Vista Tutorial - 64-bit Vista adoption skyrocketing...

**rasmasyean** · 08-28-2008

If this is any indication that 64-bit is the wave of the future and 32-bit will be “obsolete”…

“There appears to be a shift taking place in the PC industry: the move from 32-bit to 64-bit PCs.
We've been tracking the change by looking at the percentage of 64-bit PCs connecting to Windows Update, and have seen a dramatic increase in recent months. The installed base of 64-bit Windows Vista PCs, as a percentage of all Windows Vista systems, has more than tripled in the U.S. in the last three months, while worldwide adoption has more than doubled during the same period. Another view shows that 20% of new Windows Vista PCs in the U.S. connecting to Windows Update in June were 64-bit PCs, up from just 3% in March. Put more simply, usage of 64-bit Windows Vista is growing much more rapidly than 32-bit. Based on current trends, this growth will accelerate as the retail channel shifts to supplying a rapidly increasing assortment of 64-bit desktops and laptops.”
Windows Vista Team Blog : Windows Vista 64-bit Today

Comments...?

08-28-2008

How's the third-market 64-bit apps development coming along?

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com

"rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message
news:e1103679fc7ea1e5bae014849c4389db@xxxxxx-gateway.com...

Quote:

>
> If this is any indication that 64-bit is the wave of the future and
> 32-bit will be "obsolete".
>
> "There appears to be a shift taking place in the PC industry: the move
> from 32-bit to 64-bit PCs.
> We've been tracking the change by looking at the percentage of 64-bit
> PCs connecting to Windows Update, and have seen a dramatic increase in
> recent months. The installed base of 64-bit Windows Vista PCs, as a
> percentage of all Windows Vista systems, has more than tripled in the
> U.S. in the last three months, while worldwide adoption has more than
> doubled during the same period. Another view shows that 20% of new
> Windows Vista PCs in the U.S. connecting to Windows Update in June were
> 64-bit PCs, up from just 3% in March. Put more simply, usage of 64-bit
> Windows Vista is growing much more rapidly than 32-bit. Based on current
> trends, this growth will accelerate as the retail channel shifts to
> supplying a rapidly increasing assortment of 64-bit desktops and
> laptops."
> 'Windows Vista Team Blog : Windows Vista 64-bit Today'
> (http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/wi...bit-today.aspx)
>
> Comments...?
>
>
> --
> rasmasyean

08-28-2008

"rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message
news:e1103679fc7ea1e5bae014849c4389db@xxxxxx-gateway.com...

Quote:

>
> If this is any indication that 64-bit is the wave of the future and
> 32-bit will be "obsolete".
>
> "There appears to be a shift taking place in the PC industry: the move
> from 32-bit to 64-bit PCs.
> We've been tracking the change by looking at the percentage of 64-bit
> PCs connecting to Windows Update, and have seen a dramatic increase in
> recent months. The installed base of 64-bit Windows Vista PCs, as a
> percentage of all Windows Vista systems, has more than tripled in the
> U.S. in the last three months, while worldwide adoption has more than
> doubled during the same period. Another view shows that 20% of new
> Windows Vista PCs in the U.S. connecting to Windows Update in June were
> 64-bit PCs, up from just 3% in March. Put more simply, usage of 64-bit
> Windows Vista is growing much more rapidly than 32-bit. Based on current
> trends, this growth will accelerate as the retail channel shifts to
> supplying a rapidly increasing assortment of 64-bit desktops and
> laptops."
> 'Windows Vista Team Blog : Windows Vista 64-bit Today'
> (http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/wi...bit-today.aspx)
>
> Comments...?
> --
> rasmasyean

If enough software makers provide 64 bit apps, the trend may continue.
I haven't seen all that many that are true 64 bit apps, most will work with
64 bit, but don't take full advantage of it's capabilities.
I have no immediate plans to use 64 bit, my best estimate is 2-3 years to
mainstream enough 64 bit apps to make it worthwhile.

