M
Mad Ad
Flightless Bird
"Bill" <Bill_NOSPAM@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hsb502018k6@news7.newsguy.com...
>
> I'm planning to build a new system (Intel 860 CPU). I was sort of looking
> for a reason to go with the 64-bit version of Windows7, since "they" say,
> 64-bit computing is where the future is. To me, it seems like it's going
> to be a long time in coming. I mean, if MS Office-2010 is being sold as a
> 32-bit app, then what does that say about 64-bit computing at this
> point.... I recall 4 years ago when I last built a system, Vista (64-bit)
> was going to be "the thing"....I steered clear of that bandwagon and never
> switched from XP. I think the problem is most (consumer) software
> development companies don't have much incentive to build for both 32 and
> 64 bit platforms( why should they if people will still buy their 32 bit
> product if that's all there is).
>
> So that's why the road to owning a 64 bit system appears a bit rocky to
> me. Any folks out there running 64-bit Windows7 systems that really like
> them (besides ones that run programs like Photoshop), that would care to
> share their experience? I would be curious to know the ratio of the
> number of systems running 32-bit versus 64-bit versions of Windows7 (in
> case anyone has one). At this point, I've never come very close to using
> all 2GB of the RAM that's on my current XP system.
>
> Bill
>
Bottom line is if you are upgrading from xp/vista, go x64, no question about
it. If you are staying with xp/vista, stick to x32. So far ive had 1 thing
that refused to instal (and a few of them are quite old, i was expecting a
way higher failure rate) and all that took was going to the website to pick
up an x64 version.
Since 7s introduction, more pcs are being supplied with x64 than x32 now. I
was annoyed that MS pushed vista x32 more, but now its all changing with 7.
Finally.
Ad
news:hsb502018k6@news7.newsguy.com...
>
> I'm planning to build a new system (Intel 860 CPU). I was sort of looking
> for a reason to go with the 64-bit version of Windows7, since "they" say,
> 64-bit computing is where the future is. To me, it seems like it's going
> to be a long time in coming. I mean, if MS Office-2010 is being sold as a
> 32-bit app, then what does that say about 64-bit computing at this
> point.... I recall 4 years ago when I last built a system, Vista (64-bit)
> was going to be "the thing"....I steered clear of that bandwagon and never
> switched from XP. I think the problem is most (consumer) software
> development companies don't have much incentive to build for both 32 and
> 64 bit platforms( why should they if people will still buy their 32 bit
> product if that's all there is).
>
> So that's why the road to owning a 64 bit system appears a bit rocky to
> me. Any folks out there running 64-bit Windows7 systems that really like
> them (besides ones that run programs like Photoshop), that would care to
> share their experience? I would be curious to know the ratio of the
> number of systems running 32-bit versus 64-bit versions of Windows7 (in
> case anyone has one). At this point, I've never come very close to using
> all 2GB of the RAM that's on my current XP system.
>
> Bill
>
Bottom line is if you are upgrading from xp/vista, go x64, no question about
it. If you are staying with xp/vista, stick to x32. So far ive had 1 thing
that refused to instal (and a few of them are quite old, i was expecting a
way higher failure rate) and all that took was going to the website to pick
up an x64 version.
Since 7s introduction, more pcs are being supplied with x64 than x32 now. I
was annoyed that MS pushed vista x32 more, but now its all changing with 7.
Finally.
Ad