1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

64-bit Internet Explorer

Discussion in 'Internet Explorer' started by Lone Star, Jan 14, 2010.

  1. Lone Star

    Lone Star Flightless Bird

    My new Windows 7 laptop came with two versions of IE: the standard and the
    64-bit. Question: is there any advantage of using the 64-bit version? Any
    new capabilities, is the speed better, look better, or what. No I haven't
    tried it yet -- don't want the system to default to it, or something weird
    beyond my ability to revert. Thanks.

    EW
     
  2. mikeyhsd

    mikeyhsd Flightless Bird

    64 bit is better and faster in my opinion.

    however things like flash are not 64 bit so not all sites will work.
    and the switch is not auto.
    you have to exit 64 and then run 32.

    mikeyhsd@hotmail.com



    "Lone Star" <ewyatt__del@excite.com> wrote in message news:hiob86$fp9$1@news.datemas.de...
    My new Windows 7 laptop came with two versions of IE: the standard and the
    64-bit. Question: is there any advantage of using the 64-bit version? Any
    new capabilities, is the speed better, look better, or what. No I haven't
    tried it yet -- don't want the system to default to it, or something weird
    beyond my ability to revert. Thanks.

    EW
     
  3. rob^_^

    rob^_^ Flightless Bird

    Hi,

    It is more secure than the x86 version even... because it does not support
    all the x86 IE Addons and plugins.

    You cannot view flash images and the like, nor can you use Addon Toolbars
    like Google or Yahoo.

    Regards.

    "Lone Star" <ewyatt__del@excite.com> wrote in message
    news:hiob86$fp9$1@news.datemas.de...
    > My new Windows 7 laptop came with two versions of IE: the standard and the
    > 64-bit. Question: is there any advantage of using the 64-bit version?
    > Any new capabilities, is the speed better, look better, or what. No I
    > haven't tried it yet -- don't want the system to default to it, or
    > something weird beyond my ability to revert. Thanks.
    >
    > EW
    >
    >
    >
     
  4. PA Bear [MS MVP]

    PA Bear [MS MVP] Flightless Bird

    See this discussion:
    http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vistawu/thread/babaa5f8-ff06-4ea2-aef6-a9416d65f981
    --
    ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
    MS MVP-IE, Mail, Security, Windows Client - since 2002
    www.banthecheck.com


    Lone Star wrote:
    > My new Windows 7 laptop came with two versions of IE: the standard and the
    > 64-bit. Question: is there any advantage of using the 64-bit version?
    > Any
    > new capabilities, is the speed better, look better, or what. No I haven't
    > tried it yet -- don't want the system to default to it, or something weird
    > beyond my ability to revert. Thanks.
    >
    > EW
     
  5. Bruce Hagen

    Bruce Hagen Flightless Bird

    As "mikeyhsd" said, some programs do not run on the 64 Bit, yet. I have a
    shortcut to both 32 and 64 bit on my QL Taskbar. You can use both at the
    same time.
    --
    Bruce Hagen
    MS-MVP [Mail]
    Imperial Beach, CA


    "Lone Star" <ewyatt__del@excite.com> wrote in message
    news:hiob86$fp9$1@news.datemas.de...
    > My new Windows 7 laptop came with two versions of IE: the standard and
    > the 64-bit. Question: is there any advantage of using the 64-bit
    > version? Any new capabilities, is the speed better, look better, or
    > what. No I haven't tried it yet -- don't want the system to default to
    > it, or something weird beyond my ability to revert. Thanks.
    >
    > EW
    >
    >
     
  6. Jeff Strickland

    Jeff Strickland Flightless Bird

    "Lone Star" <ewyatt__del@excite.com> wrote in message
    news:hiob86$fp9$1@news.datemas.de...
    > My new Windows 7 laptop came with two versions of IE: the standard and the
    > 64-bit. Question: is there any advantage of using the 64-bit version?
    > Any new capabilities, is the speed better, look better, or what. No I
    > haven't tried it yet -- don't want the system to default to it, or
    > something weird beyond my ability to revert. Thanks.
    >
    > EW
    >
    >


    In theory, the 64-bit should be remarkably faster, in practice there are
    some web-applications (Adobe Flash) that don't work with 64-bit Explorer, so
    the speed might not be there.

    You have two options, use 32-bit because you know it will always work, or
    use 64-bit until it doesn't work and then start the 32-bit version for that
    Website.
     