**rasmasyean** · 08-28-2008

Quote: Originally Posted by Not Even Me

If enough software makers provide 64 bit apps, the trend may continue.
I haven't seen all that many that are true 64 bit apps, most will work with
64 bit, but don't take full advantage of it's capabilities.
I have no immediate plans to use 64 bit, my best estimate is 2-3 years to
mainstream enough 64 bit apps to make it worthwhile.

Yo dude, you didn't even read that article.

"What started out as a gradual (some would say "glacial") movement toward 64-bit PCs, driven primarily by technology enthusiasts, seems to have turned into a swift transition, likely fueled by the falling cost of memory and consumers' desire to get the most out of their PCs."

" PC Accelerators built into Windows Vista, such as Windows SuperFetch, improve performance by keeping commonly used programs in memory, even when the program is closed. More memory capacity on 64-bit PCs allows SuperFetch to do its job more efficiently. "

**rasmasyean** · 08-28-2008

Here's s'mor info...

32-bit vs. 64-bit Vista comparison table…
Differences and Advantages Between 32-bit (x86) VS 64-bit (x64) Windows Vista » My Digital Life

Understanding how SuperFetch uses RAM to enhance system performance…
Understand how SuperFetch uses RAM to enhance system performance | Microsoft Windows | TechRepublic.com

Windows Vista - SuperFetch & ReadyBoost
Ask the Performance Team : Windows Vista - SuperFetch &amp; ReadyBoost

08-28-2008

Yo, dude... What you quoted in no way addresses the 64-bit *applications*
issue. Until the applications are there that truly are 64-bit, the problems
with 64-bit Windows (and there are plenty) are not worth the risk for so
little return, and no matter how many cute tricks the programmers and
Microsoft pull to make what are essentially 32-bit apps run faster under
64-bit architecture, that is not at all the same as having true 64-bit
applications.

Not only that, but SuperFetch would drive the RAM worry warts, the ones who
insist that there must be as much free memory as possible, absolutely
bonkers, <g>.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com

"rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message
news:2a91e45ba70dbeffebeb7d21f6de1298@xxxxxx-gateway.com...

Quote:

>
> Not Even Me;822139 Wrote:

Quote:

>> If enough software makers provide 64 bit apps, the trend may continue.
>> I haven't seen all that many that are true 64 bit apps, most will work
>> with
>> 64 bit, but don't take full advantage of it's capabilities.
>> I have no immediate plans to use 64 bit, my best estimate is 2-3 years
>> to
>> mainstream enough 64 bit apps to make it worthwhile.

>
> Yo dude, you didn't even read that article.

>
> "What started out as a gradual (some would say "glacial") movement
> toward 64-bit PCs, driven primarily by technology enthusiasts, seems to
> have turned into a swift transition, likely fueled by the falling cost
> of memory and consumers' desire to get the most out of their PCs."
>
> " 'PC Accelerators'
> (http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system...celerator.mspx) built
> into Windows Vista, such as *Windows SuperFetch*, improve performance by
> keeping commonly used programs in memory, even when the program is
> closed. More memory capacity on 64-bit PCs allows SuperFetch to do its
> job more efficiently. "
>
>
> --
> rasmasyean

08-28-2008

Yawn....

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com

"rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message
news:bff1484f00537d740951e71de1560e09@xxxxxx-gateway.com...

