VinDSL
Diamond Member
nerp
Diamond Member
- Dec 31, 2005
- 9,865
- 105
- 106
Nice clarification, thanks.
My point is that if you do the math, the number of systems affected by the bug is a very low percentage of machines out there in the wild. But if you read forum threads, you'd quickly get the impression that it affects _all_ machines.
n7
Elite Member
- Jan 4, 2004
- 21,281
- 4
- 81
:roll:
This is quite possibly one of the dumbest posts i've ever seen here.
Oh, & here's a pic, since z0mg, i might be just lying about running x64 :roll:
http://img521.imageshack.us/im...585/vistax64sp1lf0.jpg
apoppin
Lifer
did i just hear my name?
:Q
Fraud ?
Check this out:
Vista32- vs. Vista64-bit OS Showdown *Pt 1 Done!*
i benchmarked both OSes against each other ... i AM a gamer.
-OP, if you are having issues, try Vista32 ... there is no current advantage to gaming on a 64-bit OS with 99.99% of games.
n7
Elite Member
- Jan 4, 2004
- 21,281
- 4
- 81
But great news, there's also a major limitation with x86.
< 4 GB RAM.
If i didn't feel that was a concern, i'd be running x86.
But it is.
That being said, thanx for the review apoppin...very insightful, & quite annoying that they still haven't gotten x64 drivers up to par too.
< 4 GB RAM.
If i didn't feel that was a concern, i'd be running x86.
But it is.
That being said, thanx for the review apoppin...very insightful, & quite annoying that they still haven't gotten x64 drivers up to par too.
Been running x64 for 8 months. Works perfectly, with one caveat: my Line 6 Guitar Amp emulation hardware has no drivers for 64-bit Windows (XP 64 included).
And that's not a problem with Windows; it's a problem with Line 6 being lazy and not making the drivers.
And that's not a problem with Windows; it's a problem with Line 6 being lazy and not making the drivers.
apoppin
Lifer
you're welcome ... and i am hoping to finish part2 next weekend - a more detailed analysis of RAM usage in the respective OSes.
Something to remember: there is no limitation with 32-bit games .... none that i can find [yet]
i am a gamer ... not a photochopper
-the next MS OS will be 64-bit for me ... by then Devs should be routinely writing for 64-bit and many popular games will be ported
Vista is not a bad OS and I loved Vista 64 bit but I had to go back to Vista 32 bit because I wanted to use my old Santa Cruz sound card. Though that is a hardware issue anyway and I already knew the Santa Cruz sound card would never support a 64 bit OS but I prefer the sound of my Santa Cruz over my onboard sound. If I could get my Santa Cruz sound card working in Windows Vista 64 bit I would easily go back to the 64 bit version of Vista.
I had similar problems with the install, what I found out is that if the RAM is not set to what your manufaturer specifies on the dim, then Vista has problems while installing. Make sure that the bios is not set to auto for the ram timings or voltage, manually set all the settings you can based on the sticker on your dimms.
I've had it installed for more then a month now and no problems at all.
I've had it installed for more then a month now and no problems at all.
The fact that he had to do that has nothing to do with Vista. The fact he had to do that is a clear indication that there was a hardware problem.
No, it's a bug in storport.sys which is part of Vista.
The bug is only hit in a very specific hardware case, but it not an issue with the hardware.
VinDSL
Diamond Member
Originally posted by: apoppin
did i just hear my name?
:Q
Fraud ?
Check this out:
Vista32- vs. Vista64-bit OS Showdown *Pt 1 Done!*
i benchmarked both OSes against each other ... i AM a gamer.
-OP, if you are having issues, try Vista32 ... there is no current advantage to gaming on a 64-bit OS with 99.99% of games.
apoppin I haven't took the time to thank you for doing your benchmark results! I know it can't be easy with dialup because you have to redownload all of vista's critical updates. I was surprised and shocked to see the difference between minimum and average fps from Vista 32 bit to Vista 64. I was running on Vista 64 bit before but went back to Vista 32 bit because I wanted to turn off my onboard sound and use my old santa cruz sound card. Thankfully I got it to work in Vista 32 bit but there is no hope to get it to work in any 64 bit os sense it never had any 64 bit drivers to begin with. Sucks but I am sure sooner or later by the time I go back to windows vista 64 bit I will have a brand new sound card that has 64 bit drivers or I will just have to use my onboard sound sadly
The nice thing about the santa cruz is the volume max is twice as loud as my onboard sound card. Makes a huge difference with headphones. The only thing I am limited with now is sense I have 4 GB of ram I can only see 3.2 GB of it but I don't think its that big of deal I can just use the other 800 MB as a ram drive or something for now.
VinDSL
Diamond Member
Well, here's the thing...
To paraphrase apoppin, 99.99% of the time there is NO advantage to running Vista x64. Do you agree or disagree with him?
And, 99.99% of the time, the Vista RANTS that I read are supposedly from disappointed Vista x64 users!
So, what is the REAL advantage to running Vista x64 - other than BRAGGING that you're the ultimate warrior with 8GB RAM and 56 games installed, or alternately, RANTING about Vista being "Complete Crap."
