandoning their customers?
Anyway the way I see it, this is a good thing MS is doing.
When you purchase Windows you have no free support. You have to pay for it and it's not cheap. You can also buy support for Linux from Redhat and Suse, for example. The advantage for Linux is that there are alot of support groups that are absolutely free. If you have a problem, you post a question on a website. You can do this for Windows as well.
I use both Windows (Vista for the Laptop) and Linux (Ubuntu, Desktop).
I always find it interesting when the Windows camp gets all excited when they think they've found some reason to bash Linux. Usually it's something completely wrong, but they start buzzing like a stirred up bee's nest. I guess they have to feel good about paying so much money for their software. Linux and Windows are created and maintained by a bunch of enthusiastic programmers who are dedicated to what they do. The proprietary model and the open source model have their advantages. Get used to it. The website you are reading now runs on Linux.
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.
[1] You probably can store a code pointer in a long, because I think the program counter is still 32 bits.
Nope...
From the info I've seen in Win XP x64's device manager, either drivers/devices can lock any memory range they like, or every device's memory range has to be below the 4GB line; because every device IS below the 4GB line.
You're "knowledge" appears to come from nothing more than biases and stereotypes. You don't sound qualified or informed enough to operate anything more sophisticated than the buttons on a soda vending machine, much less make enterprise platform decisions.
This only shows your level of ignorance. My experiences are the same as FireFury03's, in every point he made.
Linux is free. If you want support from a vendor, you pay for it. Fine. I can download Linux in any of a hundred different distros, each of which cater to a particular set of needs.
There are three Windows OS versions that are worth considering: XP, Vista, and Win7. Except for the period MS made Win7 available for download (and a self-destructive version at that), which of these can you download and use for free as long as you want, without Microsoft's lawyers having a conniption fit?
When politicians are involved, everyone loses.
I'm not trying to bait you here, but what point are you making? I am not aware of who FireFury03 is, since I didn't see him upstream of me (unless he posted AC).
My post was in response to his strident and ignorant assessment of Linux, particularly in the enterprise. His assertion that "businesses don't use Linux" is false by a large margin. His analysis of the costs involved doesn't agree with numbers I've seen, and his gratuitous swipe at Linux supporters was uncalled for. His position is essentially the same as many people I've met who don't know jack about Linux, have drank all the MS koolaid, and are threatened when someone wants to replace one of their Win boxes with something different.
I agree with your statement on Linux, and didn't mean to imply otherwise with my post.
I'm honestly not sure what you mean with your Windows statement. Windows isn't free, and I never implied that it was, or said that it should be. I don't have a problem with Windows per se, although I'm not a huge fan.
I notice you didn't include Windows Server 2008 in your "worth considering" list, and I wonder if we are both talking about server OSes rather than for home/desktop use.
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
The ones running Vista?
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
While the CPU (Intel Pentium Dual-Core E2180) on you machine supports the Intel EM64T extensions for 64-bit operation, the chipset on the motherboard might not do so. :-(
I would say that the motherboard would seem to support 64-bit. I've been running 64-bit Linux (Fedora 8-10, now Slackware64) for quite some time, and my install of Windows 7 is 64bit.
I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.