Enough 3rd-party apps to make 64bit Vista worthwhile?

I bet there will be pressure from the industry - hard and soft - to make the
64-bit switch.
Gamers also will be among the first to make the switch.
Michael


"breitak67" <guest DeleteThis @unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:c2a278166358d7aee1b68d5b72d524cf@nntp-gateway.com...
>
> Mark Conrad;806114 Wrote:
>> In article <00C1CFD7-C68A-44F3-99EF-92C5EA34EE11@xxxxxx>,
>> "Curious" <<spammenot@xxxxxx>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > AFAIK 32bit programs run in Vista 64 just as fast
>> > > as they do in 32 bit. > >
>>
>> Yeah, I guess that is correct about most 32 bit mainstream
>> applications, however I suspect that next-to-the-metal
>> 32-bit _utilities_ will refuse to run on a 64-bit OS...
>>
>> ....UNLESS the underlying PC hardware is all 64-bit :-\
>>
>>
>> Hmm, that brings up another question, namely how
>> difficult is it to buy a 64-bit computer in todays
>> PC market that is designed to run Windows OSs ?
>>
>> It would be terrible if we had to buy a 64-bit Mac
>> just to run a Vista 64-bit OS
>>
>> Mark-
>
> Actually, I think most PCs sold today are 64-bit hardware. I believe
> all Intel "Core 2" processors are 64-bit, as well as all the flavors of
> AMD's Athlon 64 and Phenom lines.
>
> I think x64 adoption is largely a function of user need and perceived
> risk. Most users read mail, surf the internet, use MS Word/Excel, and
> manage their iTunes - they don't need more than 2GB RAM, so adopting
> x64 is an unnecessary risk. x64 becomes attractive for scientific,
> engineering, and design apps (CAD, finite element analysis, etc.), video
> editing and graphics design work, developers who run large suites of
> dev tools, large databases, and folks running multiple VMs. Or PC trash
> talkers - the guys who build the $5000 OC'd, liquid-cooled PC with all
> the cold-cathode lights and then spend all their time surfing goat porn
> or running benchmarks to prove how fast and kewl their rig is.
>
>
> --
> breitak67

Intel 64 architecture

Core 2 Processors have it:
'Intel® 64 Architecture'
(http://developer.intel.com/technology/intel64/index.htm)

Even some newer Celeron, Pentium 4, and Xenon processors have it:
'Intel Desktop Processors Get 64-Bit Support'
(http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20050221comp.htm)

Here is Intel's CPU Page:
'Intel® Processors'
(http://www.intel.com/products/processor/index.htm?iid=prod_nav+proc)

Look for either "EM64T" support or "Intel 64 architecture"


--
breitak67

Hi, Mark.

I think you'll find very few 32-bit Win/Vista PCs on the market today. That
is, 32-bit HARDWARE. The typical machine now has a 64-bit CPU loaded with a
32-bit Vista operating system.

Just a couple of years ago, it was hard to find 64-bit drivers for printers,
video cards and other hardware. At that time, all software applications
were 32-bit and many would not install and run on Vista x64 (or WinXP x64).
ATI, for example, promised for a couple of years to produce 64-bit drivers
for my Radeon graphics card; by the time they arrived, I had moved on to new
hardware, still from ATI but with drivers. All through the long Vista beta
I tried several times to install Photoshop Elements 4.0 in Vista x64.
Finally, just as Vista "went gold" in November 2006, Adobe got PSE 4.0 so
that it would install and run in 64-bit. Then I got PSE 6.0 and it runs
fine in Vista x64.

> Really just interested whether or not a lot of
> mainstream "general" apps are available yet.

Yes. Many of them are still 32-bit apps, but they run with no problems at
all in Vista x64 on 64-bit hardware. Software coded for 64-bits is still
rare, but most apps don't need that extra oomph anyhow.

Nowadays, 64-bit availability is like a downhill snowball. You should have
very little problem finding both hardware and software that will work
without problems in Vista x64. ;<) Of course, the Dragon software you need
just might be the exception. Sorry 'bout that. :>(

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
rc RemoveThis @grandecom.net
Microsoft Windows MVP
(Running Windows Live Mail 2008 in Vista Ultimate x64 SP1)

"Mark Conrad" <noneof RemoveThis @urbusiness.invalid> wrote in message
news:noneof-A7C7A2.18543014082008@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
>
> I have been considering switching to 64 bit Vista.
>
> Would anyone please list a few of the pros and cons?
>
> Here presently running 32 bit Vista on Mac hardware.
>
> My main app is Dragon NaturallySpeaking. (medical)
>
> Think I will check their website to see if they plan
> to grind out a 64 bit version of Dragon.
>
> Really just interested whether or not a lot of
> mainstream "general" apps are available yet.
>
> Mark-

"Phillips" <afn18721.DeleteThis@afn.org> wrote in message
news:2F0F8D1E-2DCA-404A-AE29-9FF5044367AB@microsoft.com...
> If you have the money, you can build a nice (lots of RAM) Vista 64-bit PC
> and then run virtual machines w/ a 32-bit OS.
> Otherwise, not yet... and probably it will take a couple of years till
> 64-bit CPUs will become mainstream so that there will be some incentives
> for software companies to produce competitive 64-bit applications.
> Michael
>
>
It seems to me that 64 bit CPUs are mainstream now, and have been for
the last year, or so.

In article <OGk6rAXAJHA.1136.TakeThisOut@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>,
"R. C. White" <rc.TakeThisOut@grandecom.net> wrote:

> Hi, Mark.
>
> I think you'll find very few 32-bit Win/Vista PCs on the market today. That
> is, 32-bit HARDWARE. The typical machine now has a 64-bit CPU loaded with a
> 32-bit Vista operating system.

Really happy to hear that, plus the rest of the info
in your post.



> Of course, the Dragon software you need
> just might be the exception. Sorry 'bout that.

Me too :-\ Hopefully they will eventually yield to
market forces and grind out a 64 bit version of Dragon.

Mark-


--
I am spoiled by the added speed of 64 bit _software_.

....as I come from a Mac background which is all 64 bit.

Presently I run 32 bit Dragon software on a MacBook Pro.
(using a separate Vista partition on the Mac hardware)

Vista Ultimate running Dragon 9.5 - full medical version.

The 32 bit version of Dragon runs "satisfactorily"
at the present time.

For example, I ran a timed test, speaking
at the high rate of 336 wpm. (60 second test)

Test dang near broke my tongue, maintaining 336 wpm
speaking speed in a legible fashion for 60 seconds.

Dragon running on the Mac kept up with that fast rate,
yielding 100% speech-to-text accuracy, the words
appearing on the screen as fast as I was speaking them.

Being a greedy cuss, I realized if I was running a
background app such as Photoshop, then Dragon
would bog down and fail the speed test.

Would definitely need 64 bit Dragon if I were
planning to run background applications.

Last month I purchased a HP Pavillion a6512p Desktop Pc, with 4.00GB ram
and a 64bit operating system, Vista Home Premium with service pack 1. I
have had "no" problems and am very happy with the performance of this
computer. One problem I have found is that "some" programs or tools that
I want to download and install = do "not" support the 64bit (as of yet)
so I have to look for others. There are "many" out there, just have to
shop around. I use AVAST,Spybot Search & Destroy,Auslogics Disk
Defrag,Pixillion Image Converter,Email Stripper,Zappit,CCleaner,and Wise
Disk Cleaner and Registry Cleaner all these programs work "great" with
the 64bit and are FREE!!!

ART


--
Art