Quote:

>
> Here's s'mor info...
>
>
> 32-bit vs. 64-bit Vista comparison table…
> 'Differences and Advantages Between 32-bit (x86) VS 64-bit (x64)
> Windows Vista » My Digital Life'
> (http://www.mydigitallife.info/2008/0...windows-vista/)
>
> Understanding how SuperFetch uses RAM to enhance system
> performance…
> 'Understand how SuperFetch uses RAM to enhance system performance |
> Microsoft Windows | TechRepublic.com'
> (http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/wi...windows/?p=735)
>
> Windows Vista - SuperFetch & ReadyBoost
> 'Ask the Performance Team : Windows Vista - SuperFetch &amp;
> ReadyBoost'
> (http://blogs.technet.com/askperf/arc...eadyboost.aspx)
>
>
> --
> rasmasyean

**rasmasyean** · 08-28-2008

Quote: Originally Posted by Gary S. Terhune

Yo, dude... What you quoted in no way addresses the 64-bit *applications*
issue. Until the applications are there that truly are 64-bit, the problems
with 64-bit Windows (and there are plenty) are not worth the risk for so
little return, and no matter how many cute tricks the programmers and
Microsoft pull to make what are essentially 32-bit apps run faster under
64-bit architecture, that is not at all the same as having true 64-bit
applications.

Not only that, but SuperFetch would drive the RAM worry warts, the ones who
insist that there must be as much free memory as possible, absolutely
bonkers, <g>.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
Welcome to the GrystMill!

That's not exactly how it works. Having a large disk cache makes overall performance faster since it doesn't have to access the HD as much since a HD is a lot slower than RAM.

And what you are talking about regarding 64-bit application performance only applies to things that involve a lot of math calculations. Many of these "special" users already use 64-bit XP. In reality, the "average user" would reap more benefit from cache (even as it uses all "free" RAM) than to run true 64-bit applications. The future 64-bit apps is just icing on the cake.

See most free RAM is wasted, so Vista salvages that wasted RAM intelligently to make the computer faster. It's not just the CPU and FLOPS or whatever that affects performance.

At least that's what that article is indicating as the reason for grater adoption of 64-bit Vista (vs. 32-bit Vista).

08-28-2008

What, you can't have the cache and all that with true 64-bit apps? You have
to choose between one or the other? My 32-bit Windows on this Core2Duo
machine is plenty fast as it is. I've don't generally have to wait more than
a heartbeat for apps to open, so I don't see any advantage in storing them
in RAM to make them open more quickly.

I know all that about the RAM, wasted space, etc. I guess my <g> (grin) at
the end of the paragraph didn't make it clear enough that I consider those
"free-RAM believers to be nuts.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com

"rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message
news:512efd0c9790dc508f6a41af1dc77ed0@xxxxxx-gateway.com...

Quote:

>
> Gary S. Terhune;822848 Wrote:

Quote:

>> Yo, dude... What you quoted in no way addresses the 64-bit
>> *applications*
>> issue. Until the applications are there that truly are 64-bit, the
>> problems
>> with 64-bit Windows (and there are plenty) are not worth the risk for
>> so
>> little return, and no matter how many cute tricks the programmers and
>> Microsoft pull to make what are essentially 32-bit apps run faster
>> under
>> 64-bit architecture, that is not at all the same as having true 64-bit
>> applications.
>>
>> Not only that, but SuperFetch would drive the RAM worry warts, the ones
>> who
>> insist that there must be as much free memory as possible, absolutely
>> bonkers, <g>.
>>
>> --
>> Gary S. Terhune
>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>> 'Welcome to the GrystMill!' (http://grystmill.com)
>>

>
> That's not exactly how it works. Having a large disk cache makes
> overall performance faster since it doesn't have to access the HD as
> much since a HD is a lot slower than RAM.
>
> And what you are talking about regarding 64-bit application performance
> only applies to things that involve a lot of math calculations. Many of
> these "special" users already use 64-bit XP. In reality, the "average
> user" would reap more benefit from cache (even as it uses all "free"
> RAM) than to run true 64-bit applications. The future 64-bit apps is
> just icing on the cake.
>
> See most free RAM is wasted, so Vista salvages that wasted RAM
> intelligently to make the computer faster. It's not just the CPU and
> FLOPS or whatever that affects performance.
>
> At least that's what that article is indicating as the reason for
> grater adoption of 64-bit Vista (vs. 32-bit Vista).
>
>
> --
> rasmasyean

08-29-2008

I read it, but I still don't see the 'glacial shift'.
Having a 64 bit OS may allow a few programs to run faster, but for most
applications it's no help.
Eventually it will be needed and functional, but that time has not arrived
yet.

"rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message
news:2a91e45ba70dbeffebeb7d21f6de1298@xxxxxx-gateway.com...

Quote:

>
> Not Even Me;822139 Wrote:

Quote:

>> If enough software makers provide 64 bit apps, the trend may continue.
>> I haven't seen all that many that are true 64 bit apps, most will work
>> with
>> 64 bit, but don't take full advantage of it's capabilities.
>> I have no immediate plans to use 64 bit, my best estimate is 2-3 years
>> to
>> mainstream enough 64 bit apps to make it worthwhile.

>
> Yo dude, you didn't even read that article.

>
> "What started out as a gradual (some would say "glacial") movement
> toward 64-bit PCs, driven primarily by technology enthusiasts, seems to
> have turned into a swift transition, likely fueled by the falling cost
> of memory and consumers' desire to get the most out of their PCs."
>
> " 'PC Accelerators'
> (http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system...celerator.mspx) built
> into Windows Vista, such as *Windows SuperFetch*, improve performance by
> keeping commonly used programs in memory, even when the program is
> closed. More memory capacity on 64-bit PCs allows SuperFetch to do its
> job more efficiently. "
>
>
> --
> rasmasyean

08-28-2008	#1 (permalink)
rasmasyean Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Vista Ultimate x64 207 posts	64-bit Vista adoption skyrocketing... If this is any indication that 64-bit is the wave of the future and 32-bit will be “obsolete”… “There appears to be a shift taking place in the PC industry: the move from 32-bit to 64-bit PCs. We've been tracking the change by looking at the percentage of 64-bit PCs connecting to Windows Update, and have seen a dramatic increase in recent months. The installed base of 64-bit Windows Vista PCs, as a percentage of all Windows Vista systems, has more than tripled in the U.S. in the last three months, while worldwide adoption has more than doubled during the same period. Another view shows that 20% of new Windows Vista PCs in the U.S. connecting to Windows Update in June were 64-bit PCs, up from just 3% in March. Put more simply, usage of 64-bit Windows Vista is growing much more rapidly than 32-bit. Based on current trends, this growth will accelerate as the retail channel shifts to supplying a rapidly increasing assortment of 64-bit desktops and laptops.” Windows Vista Team Blog : Windows Vista 64-bit Today Comments...?
My System Specs

08-28-2008	#2 (permalink)
Gary S. Terhune Guest n/a posts	Re: 64-bit Vista adoption skyrocketing... How's the third-market 64-bit apps development coming along? -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://grystmill.com "rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message news:e1103679fc7ea1e5bae014849c4389db@xxxxxx-gateway.com... Quote: > > If this is any indication that 64-bit is the wave of the future and > 32-bit will be "obsolete". > > "There appears to be a shift taking place in the PC industry: the move > from 32-bit to 64-bit PCs. > We've been tracking the change by looking at the percentage of 64-bit > PCs connecting to Windows Update, and have seen a dramatic increase in > recent months. The installed base of 64-bit Windows Vista PCs, as a > percentage of all Windows Vista systems, has more than tripled in the > U.S. in the last three months, while worldwide adoption has more than > doubled during the same period. Another view shows that 20% of new > Windows Vista PCs in the U.S. connecting to Windows Update in June were > 64-bit PCs, up from just 3% in March. Put more simply, usage of 64-bit > Windows Vista is growing much more rapidly than 32-bit. Based on current > trends, this growth will accelerate as the retail channel shifts to > supplying a rapidly increasing assortment of 64-bit desktops and > laptops." > 'Windows Vista Team Blog : Windows Vista 64-bit Today' > (http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/wi...bit-today.aspx) > > Comments...? > > > -- > rasmasyean
My System Specs

