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

7

Discussion in 'Windows 7' started by Niels Baekmann, May 14, 2010.

  1. Niels Baekmann

    Niels Baekmann Flightless Bird

    64 bit better than 32 bit ?
     
  2. Agent_C

    Agent_C Flightless Bird

    On Sat, 15 May 2010 04:15:53 +0200, "Niels Baekmann" <12.34@56.78>
    wrote:

    >64 bit better than 32 bit ?


    What?
     
  3. Tom Lake

    Tom Lake Flightless Bird

    "Niels Baekmann" <12.34@56.78> wrote in message
    news:Fs2dnUq55ZVHnnPWnZ2dnUVZ8iGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
    > 64 bit better than 32 bit ?


    For what? It's no faster for 32-bit apps.

    Tom Lake
     
  4. Low Dong

    Low Dong Flightless Bird

    It depends on which wine you use. If you go with a Red, then 64 bit may be
    a bit better or a nice White wine, then you could go either way. I would
    have at least 7 glasses of wine then it really doesn't matter.



    "Niels Baekmann" <12.34@56.78> wrote in message
    news:Fs2dnUq55ZVHnnPWnZ2dnUVZ8iGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
    > 64 bit better than 32 bit ?
     
  5. Ken Blake

    Ken Blake Flightless Bird

    On Sat, 15 May 2010 04:15:53 +0200, "Niels Baekmann" <12.34@56.78>
    wrote:

    > 64 bit better than 32 bit ?





    The advantage of running a 64-bit version of Windows mostly exists
    only if you also run 64-bit applications under it. Bear in mind that
    there are very few such applications available yet. If you are
    presently running 32-bit Windows, you don't have any 64-bit
    applications, so to achieve any significant advantage, you not only
    have to replace Windows, but also your applications, *if* (and that's
    a big "if") 64-bit versions exist.

    Also note that you will need 64-bit drivers for all your hardware.
    Those drivers may not all be available, especially if some of your
    hardware is a few years old. So it's possible that you might also have
    to replace things like your printer, scanner, etc.

    So the answer to your question is that it may not be a great idea
    right now. That will undoubtedly change in the near future, as 64-bit
    applications become more available, but for now, 64-bit Windows often
    means some extra trouble and expense for little or no benefit.

    On the other hand, installing 64-bit Windows instead of 32-bit Windows
    makes you able to buy 64-bit software as it becomes available, instead
    of the older 32-bit versions. That means that installing 64-bit
    Windows--even though it may do very little for you at present--puts
    you into a better position for the future.

    One additional point: the 64-bit version lets you use more than the
    approximately 3.1GB of RAM that the 32-bit version can use. Very few
    people need or can make effective use of more than 3.1GB, but if you
    are one of those who can, that's something else to consider.


    Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
     
  6. ray

    ray Flightless Bird

    On Sat, 15 May 2010 04:15:53 +0200, Niels Baekmann wrote:

    > 64 bit better than 32 bit ?


    Is an apple 'better' than an orange?
     
  7. Andy from Dover

    Andy from Dover Flightless Bird

    "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.invalid.com> wrote in message
    news:dt6su5putlk5gcvlqvj7j9e6anaikovfqf@4ax.com...
    > On Sat, 15 May 2010 04:15:53 +0200, "Niels Baekmann" <12.34@56.78>
    > wrote:
    >
    > > 64 bit better than 32 bit ?

    >
    >
    >
    >
    > The advantage of running a 64-bit version of Windows mostly exists
    > only if you also run 64-bit applications under it. Bear in mind that
    > there are very few such applications available yet. If you are
    > presently running 32-bit Windows, you don't have any 64-bit
    > applications, so to achieve any significant advantage, you not only
    > have to replace Windows, but also your applications, *if* (and that's
    > a big "if") 64-bit versions exist.
    >
    > Also note that you will need 64-bit drivers for all your hardware.
    > Those drivers may not all be available, especially if some of your
    > hardware is a few years old. So it's possible that you might also have
    > to replace things like your printer, scanner, etc.
    >
    > So the answer to your question is that it may not be a great idea
    > right now. That will undoubtedly change in the near future, as 64-bit
    > applications become more available, but for now, 64-bit Windows often
    > means some extra trouble and expense for little or no benefit.
    >
    > On the other hand, installing 64-bit Windows instead of 32-bit Windows
    > makes you able to buy 64-bit software as it becomes available, instead
    > of the older 32-bit versions. That means that installing 64-bit
    > Windows--even though it may do very little for you at present--puts
    > you into a better position for the future.
    >
    > One additional point: the 64-bit version lets you use more than the
    > approximately 3.1GB of RAM that the 32-bit version can use. Very few
    > people need or can make effective use of more than 3.1GB, but if you
    > are one of those who can, that's something else to consider.
    >
    >
    > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003

    Thank you Ken. As one who is in the market for a new computer I will take
    your words of wisdom with me on my quest for a new laptop. (serious, no
    sarcasm)
    ;-)
     
  8. Nil

    Nil Flightless Bird

    On 14 May 2010, "Niels Baekmann" <12.34@56.78> wrote in
    alt.windows7.general:

    > 64 bit better than 32 bit ?