  7. Leonard Grey

    Leonard Grey Flightless Bird

    Why should the 64-bit version of IE 8 be "remarkably faster" in theory
    or in practice?
    ---
    Leonard Grey
    Errare humanum est

    Jeff Strickland wrote:
    > "Lone Star" <ewyatt__del@excite.com> wrote in message
    > news:hiob86$fp9$1@news.datemas.de...
    >> My new Windows 7 laptop came with two versions of IE: the standard and the
    >> 64-bit. Question: is there any advantage of using the 64-bit version?
    >> Any new capabilities, is the speed better, look better, or what. No I
    >> haven't tried it yet -- don't want the system to default to it, or
    >> something weird beyond my ability to revert. Thanks.
    >>
    >> EW
    >>
    >>

    >
    > In theory, the 64-bit should be remarkably faster, in practice there are
    > some web-applications (Adobe Flash) that don't work with 64-bit Explorer, so
    > the speed might not be there.
    >
    > You have two options, use 32-bit because you know it will always work, or
    > use 64-bit until it doesn't work and then start the 32-bit version for that
    > Website.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
  8. rob^_^

    rob^_^ Flightless Bird

    A bigger Bus. More bits can travel on each clock tick.

    "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    news:-OLjQRmglKHA.2184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
    > Why should the 64-bit version of IE 8 be "remarkably faster" in theory or
    > in practice?
    > ---
    > Leonard Grey
    > Errare humanum est
    >
    > Jeff Strickland wrote:
    >> "Lone Star" <ewyatt__del@excite.com> wrote in message
    >> news:hiob86$fp9$1@news.datemas.de...
    >>> My new Windows 7 laptop came with two versions of IE: the standard and
    >>> the 64-bit. Question: is there any advantage of using the 64-bit
    >>> version? Any new capabilities, is the speed better, look better, or
    >>> what. No I haven't tried it yet -- don't want the system to default to
    >>> it, or something weird beyond my ability to revert. Thanks.
    >>>
    >>> EW
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> In theory, the 64-bit should be remarkably faster, in practice there are
    >> some web-applications (Adobe Flash) that don't work with 64-bit Explorer,
    >> so the speed might not be there.
    >>
    >> You have two options, use 32-bit because you know it will always work, or
    >> use 64-bit until it doesn't work and then start the 32-bit version for
    >> that Website.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
     
  9. PA Bear [MS MVP]

    PA Bear [MS MVP] Flightless Bird

    IE64-bit is a "level 2" browser; Flash and ActiveX Controls are only
    supported in "level 1" browsers (e.g., IE 32-bit) so they (and consequently
    most Add-ons) don't load in IE 64-bit. See "Levels of browser support" on
    this somewhat related page:
    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc263526.aspx#section2

    Leonard Grey wrote:
    > Why should the 64-bit version of IE 8 be "remarkably faster" in theory
    > or in practice?
    > ---
    > Leonard Grey
    > Errare humanum est
    >
    > Jeff Strickland wrote:
    >> "Lone Star" <ewyatt__del@excite.com> wrote in message
    >> news:hiob86$fp9$1@news.datemas.de...
    >>> My new Windows 7 laptop came with two versions of IE: the standard and
    >>> the
    >>> 64-bit. Question: is there any advantage of using the 64-bit version?
    >>> Any new capabilities, is the speed better, look better, or what. No I
    >>> haven't tried it yet -- don't want the system to default to it, or
    >>> something weird beyond my ability to revert. Thanks.
    >>>
    >>> EW
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> In theory, the 64-bit should be remarkably faster, in practice there are
    >> some web-applications (Adobe Flash) that don't work with 64-bit Explorer,
    >> so the speed might not be there.
    >>
    >> You have two options, use 32-bit because you know it will always work, or
    >> use 64-bit until it doesn't work and then start the 32-bit version for
    >> that
    >> Website.
     
  10. Leonard Grey

    Leonard Grey Flightless Bird

    Those are hardware characteristics unrelated to Internet Explorer or
    even to 64-bit Windows.

    The purpose of 64-bit computing is to address substantially more memory.
    This will make any application run faster /if/ it can take advantage of
    the extra memory. I doubt that's true of many web pages on the public
    internet at present