08-28-2008	#3 (permalink)
Not Even Me Guest n/a posts	Re: 64-bit Vista adoption skyrocketing... "rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message news:e1103679fc7ea1e5bae014849c4389db@xxxxxx-gateway.com... Quote: > > If this is any indication that 64-bit is the wave of the future and > 32-bit will be "obsolete". > > "There appears to be a shift taking place in the PC industry: the move > from 32-bit to 64-bit PCs. > We've been tracking the change by looking at the percentage of 64-bit > PCs connecting to Windows Update, and have seen a dramatic increase in > recent months. The installed base of 64-bit Windows Vista PCs, as a > percentage of all Windows Vista systems, has more than tripled in the > U.S. in the last three months, while worldwide adoption has more than > doubled during the same period. Another view shows that 20% of new > Windows Vista PCs in the U.S. connecting to Windows Update in June were > 64-bit PCs, up from just 3% in March. Put more simply, usage of 64-bit > Windows Vista is growing much more rapidly than 32-bit. Based on current > trends, this growth will accelerate as the retail channel shifts to > supplying a rapidly increasing assortment of 64-bit desktops and > laptops." > 'Windows Vista Team Blog : Windows Vista 64-bit Today' > (http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/wi...bit-today.aspx) > > Comments...? > -- > rasmasyean If enough software makers provide 64 bit apps, the trend may continue. I haven't seen all that many that are true 64 bit apps, most will work with 64 bit, but don't take full advantage of it's capabilities. I have no immediate plans to use 64 bit, my best estimate is 2-3 years to mainstream enough 64 bit apps to make it worthwhile.
My System Specs

08-28-2008	#4 (permalink)
rasmasyean Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Vista Ultimate x64 207 posts	Re: 64-bit Vista adoption skyrocketing... Quote: Originally Posted by Not Even Me If enough software makers provide 64 bit apps, the trend may continue. I haven't seen all that many that are true 64 bit apps, most will work with 64 bit, but don't take full advantage of it's capabilities. I have no immediate plans to use 64 bit, my best estimate is 2-3 years to mainstream enough 64 bit apps to make it worthwhile. Yo dude, you didn't even read that article. "What started out as a gradual (some would say "glacial") movement toward 64-bit PCs, driven primarily by technology enthusiasts, seems to have turned into a swift transition, likely fueled by the falling cost of memory and consumers' desire to get the most out of their PCs." " PC Accelerators built into Windows Vista, such as Windows SuperFetch, improve performance by keeping commonly used programs in memory, even when the program is closed. More memory capacity on 64-bit PCs allows SuperFetch to do its job more efficiently. "
My System Specs

08-28-2008	#5 (permalink)
rasmasyean Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Vista Ultimate x64 207 posts	Re: 64-bit Vista adoption skyrocketing... Here's s'mor info... 32-bit vs. 64-bit Vista comparison table… Differences and Advantages Between 32-bit (x86) VS 64-bit (x64) Windows Vista » My Digital Life Understanding how SuperFetch uses RAM to enhance system performance… Understand how SuperFetch uses RAM to enhance system performance \| Microsoft Windows \| TechRepublic.com Windows Vista - SuperFetch & ReadyBoost Ask the Performance Team : Windows Vista - SuperFetch &amp; ReadyBoost
My System Specs

