Vista - 64-bit: More than just the RAM

Well if it costs much the same as Vista 32 which it does and if it does much same things as Vista 32 which it does and can do things which Vista 32 can't do like run 64 bit application software which it can.............I think you have got your answer.

Really if somebody wants the Best Vista system around it has to be Vista 64 ultimate, obviously there have to be caveats to this.... like don't expect to run 16 bit software on it, but since very many hang people on to their old computers; they often will have a XP machine to complement it, which solves all those issues.

Must say that MS are not really helping people adopt 64 bit by the fact they do not even mention it on their top end Vista product blurb
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/win.../ultimate.aspx

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

Hi Kross, the RAM which a 64 bit system will support is just so huge that from that aspect I can't see any need to go to 128 bits for a long time. what I will think will drive a migration from 64 bit to 128 bit computing will be home and work place robotics.

• Published: Nov 23, 2004

http://www.windowsnetworking.com/art...Computing.html



Bye the way, what flag is that?

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

64-bit apps should run faster than 32-bit, if written correctly. Since very few apps need more than 2GB of RAM to work properly, the only benefit for more RAM is being about to run more applications at the same time.

Which is needed, when you consider how many *more* 'apps' the OS itself runs on a regular basis.

Never fear, the OS itself will force users to go to 64bit soon enough- but another benefit is that virtualization, both of servers and (especially of note for end users) desktops is taking off - so those that absolutely positively without a shade of doubt could not live without playing their little 8 and 16 bit games can still do so by virtualizing an older OS.

Tell me about it...

They never really say anything useful about these in these descriptions. If they start linking MS technical pages, etc...heck that confuses IT pros, forget about normal consumers. They just won't buy it until they "figure out what it says"...which is never.

You have to like dig info up from all over the place to see what other people "translated" that hopefully gives you a hint of how it applies to "the real world".

At least these days there are some guru blogs (some who work for MS and can actually communicate and not just code) to help out in this regard. But it's still a real hassle for the average person to find because they won't know what to look for to begin with.

Perhaps it takes better marketing...or those details are best left for the pros to figure out.

Well, if this recent discovery works out to be commercially viable, maybe it will eliminate the hard drive and all you will have is a computer with a large amount of RAM? Who knows.

"Memristor could enable instant-on PCs, massive data storage and computers that think like humans "
HP Discovers Potential "God Particle" of Electronics | Popular Science

I found this article...which is kinda funny, because it's anti-Microsoft but promotes Vista. lol
How Windows XP Wasted $25 Billion of Energy : TreeHugger

Well, if you want to talk about specific snippets of mathematical code, in some cases, 64-bit systems will realize 4x speed improvements and sometimes more. This assumes the snippet of code is optimized for the 64-bit environment.

But, a 64-bit Vista system is not going to significantly faster than a 32-bit Vista system on normal day to day computing.

S-

rasmasyean
August 27th, 2008 at 7:32 am

Sorry to say but your arguments are flawed because you missed some pretty critical information. And you appear to know little about Windows.

32-bit means it can only address 2^32 (2 to the 32nd power) = 4GB memory spaces.
That would be RAM + VRAM + other devices on Motherboard, etc.
e.g. If you have a 1 GB VRAM, you will prolly only be able to get 2.7GB user RAM approx.

Superfetch makes your computer’s “data-access” speed much faster the more RAM you have.

“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

rasmasyean
August 27th, 2008 at 7:41 am

And this is what they said as well…
“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.”

Just an FYI, so you can include this in your analysis. I guess not many people know that Vista has this technology that sort of “redefines” traditional ways of computing. WPF is also something that introduces some new concepts from a “software engineering” point if you’re interested in checking that out as well. Perhaps it can give you some ideas that carry over to Linux.

Alexander Sandler
August 27th, 2008 at 9:11 am

Well… I am wondering if there’s a slight chance that at least some of my arguments are right…

As a rule you don’t need 64-bit support to have more than 4GB of RAM. Good old Pentium 4 is well capable to address more than 4GB of RAM with both Windows and Linux. However when you try to have more than 4GB of RAM there are whole bunch of limitations unrelated to either OS or the CPU. For instance, I have 4GB on my XP machine at home, but it only sees 3.2GB. Why? This limitation imposed by my MOTHERBOARD.

Still you are right. I missed this point. Someone considering to have more than 4GB of RAM should check out his computers specs. It is possible that 64-bit OS would be the only way for him/her to have that amount of RAM.

update: That’s not true. If your hardware supports more than 4GB, there is no reason to buy 64-bit Windows. 32-bit XP supports 4GB+. So it was right not to mention this because in terms of bitness it does not matter how much RAM you have. If your hardware does not support more than 4GB, then 64-bit OS won’t help you anyway.

John L. Galt
August 28th, 2008 at 5:49 am

“update: That’s not true. If your hardware supports more than 4GB, there is no reason to buy 64-bit Windows. 32-bit XP supports 4GB+. So it was right not to mention this because in terms of bitness it does not matter how much RAM you have. If your hardware does not support more than 4GB, then 64-bit OS won’t help you anyway.”

Sorry, do the math.

2^32 = 4 GB. 32bit applications cannot access more than 4 GB of RAM.

Also, there are a few programs that can be recompiled for 64bit OS, especially open-source programs (as you have already noted) as well as others, provided a person has the know how and wherewithal to do so. Finally, The next version of Photoshop is going 64bit, just to name *one* prominent application.