    In addition, Microsoft has taken the opportunity to harden its 64-bit
    OSes by requiring that drivers be digitally signed, to combat rootkits.
    ---
    Leonard Grey
    Errare humanum est

    rob^_^ wrote:
    > A bigger Bus. More bits can travel on each clock tick.
    >
    > "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    > news:-OLjQRmglKHA.2184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
    >> Why should the 64-bit version of IE 8 be "remarkably faster" in theory
    >> or in practice?
    >> ---
    >> Leonard Grey
    >> Errare humanum est
    >>
    >> Jeff Strickland wrote:
    >>> "Lone Star" <ewyatt__del@excite.com> wrote in message
    >>> news:hiob86$fp9$1@news.datemas.de...
    >>>> My new Windows 7 laptop came with two versions of IE: the standard
    >>>> and the 64-bit. Question: is there any advantage of using the
    >>>> 64-bit version? Any new capabilities, is the speed better, look
    >>>> better, or what. No I haven't tried it yet -- don't want the system
    >>>> to default to it, or something weird beyond my ability to revert.
    >>>> Thanks.
    >>>>
    >>>> EW
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> In theory, the 64-bit should be remarkably faster, in practice there
    >>> are some web-applications (Adobe Flash) that don't work with 64-bit
    >>> Explorer, so the speed might not be there.
    >>>
    >>> You have two options, use 32-bit because you know it will always
    >>> work, or use 64-bit until it doesn't work and then start the 32-bit
    >>> version for that Website.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
     
  11. Jeff Strickland

    Jeff Strickland Flightless Bird

    "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    news:-OLjQRmglKHA.2184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
    > Why should the 64-bit version of IE 8 be "remarkably faster" in theory or
    > in practice?


    Because 64-bits process twice as much data in the same time slice.
     
  12. rob^_^

    rob^_^ Flightless Bird

    Ta!

    "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    news:-OiMuDihlKHA.2592@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
    > Those are hardware characteristics unrelated to Internet Explorer or even
    > to 64-bit Windows.
    >
    > The purpose of 64-bit computing is to address substantially more memory.
    > This will make any application run faster /if/ it can take advantage of
    > the extra memory. I doubt that's true of many web pages on the public
    > internet at present
    >
    > In addition, Microsoft has taken the opportunity to harden its 64-bit OSes
    > by requiring that drivers be digitally signed, to combat rootkits.
    > ---
    > Leonard Grey
    > Errare humanum est
    >
    > rob^_^ wrote:
    >> A bigger Bus. More bits can travel on each clock tick.
    >>
    >> "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    >> news:-OLjQRmglKHA.2184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
    >>> Why should the 64-bit version of IE 8 be "remarkably faster" in theory
    >>> or in practice?
    >>> ---
    >>> Leonard Grey
    >>> Errare humanum est
    >>>
    >>> Jeff Strickland wrote:
    >>>> "Lone Star" <ewyatt__del@excite.com> wrote in message
    >>>> news:hiob86$fp9$1@news.datemas.de...
    >>>>> My new Windows 7 laptop came with two versions of IE: the standard and
    >>>>> the 64-bit. Question: is there any advantage of using the 64-bit
    >>>>> version? Any new capabilities, is the speed better, look better, or
    >>>>> what. No I haven't tried it yet -- don't want the system to default
    >>>>> to it, or something weird beyond my ability to revert. Thanks.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> EW
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> In theory, the 64-bit should be remarkably faster, in practice there
    >>>> are some web-applications (Adobe Flash) that don't work with 64-bit
    >>>> Explorer, so the speed might not be there.
    >>>>
    >>>> You have two options, use 32-bit because you know it will always work,
    >>>> or use 64-bit until it doesn't work and then start the 32-bit version
    >>>> for that Website.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>

    >
     
  13. justHenson

    justHenson Flightless Bird

    From what I've read, 64-bit browsers can run 64-bit ActiveX controls. Do
    many of these exist? If so, why not? Are 64-bit controls just wildly
    unpopular?

    - Henson

    "PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote:

    > IE64-bit is a "level 2" browser; Flash and ActiveX Controls are only
    > supported in "level 1" browsers (e.g., IE 32-bit) so they (and consequently
    > most Add-ons) don't load in IE 64-bit. See "Levels of browser support" on
    > this somewhat related page:
    > http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc263526.aspx#section2
     
  14. Leonard Grey

    Leonard Grey Flightless Bird

    No, my friend. You misunderstand 64-bit computing.

    The "64" refers to the number 2 raised to the 64th power, which is an
    absurdly high number that indicates the largest memory address that the
    computer can access. No consumer version of Windows can use that much
    memory; I believe 64-bit Windows 7 [Professional and Ultimate] can
    access as much as 192GB of memory.

    By contrast, the highest memory address available to a 32-bit computer
    is 2 raised to the 32nd power, or 4,294,967,296, which is 4GB. That
    explains why 32-bit Windows can use a maximum of 4GB, although some of
    that is used by the system.