08-28-2008	#6 (permalink)
Gary S. Terhune Guest n/a posts	Re: 64-bit Vista adoption skyrocketing... Yo, dude... What you quoted in no way addresses the 64-bit applications issue. Until the applications are there that truly are 64-bit, the problems with 64-bit Windows (and there are plenty) are not worth the risk for so little return, and no matter how many cute tricks the programmers and Microsoft pull to make what are essentially 32-bit apps run faster under 64-bit architecture, that is not at all the same as having true 64-bit applications. Not only that, but SuperFetch would drive the RAM worry warts, the ones who insist that there must be as much free memory as possible, absolutely bonkers, <g>. -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://grystmill.com "rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message news:2a91e45ba70dbeffebeb7d21f6de1298@xxxxxx-gateway.com... Quote: > > Not Even Me;822139 Wrote: Quote: >> If enough software makers provide 64 bit apps, the trend may continue. >> I haven't seen all that many that are true 64 bit apps, most will work >> with >> 64 bit, but don't take full advantage of it's capabilities. >> I have no immediate plans to use 64 bit, my best estimate is 2-3 years >> to >> mainstream enough 64 bit apps to make it worthwhile. > > Yo dude, you didn't even read that article. > > "What started out as a gradual (some would say "glacial") movement > toward 64-bit PCs, driven primarily by technology enthusiasts, seems to > have turned into a swift transition, likely fueled by the falling cost > of memory and consumers' desire to get the most out of their PCs." > > " 'PC Accelerators' > (http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system...celerator.mspx) built > into Windows Vista, such as Windows SuperFetch, improve performance by > keeping commonly used programs in memory, even when the program is > closed. More memory capacity on 64-bit PCs allows SuperFetch to do its > job more efficiently. " > > > -- > rasmasyean
My System Specs

08-28-2008	#7 (permalink)
Gary S. Terhune Guest n/a posts	Re: 64-bit Vista adoption skyrocketing... Yawn.... -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://grystmill.com "rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message news:bff1484f00537d740951e71de1560e09@xxxxxx-gateway.com... Quote: > > Here's s'mor info... > > > 32-bit vs. 64-bit Vista comparison table… > 'Differences and Advantages Between 32-bit (x86) VS 64-bit (x64) > Windows Vista » My Digital Life' > (http://www.mydigitallife.info/2008/0...windows-vista/) > > Understanding how SuperFetch uses RAM to enhance system > performance… > 'Understand how SuperFetch uses RAM to enhance system performance \| > Microsoft Windows \| TechRepublic.com' > (http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/wi...windows/?p=735) > > Windows Vista - SuperFetch & ReadyBoost > 'Ask the Performance Team : Windows Vista - SuperFetch &amp; > ReadyBoost' > (http://blogs.technet.com/askperf/arc...eadyboost.aspx) > > > -- > rasmasyean
My System Specs

08-28-2008	#8 (permalink)
rasmasyean Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Vista Ultimate x64 207 posts	Re: 64-bit Vista adoption skyrocketing... Quote: Originally Posted by Gary S. Terhune Yo, dude... What you quoted in no way addresses the 64-bit applications issue. Until the applications are there that truly are 64-bit, the problems with 64-bit Windows (and there are plenty) are not worth the risk for so little return, and no matter how many cute tricks the programmers and Microsoft pull to make what are essentially 32-bit apps run faster under 64-bit architecture, that is not at all the same as having true 64-bit applications. Not only that, but SuperFetch would drive the RAM worry warts, the ones who insist that there must be as much free memory as possible, absolutely bonkers, <g>. -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User Welcome to the GrystMill! That's not exactly how it works. Having a large disk cache makes overall performance faster since it doesn't have to access the HD as much since a HD is a lot slower than RAM. And what you are talking about regarding 64-bit application performance only applies to things that involve a lot of math calculations. Many of these "special" users already use 64-bit XP. In reality, the "average user" would reap more benefit from cache (even as it uses all "free" RAM) than to run true 64-bit applications. The future 64-bit apps is just icing on the cake. See most free RAM is wasted, so Vista salvages that wasted RAM intelligently to make the computer faster. It's not just the CPU and FLOPS or whatever that affects performance. At least that's what that article is indicating as the reason for grater adoption of 64-bit Vista (vs. 32-bit Vista).
My System Specs