    Yes, it's 32 bits better.
     
  9. Bill

    Bill Flightless Bird

    "Nil" <rednoise@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote in message
    news:Xns9D7911A06480Fnilch1@130.133.4.11...
    > On 14 May 2010, "Niels Baekmann" <12.34@56.78> wrote in
    > alt.windows7.general:
    >
    >> 64 bit better than 32 bit ?

    >
    > Yes, it's 32 bits better.


    Some might say, practically 2^32 ~ 4 billion times as good....
     
  10. Nil

    Nil Flightless Bird

    On 15 May 2010, "Bill" <Bill_NOSPAM@comcast.net> wrote in
    alt.windows7.general:

    > Some might say, practically 2^32 ~ 4 billion times as good....


    Wow, that's really good! I gotta get me somma that. Everybody knows
    that if a little is good, more is better.
     
  11. LSMFT

    LSMFT Flightless Bird

    Niels Baekmann wrote:
    > 64 bit better than 32 bit ?


    It's not a matter of better. It's a matter of fit. 32 for 32 bit
    processor, 64 for 64 bit processor. That all. 32 will run on a 64 bit
    but why do that if you have a choice? 64 will NOT run on a 32.

    --
    LSMFT

    If I wasn't me I wouldn't like me either..........
     
  12. Al Smith

    Al Smith Flightless Bird

    Niels Baekmann wrote:
    > 64 bit better than 32 bit ?



    It's, like, twice as much, dude. How can it not be better?

    -Al-
     
  13. Ken Blake

    Ken Blake Flightless Bird

    On Sat, 15 May 2010 01:07:31 -0400, "Andy from Dover"
    <cheadle@juno.com> wrote:


    > Thank you Ken.



    You're welcome. Glad to help.




    > As one who is in the market for a new computer I will take
    > your words of wisdom with me on my quest for a new laptop. (serious, no
    > sarcasm)
    > ;-)
    >

    Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
     
  14. Ken Blake

    Ken Blake Flightless Bird

    On 15 May 2010 04:43:12 GMT, ray <ray@zianet.com> wrote:

    > On Sat, 15 May 2010 04:15:53 +0200, Niels Baekmann wrote:
    >
    > > 64 bit better than 32 bit ?

    >
    > Is an apple 'better' than an orange?




    That's a matter of taste. The differences between 32-bit Windows and
    64-bit Windows are not simply a matter of taste.


    Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
     
  15. Death

    Death Flightless Bird

    Niels Baekmann wrote:

    > 64 bit better than 32 bit ?


    18,446,744,073,709,551,616 is better, if that's your lucky number.
    4,294,967,296 is smaller.

    --
    Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,
    Mors venit velociter quae neminem veretur.
     
  16. McG.

    McG. Flightless Bird

    "Niels Baekmann" <12.34@56.78> wrote in message
    news:Fs2dnUq55ZVHnnPWnZ2dnUVZ8iGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
    > 64 bit better than 32 bit ?


    Absolutely.

    McG.
     
  17. Bruce Chambers

    Bruce Chambers Flightless Bird

    Niels Baekmann wrote:
    > 64 bit better than 32 bit ?



    For what specific purpose?

    On what specific hardware platform?

    Running which specific applications?

    Answers to such purely subjective questions depend entirely upon the
    specific circumstances to which they apply, and you've divulfed none of
    this.

    You might as well try here:

    Psychic Friends Network
    (800) 592-7827


    --

    Bruce Chambers

    Help us help you:
    http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

    http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375

    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
    safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

    Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

    The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
    killed a great many philosophers.
    ~ Denis Diderot
     
  18. FiOS-Dave

    FiOS-Dave Flightless Bird

    64 bit systems are inherently safer, due to better Address Space
    Randomization.

    Dave

    "Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message
    news:hsp3fa$h1b$1@speranza.aioe.org...
    > Niels Baekmann wrote:
    >> 64 bit better than 32 bit ?

    >
    >
    > For what specific purpose?
    >
    > On what specific hardware platform?
    >
    > Running which specific applications?
    >
    > Answers to such purely subjective questions depend entirely upon the
    > specific circumstances to which they apply, and you've divulfed none of
    > this.
    >
    > You might as well try here:
    >
    > Psychic Friends Network
    > (800) 592-7827
    >
    >
    > --
    >
    > Bruce Chambers
    >
    > Help us help you:
    > http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
    >
    > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375
    >
    > They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
    > safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin
    >
    > Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand
    > Russell
    >
    > The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
    > killed a great many philosophers.
    > ~ Denis Diderot
     
  19. Tom Lake

    Tom Lake Flightless Bird

    > It's not a matter of better. It's a matter of fit. 32 for 32 bit
    > processor, 64 for 64 bit processor. That all. 32 will run on a 64 bit
    > but why do that if you have a choice? 64 will NOT run on a 32.
    >
    > --
    > LSMFT


    LSMFT=Lucky Strike Means Fine Tobacco???
     
  20. Tom Lake

    Tom Lake Flightless Bird

    > Is an apple 'better' than an orange?

    Yes?
     

Share This Page