    64-bit computing is a boon to memory-intensive applications, since it
    allows you to equip your computer with more RAM. And to the extent that
    more RAM is available, all applications will run faster. But that's
    because of the added memory; there's nothing inherently faster about a
    64-bit computer.
    ---
    Leonard Grey
    Errare humanum est

    Jeff Strickland wrote:
    > "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    > news:-OLjQRmglKHA.2184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
    >> Why should the 64-bit version of IE 8 be "remarkably faster" in theory or
    >> in practice?

    >
    > Because 64-bits process twice as much data in the same time slice.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
  15. Tom Lake

    Tom Lake Flightless Bird

    "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    news:exiTYWolKHA.2780@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
    > No, my friend. You misunderstand 64-bit computing.


    > 64-bit computing is a boon to memory-intensive applications, since it
    > allows you to equip your computer with more RAM. And to the extent that
    > more RAM is available, all applications will run faster. But that's
    > because of the added memory; there's nothing inherently faster about a
    > 64-bit computer.
    > ---
    > Leonard Grey
    > Errare humanum est


    It's not just memory. A 64-bit CPU will perform 64-bit integer arithmetic
    faster than a 32-bit CPU unless both use the coprocessor instructions.
    Even then, when moving large numbers around, a 64-bit CPU does it faster
    than 32-bit.

    Tom Lake
     
  16. Jeff Strickland

    Jeff Strickland Flightless Bird

    Let's assume for the moment that there are 4G of RAM in the system -- the
    max RAM of a 32-bit environment.

    Wouldn't the same volume of data pass through the RAM faster on a 64-bit
    system as opposed to the 32-bit system? If the same data through the same
    memory space happens faster at 64 bits than 32, then wouldn't the system be
    faster as a result of doubling the bit rate of the bus?

    I get that the Internet is not quite ready for 64-bit systems, but that's
    not the fault of the systems, it's the fault of web developement. No worries
    though, I'm sure the development is not far behind.

    I happen to have 4G of RAM running under XP Pro, and I'm pleased with the
    speed of my system -- but I'm not a particularly heavy graphics user, which
    is RAM-intensive.








    "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    news:exiTYWolKHA.2780@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
    > No, my friend. You misunderstand 64-bit computing.
    >
    > The "64" refers to the number 2 raised to the 64th power, which is an
    > absurdly high number that indicates the largest memory address that the
    > computer can access. No consumer version of Windows can use that much
    > memory; I believe 64-bit Windows 7 [Professional and Ultimate] can access
    > as much as 192GB of memory.
    >
    > By contrast, the highest memory address available to a 32-bit computer is
    > 2 raised to the 32nd power, or 4,294,967,296, which is 4GB. That explains
    > why 32-bit Windows can use a maximum of 4GB, although some of that is used
    > by the system.
    >
    > 64-bit computing is a boon to memory-intensive applications, since it
    > allows you to equip your computer with more RAM. And to the extent that
    > more RAM is available, all applications will run faster. But that's
    > because of the added memory; there's nothing inherently faster about a
    > 64-bit computer.
    > ---
    > Leonard Grey
    > Errare humanum est
    >
    > Jeff Strickland wrote:
    >> "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    >> news:-OLjQRmglKHA.2184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
    >>> Why should the 64-bit version of IE 8 be "remarkably faster" in theory
    >>> or in practice?

    >>
    >> Because 64-bits process twice as much data in the same time slice.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
     
  17. PA Bear [MS MVP]

    PA Bear [MS MVP] Flightless Bird

    Tom Lake wrote:
    > "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    > news:exiTYWolKHA.2780@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
    >> No, my friend. You misunderstand 64-bit computing.

    >
    >> 64-bit computing is a boon to memory-intensive applications, since it
    >> allows you to equip your computer with more RAM. And to the extent that
    >> more RAM is available, all applications will run faster. But that's
    >> because of the added memory; there's nothing inherently faster about a
    >> 64-bit computer.
    >> ---
    >> Leonard Grey
    >> Errare humanum est

    >
    > It's not just memory. A 64-bit CPU will perform 64-bit integer arithmetic
    > faster than a 32-bit CPU unless both use the coprocessor instructions.
    > Even then, when moving large numbers around, a 64-bit CPU does it faster
    > than 32-bit.


    <zzzzzzzzzzzz...>
     
  18. Leonard Grey

    Leonard Grey Flightless Bird

    The data transfer rate depends on hardware, not software.
    ---
    Leonard Grey
    Errare humanum est

    Jeff Strickland wrote:
    > Let's assume for the moment that there are 4G of RAM in the system -- the
    > max RAM of a 32-bit environment.
    >
    > Wouldn't the same volume of data pass through the RAM faster on a 64-bit
    > system as opposed to the 32-bit system? If the same data through the same
    > memory space happens faster at 64 bits than 32, then wouldn't the system be
    > faster as a result of doubling the bit rate of the bus?
    >
    > I get that the Internet is not quite ready for 64-bit systems, but that's
    > not the fault of the systems, it's the fault of web developement. No worries
    > though, I'm sure the development is not far behind.
    >
    > I happen to have 4G of RAM running under XP Pro, and I'm pleased with the
    > speed of my system -- but I'm not a particularly heavy graphics user, which
    > is RAM-intensive.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    > news:exiTYWolKHA.2780@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
    >> No, my friend. You misunderstand 64-bit computing.
    >>
    >> The "64" refers to the number 2 raised to the 64th power, which is an
    >> absurdly high number that indicates the largest memory address that the
    >> computer can access. No consumer version of Windows can use that much
    >> memory; I believe 64-bit Windows 7 [Professional and Ultimate] can access
    >> as much as 192GB of memory.
    >>
    >> By contrast, the highest memory address available to a 32-bit computer is
    >> 2 raised to the 32nd power, or 4,294,967,296, which is 4GB. That explains
    >> why 32-bit Windows can use a maximum of 4GB, although some of that is used
    >> by the system.
    >>
    >> 64-bit computing is a boon to memory-intensive applications, since it
    >> allows you to equip your computer with more RAM. And to the extent that
    >> more RAM is available, all applications will run faster. But that's
    >> because of the added memory; there's nothing inherently faster about a
    >> 64-bit computer.
    >> ---
    >> Leonard Grey
    >> Errare humanum est
    >>
    >> Jeff Strickland wrote:
    >>> "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    >>> news:-OLjQRmglKHA.2184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
    >>>> Why should the 64-bit version of IE 8 be "remarkably faster" in theory
    >>>> or in practice?
    >>> Because 64-bits process twice as much data in the same time slice.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >
     
  19. rob^_^

    rob^_^ Flightless Bird

    ditto. How many seats are on the bus.

    "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    news:#b6hn9tlKHA.1648@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
    > The data transfer rate depends on hardware, not software.
    > ---
    > Leonard Grey
    > Errare humanum est
    >
    > Jeff Strickland wrote:
    >> Let's assume for the moment that there are 4G of RAM in the system -- the
    >> max RAM of a 32-bit environment.
    >>
    >> Wouldn't the same volume of data pass through the RAM faster on a 64-bit
    >> system as opposed to the 32-bit system? If the same data through the same
    >> memory space happens faster at 64 bits than 32, then wouldn't the system
    >> be faster as a result of doubling the bit rate of the bus?
    >>
    >> I get that the Internet is not quite ready for 64-bit systems, but that's
    >> not the fault of the systems, it's the fault of web developement. No
    >> worries though, I'm sure the development is not far behind.
    >>
    >> I happen to have 4G of RAM running under XP Pro, and I'm pleased with the
    >> speed of my system -- but I'm not a particularly heavy graphics user,
    >> which is RAM-intensive.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    >> news:exiTYWolKHA.2780@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
    >>> No, my friend. You misunderstand 64-bit computing.
    >>>
    >>> The "64" refers to the number 2 raised to the 64th power, which is an
    >>> absurdly high number that indicates the largest memory address that the
    >>> computer can access. No consumer version of Windows can use that much
    >>> memory; I believe 64-bit Windows 7 [Professional and Ultimate] can
    >>> access as much as 192GB of memory.
    >>>
    >>> By contrast, the highest memory address available to a 32-bit computer
    >>> is 2 raised to the 32nd power, or 4,294,967,296, which is 4GB. That
    >>> explains why 32-bit Windows can use a maximum of 4GB, although some of
    >>> that is used by the system.
    >>>
    >>> 64-bit computing is a boon to memory-intensive applications, since it
    >>> allows you to equip your computer with more RAM. And to the extent that
    >>> more RAM is available, all applications will run faster. But that's
    >>> because of the added memory; there's nothing inherently faster about a
    >>> 64-bit computer.
    >>> ---
    >>> Leonard Grey
    >>> Errare humanum est
    >>>
    >>> Jeff Strickland wrote:
    >>>> "Leonard Grey" <l.grey@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    >>>> news:-OLjQRmglKHA.2184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
    >>>>> Why should the 64-bit version of IE 8 be "remarkably faster" in theory
    >>>>> or in practice?
    >>>> Because 64-bits process twice as much data in the same time slice.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>

    >>
     

Share This Page