08-28-2008	#9 (permalink)
Gary S. Terhune Guest n/a posts	Re: 64-bit Vista adoption skyrocketing... What, you can't have the cache and all that with true 64-bit apps? You have to choose between one or the other? My 32-bit Windows on this Core2Duo machine is plenty fast as it is. I've don't generally have to wait more than a heartbeat for apps to open, so I don't see any advantage in storing them in RAM to make them open more quickly. I know all that about the RAM, wasted space, etc. I guess my <g> (grin) at the end of the paragraph didn't make it clear enough that I consider those "free-RAM believers to be nuts. -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://grystmill.com "rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message news:512efd0c9790dc508f6a41af1dc77ed0@xxxxxx-gateway.com... Quote: > > Gary S. Terhune;822848 Wrote: Quote: >> Yo, dude... What you quoted in no way addresses the 64-bit >> applications >> issue. Until the applications are there that truly are 64-bit, the >> problems >> with 64-bit Windows (and there are plenty) are not worth the risk for >> so >> little return, and no matter how many cute tricks the programmers and >> Microsoft pull to make what are essentially 32-bit apps run faster >> under >> 64-bit architecture, that is not at all the same as having true 64-bit >> applications. >> >> Not only that, but SuperFetch would drive the RAM worry warts, the ones >> who >> insist that there must be as much free memory as possible, absolutely >> bonkers, <g>. >> >> -- >> Gary S. Terhune >> MS-MVP Shell/User >> 'Welcome to the GrystMill!' (http://grystmill.com) >> > > That's not exactly how it works. Having a large disk cache makes > overall performance faster since it doesn't have to access the HD as > much since a HD is a lot slower than RAM. > > And what you are talking about regarding 64-bit application performance > only applies to things that involve a lot of math calculations. Many of > these "special" users already use 64-bit XP. In reality, the "average > user" would reap more benefit from cache (even as it uses all "free" > RAM) than to run true 64-bit applications. The future 64-bit apps is > just icing on the cake. > > See most free RAM is wasted, so Vista salvages that wasted RAM > intelligently to make the computer faster. It's not just the CPU and > FLOPS or whatever that affects performance. > > At least that's what that article is indicating as the reason for > grater adoption of 64-bit Vista (vs. 32-bit Vista). > > > -- > rasmasyean
My System Specs

08-29-2008	#10 (permalink)
Not Even Me Guest n/a posts	Re: 64-bit Vista adoption skyrocketing... I read it, but I still don't see the 'glacial shift'. Having a 64 bit OS may allow a few programs to run faster, but for most applications it's no help. Eventually it will be needed and functional, but that time has not arrived yet. "rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message news:2a91e45ba70dbeffebeb7d21f6de1298@xxxxxx-gateway.com... Quote: > > Not Even Me;822139 Wrote: Quote: >> If enough software makers provide 64 bit apps, the trend may continue. >> I haven't seen all that many that are true 64 bit apps, most will work >> with >> 64 bit, but don't take full advantage of it's capabilities. >> I have no immediate plans to use 64 bit, my best estimate is 2-3 years >> to >> mainstream enough 64 bit apps to make it worthwhile. > > Yo dude, you didn't even read that article. > > "What started out as a gradual (some would say "glacial") movement > toward 64-bit PCs, driven primarily by technology enthusiasts, seems to > have turned into a swift transition, likely fueled by the falling cost > of memory and consumers' desire to get the most out of their PCs." > > " 'PC Accelerators' > (http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system...celerator.mspx) built > into Windows Vista, such as Windows SuperFetch, improve performance by > keeping commonly used programs in memory, even when the program is > closed. More memory capacity on 64-bit PCs allows SuperFetch to do its > job more efficiently. " > > > -- > rasmasyean
My System Specs

Similar Threads
Thread	Forum
Vista Adoption	Vista General
DRAM Makers Suffer Due to Lackluster Vista Adoption	Vista General
Re: Windows Vista Perils in Desktop Adoption (or "How to Crash" Vista Every Time")	Vista General
Q&A: Microsoft Speech Serverâ€™s Growing Adoption in the Enterprise	Vista News
Q&A: Microsoft Speech Serverâ€™s Growing Adoption in the Enterprise	Vista News