That's why I "suspect" a LOT of Vista x64 POSTS are fraudulent!
It doesn't make any sense that e-peeners and malcontents are having a totally different experience with x64!
To think otherwise is 'dumb', IMHO...
Mem
Lifer
- Apr 23, 2000
- 21,476
- 13
- 81
Originally posted by: VinDSL
Well, here's the thing...
To paraphrase apoppin, 99.99% of the time there is NO advantage to running Vista x64. Do you disagree with him?
And, 99.99% of the time, the Vista RANTS that I read are supposedly from disappointed Vista x64 users!
So, what is the REAL advantage to running Vista x64 - other than BRAGGING that you're the ultimate warrior with 8GB RAM and 56 games installed, or alternately, RANTING about Vista being "Complete Crap."
That's why I "suspect" a LOT of Vista x64 POSTS are fraudulent!
It doesn't make any since that e-peeners and malcontents are having a totally different experience with x64!
To think otherwise is 'dumb', IMHO...
You don't have to agree with apoppin to see the benefits of Vista x64,we are not talking about advantages both Vista x86,x64 have ( Pros and Cons),fact is Vista x64 is stable as Vista x86(no legacy 16 bit software in the OS for starters),you was trying to say users that have Vista x64 are liars when it comes to stability etc......as you would say
.
Btw thanks NOT for trying to turn this into a Vista x86 v Vista x64 flame thread, if you need to know why Vista x64 is important or will be needed then you have not done a lot of research on the matter.
When do you all think we will be forced to go to a 64 bit os ? I don't mine just curious when you think that will be are only option ?
Mem
Lifer
- Apr 23, 2000
- 21,476
- 13
- 81
You'll never be forced since you always have a choice of not buying what's available
,Windows 7 I hear will come in both 32 bit and 64 bit versions,I'm guessing Windows 8 will probably be 64 bit only(Microsoftt will probably push very hard for 64 bit only OS by then),there's no urgent need to go over to 64 bit software at the moment since 64 bit operating systems ie ...XP x64 /Vista x64 can run most 32 bit software,gaming and demanding video software on the otherhand will probably end up needing more memory as time goes on so we'll just have to see when the time is right.
VinDSL
Diamond Member
If you don't mind me parsing the OP's original post....
He is the one claiming Vista x64 is "Complete Crap", not me!
And, the OP is the one that interjected the x86 vs x64 argument...
I'm just suggesting that he NOT put lot of credence into x64 threads/articles, and he should try Vista x86 before downgrading to XP - that's all!
Mem
Lifer
- Apr 23, 2000
- 21,476
- 13
- 81
Originally posted by: VinDSL
If you don't mind me parsing the OP's original post....
He is the one claiming Vista x64 is "Complete Crap", not me!
And, the OP is the one that interjected the x86 vs x64 argument...
I'm just suggesting that he NOT put lot of credence into x64 threads/articles, and he should try Vista x86 before downgrading to XP - that's all!
So you did not post this...
Btw if you were trying to be sarcastic then it did not come over right,you forgot the very important sarcastic icons.
apoppin
Lifer
*forced* ?
it is not a bad thing ... the devs and venders need to get off their dead asses and port aps to 64-bit
Letsee ... MS said the next OS would be "64-bit only" then did a backpedal ...
-My guess is that within 3 years we will see aps and games routinely written for and/or ported to 64bit ... 2 more years - after that - and 64-bit will rule the world
There is NO denying 64 bit's advantages over 32-bit when the applications are 64-bit ... but for the moment, 'Vista 32 guys' can feel secure ... unlike the 'XP guys'.
I've only had one problem with Vista and it's very minor. For some reason (at least on my system) if you try to delete a shortcut and the target for that shortcut doesn't exist anymore, then Explorer will freeze for a minute or so as soon as you try to right click the shortcut. To get rid of it you have to manually drag the shortcut to the recycle bin.
Othre than that, I like Vista. Sure it's not some huge step up from XP but I've had great luck with it. As petty as it may sound, I like the extra large icons the most.
Oh yeah there's also a minor issue of programs designed for XP that use the .Net framework. When you try to install one of those programs (again at least on my machine) the installer will tell you to first download and install .Net even though it's already present as part of the Vista OS. The workaround is to simply run in XP SP2 compatibility mode. Again, this is no big deal to me.
Personally, if Microsoft came out with a new OS tomorrow I'd upgrade to it simply because I like having the newest software.
Othre than that, I like Vista. Sure it's not some huge step up from XP but I've had great luck with it. As petty as it may sound, I like the extra large icons the most.
Oh yeah there's also a minor issue of programs designed for XP that use the .Net framework. When you try to install one of those programs (again at least on my machine) the installer will tell you to first download and install .Net even though it's already present as part of the Vista OS. The workaround is to simply run in XP SP2 compatibility mode. Again, this is no big deal to me.
Personally, if Microsoft came out with a new OS tomorrow I'd upgrade to it simply because I like having the newest software.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter