Vista - For those want to use 64-bit version...

FYI.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=171&tag=nl.e539

[Quote/]

[....]and Microsoft has decided, sensibly, that it won't include the 64-bit
version of Vista in any of its retail boxes; you'll have to order a DVD and
have it shipped separately.

[/Quote]

On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 11:59:02 +0800, "xfile"
<cou-cou@remove.nospam.com> wrote:

>FYI.
>
>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=171&tag=nl.e539
>
>[Quote/]
>
>[....]and Microsoft has decided, sensibly, that it won't include the 64-bit
>version of Vista in any of its retail boxes; you'll have to order a DVD and
>have it shipped separately.
>
>[/Quote]
>



I'm running the 64-bit versio of Vista RTM, and it ROCKS! Verything is
SO much faster! I previously had a clean XP32 installation on this
system, then reinstalled when Vista appeared on MSDN. It's an
absolutely flying machine.

Admittedly I have good hardware (all my Widows Experience scores are
5.9 except the disk, which is 5.1) but the difference is astounding.
Even running IE7 x64 is better than IE7 x86.



Jim

I envy you.

Don't forget to order the DVD when you purchase the retail version; it won't
be included in the box.


"Jim" <jim@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:7drnm29ne0140a0uot8m9o83bv37vesbc1@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 11:59:02 +0800, "xfile"
> <cou-cou@remove.nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>FYI.
>>
>>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=171&tag=nl.e539
>>
>>[Quote/]
>>
>>[....]and Microsoft has decided, sensibly, that it won't include the
>>64-bit
>>version of Vista in any of its retail boxes; you'll have to order a DVD
>>and
>>have it shipped separately.
>>
>>[/Quote]
>>
>
>
>
> I'm running the 64-bit versio of Vista RTM, and it ROCKS! Verything is
> SO much faster! I previously had a clean XP32 installation on this
> system, then reinstalled when Vista appeared on MSDN. It's an
> absolutely flying machine.
>
> Admittedly I have good hardware (all my Widows Experience scores are
> 5.9 except the disk, which is 5.1) but the difference is astounding.
> Even running IE7 x64 is better than IE7 x86.
>
>
>
> Jim

First the licence limiting reinstalls, now this... "Order separately" means
more delays to get the thing...
MS urgently needs a CCO (Chief Common sense Officer)...

They surely have their reasons, but and all enthusiasts/power users who
upgraded their machines to 64-bit just for that????

"xfile" <cou-cou@remove.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:uVCCMGqEHHA.4132@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> FYI.
>
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=171&tag=nl.e539
>
> [Quote/]
>
> [....]and Microsoft has decided, sensibly, that it won't include the
> 64-bit version of Vista in any of its retail boxes; you'll have to order a
> DVD and have it shipped separately.
>
> [/Quote]
>

LOL,

CCO?

Good thinking, I will borrow that term and maybe use it for my resume
someday.


"EdricFilho" <ebfilho@msn.com> wrote in message
news:uNVLKBuEHHA.4280@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> First the licence limiting reinstalls, now this... "Order separately"
> means more delays to get the thing...
> MS urgently needs a CCO (Chief Common sense Officer)...
>
> They surely have their reasons, but and all enthusiasts/power users who
> upgraded their machines to 64-bit just for that????
>
> "xfile" <cou-cou@remove.nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:uVCCMGqEHHA.4132@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> FYI.
>>
>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=171&tag=nl.e539
>>
>> [Quote/]
>>
>> [....]and Microsoft has decided, sensibly, that it won't include the
>> 64-bit version of Vista in any of its retail boxes; you'll have to order
>> a DVD and have it shipped separately.
>>
>> [/Quote]
>>
>

xfile wrote:

> FYI.
>
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=171&tag=nl.e539
>
> [Quote/]
>
> [....]and Microsoft has decided, sensibly, that it won't include the 64-bit
> version of Vista in any of its retail boxes; you'll have to order a DVD and
> have it shipped separately.
>
> [/Quote]
>
>

At least for the Business version, and IMHO for the others, this seems
like a very bad decision. Isn't it in everybody's interests to hasten
the move to 64-bit?

David Wilkisnon

"Jim" <jim@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:7drnm29ne0140a0uot8m9o83bv37vesbc1@4ax.com...

> I'm running the 64-bit versio of Vista RTM, and it ROCKS! Verything is
> SO much faster!

I certainly do agree with that. I have 64-bit Vista Business installed on a
second partition on an AMD DualCore box with 4Gb RAM, and it certainly does
seem to be much faster than XP Pro.

Problem is I have an nVidia GeForce 6800 graphics card, and the Microsoft
drivers are absolute rubbish. nVidia has got as far as RC2 drivers, but they
still crash with alarming regularity, causing a BSOD in nvlddmkm.sys.

I'll be waiting until Microsoft have patched up Visual Studio.NET 2005
sufficiently so they actually support it before finally ditching XP but, if
nVidia haven't sorted out their driver problems by then, I'll have no choice
but to get another graphics card.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourc...nvlddmkm%2esys

On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 12:28:56 -0000, "Mark Rae"
<mark@markNOSPAMrae.com> wrote:

>"Jim" <jim@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:7drnm29ne0140a0uot8m9o83bv37vesbc1@4ax.com...
>
>> I'm running the 64-bit versio of Vista RTM, and it ROCKS! Verything is
>> SO much faster!
>
>I certainly do agree with that. I have 64-bit Vista Business installed on a
>second partition on an AMD DualCore box with 4Gb RAM, and it certainly does
>seem to be much faster than XP Pro.
>
>Problem is I have an nVidia GeForce 6800 graphics card, and the Microsoft
>drivers are absolute rubbish. nVidia has got as far as RC2 drivers, but they
>still crash with alarming regularity, causing a BSOD in nvlddmkm.sys.
>
>I'll be waiting until Microsoft have patched up Visual Studio.NET 2005
>sufficiently so they actually support it before finally ditching XP but, if
>nVidia haven't sorted out their driver problems by then, I'll have no choice
>but to get another graphics card.
>
>http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourc...nvlddmkm%2esys
>


I guess I was lucky. I have a 7900 GTX card, and the built-in nVidia
drivers seem to be excellent. I've yet to experience any crashes in
Vista, whether I'm playing game (Flight Sim) or running Virtual Server
etc.

As for Visual Studio. I have some applications which are developed
under Visual Studio 6, so Ive got an XP VM for that, running under
Virtual Server 2005. It works well.

Jim

"Jim" <jim@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:76gom2t5s4e2om4grk0lpkvrs1f9ftgkgl@4ax.com...

> I guess I was lucky. I have a 7900 GTX card, and the built-in nVidia
> drivers seem to be excellent. I've yet to experience any crashes in
> Vista, whether I'm playing game (Flight Sim) or running Virtual Server
> etc.

I guess so because, as I understand it, the problem lies with SLI...

> As for Visual Studio. I have some applications which are developed
> under Visual Studio 6, so Ive got an XP VM for that, running under
> Virtual Server 2005. It works well.

Yes indeed - in fact, that's Microsoft's "official" solution to supporting
previous versions of their development suites... :-)

However, I make a living exclusively with Visual Studio.NET 2005 (apart from
a couple of legacy apps which are installed on virtual machines) so there is
no merit whatever in deploying Vista if it means I have to spend 95% of my
time using XP Pro in a virtual machine...

No - I'll wait till February (or whenever the VS.NET patch is actually
released) and review the situation then.

However, I'm favouring more and more the idea of replacing my graphics card.
Vista has been available to hardware developers for long enough now, so
Microsoft and/or nVidia really should have produced reliable drivers by
now...

If you are referring to the limitation on transfers, that has been rescinded
as noted recently in the ng.

"EdricFilho" <ebfilho@msn.com> wrote in message
news:uNVLKBuEHHA.4280@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> First the licence limiting reinstalls, now this... "Order separately"
> means more delays to get the thing...
> MS urgently needs a CCO (Chief Common sense Officer)...
>
> They surely have their reasons, but and all enthusiasts/power users who
> upgraded their machines to 64-bit just for that????
>
> "xfile" <cou-cou@remove.nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:uVCCMGqEHHA.4132@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> FYI.
>>
>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=171&tag=nl.e539
>>
>> [Quote/]
>>
>> [....]and Microsoft has decided, sensibly, that it won't include the
>> 64-bit version of Vista in any of its retail boxes; you'll have to order
>> a DVD and have it shipped separately.
>>
>> [/Quote]
>>
>