why did MS release Vista 32?
- Thread starter Glaucus
- Start date
Dirtydog you need to experience Visual Studio crashing on an XP machine with 2GB memoryThe pain
Sometimes I go and make a cuppa...!
I can't comment on that as I've never used it
Is 2GB not enough for its demands?!
Dirtydog you need to experience Visual Studio crashing on an XP machine with 2GB memory
At work I've been running Visual Studio and SQL on a machine with 512mb and XP for the past 3 yrs. Was as stable as a rock. Only problems was it was a little slow. We've now upgraded the same machines to 4GB of ram and there was a big speed improvement. No issues with stability though.
At home I'm running Visual Studio on Vista 32 and now 64 and tbh I haven't noticed any difference in stability. TBH its a pain getting everything working on Vista as you need patches, different version of Studio and SQL and IIs etc.
I'd really like to get Server 2008 up and running as a workstation. As it was really a lot faster.
Did I just get hugely lucky with XP x64 then? I've never had a single driver issue with it - all the hardware inside my box works, my wireless adapter works, my USB TV card works, my printer/scanner/copier/kitchen sink works....
Obviously people must have had problems with it for it to gain the "crappy drivers" reputation it has, but I've never come across a single problem with it.
You've never had VS crash then? Never got the WinForms designer into a pickle or anything??
No I agree with you. I think the driver support was and is pretty good. A bit patchy at the start but it got better. And to be honest most people running XP x64 don't have armies of USB peripherals. They only need their Intel chipset drivers, some Nvidia/Ati drivers and some sound drivers. That is pretty much it and the availability of those drivers was never a problem for x64.
But I still think XP x64 lags behind Vista x64 a bit for mass market driver support. All the crappy USB web cams and crap like that I am talking about
Even firefox crashing requires explorer to restart. Explorer restarting is the norm. Xp closing just the crashed app is not the norm. Unless you can kill the process in manager.
I only have one problem with vista and it is a big one. Is slow file copying and this doesn't apply to everyone using vista.
I only have one problem with vista and it is a big one. Is slow file copying and this doesn't apply to everyone using vista.
your machine sounds flaky mate. I suspect issues beyond the fault of XP itself.
Multiple machines running different editions of xp
Must be PEBKAC then
whats that stand for.
it doesn't happen often, usually I just closed a crashed application with the process manager. but if that doesn't work. Then the explorer will restart.
I think you will find that PEBKAC applies to IT Pro's too. No offence to those whom take their job seriously but in most IT departments the world over it takes the average Joe like me and you to sort out the problems of others and find solutions from MS to take to the table and solve a conflict and a driver error and once all the problems are solved in paperwork and solution settings for a specific setup with a new O/S, the IT Cowboys jump onboard saying it is the best thing since sliced cheese.
The experience of this is in the eating. I was one of the Beta testers of XP and one of my IT Associates said that there were too many problems with XP and it will never take off. He was using windows 2000 and 98 at the time because those were the O/S's he had to support through his job and he was not going to fault find a new Operating system. That was in 2001 and it is 2008 now and he is still on Windows XP moaning that it will never catch on. His job has just taken a shipload of new PC's and in traditional form he and his associates are having to do 3 months crash course in Vista. And he has never even touched a pc with Vista on it. Would you trust a person whom has to do a crash course on an O/S and is relying on other users solutions to solve his. It is about time MS gave us the users more credit for bringing issues to light and helping with the solution. And not rewarding the hypocrites whom call themselves IT Pro's who live in their own little world cocooned from the real working environments around them.
Walking into Somewhere like PC World and ask them a few questions about Vista and I bet they draw a blank apart from the fact that they sell it. Their famous technical department is full of pc's running XP and it will cost an arm and a leg for technical advice you can get here for free.
There are many forums all over the world well known to users over the years from other designated support clients of the shop selling their goods or to competitors which I am not allowed to list here for breach of the rules but we all know them and have often visited them for advice on one thing or another. Usually you get good advice but the idea is to take that advice and seek out the answers for yourself and research what you do not understand about the advice given you. AND its free. Apart from an internet connection that is all it costs you.
The 32 bit age is practically over apart from the Bios restrictions we have an all new format of Motherboard coming out soon without the 64k Bios restrictions and no MSdos limitations because all memory will be avaiolable to the O/S page. The limitation we have at present is legacy support. Once that is gone there will be no restriction on file attributes and boot tables, but alas still the attributes of bad or lazy programmers.
This my friends is where the problem lies. we have a good operating system but because there are some lazy programmers out there we don't get the support for 64 bit as we should because around 86% of pc owners are still using a 32 bit Operating system. A 32 bit O/S can only completely address 4GB of ram. This includes graphics memory and I/O protocols limited by a legacy Bios. The legacy bios is what slows up boot time because of addressing the I/O and IRQ addresses it has to compartmentalise every shadow address and shared IRQ instead of giving complete address access to input and output without a shareload.
Many have discussed this over the years on Technet, but until some Motherboard company takes the plunge and does away with it we will forever have the same restriction. The motherboard infrastructure has been around for years it just needs that nudge to give it free unparalelled reign.
Still I am sorry for boring you but I just had to say these things if no one else did.
The experience of this is in the eating. I was one of the Beta testers of XP and one of my IT Associates said that there were too many problems with XP and it will never take off. He was using windows 2000 and 98 at the time because those were the O/S's he had to support through his job and he was not going to fault find a new Operating system. That was in 2001 and it is 2008 now and he is still on Windows XP moaning that it will never catch on. His job has just taken a shipload of new PC's and in traditional form he and his associates are having to do 3 months crash course in Vista. And he has never even touched a pc with Vista on it. Would you trust a person whom has to do a crash course on an O/S and is relying on other users solutions to solve his. It is about time MS gave us the users more credit for bringing issues to light and helping with the solution. And not rewarding the hypocrites whom call themselves IT Pro's who live in their own little world cocooned from the real working environments around them.
Walking into Somewhere like PC World and ask them a few questions about Vista and I bet they draw a blank apart from the fact that they sell it. Their famous technical department is full of pc's running XP and it will cost an arm and a leg for technical advice you can get here for free.
There are many forums all over the world well known to users over the years from other designated support clients of the shop selling their goods or to competitors which I am not allowed to list here for breach of the rules but we all know them and have often visited them for advice on one thing or another. Usually you get good advice but the idea is to take that advice and seek out the answers for yourself and research what you do not understand about the advice given you. AND its free. Apart from an internet connection that is all it costs you.
The 32 bit age is practically over apart from the Bios restrictions we have an all new format of Motherboard coming out soon without the 64k Bios restrictions and no MSdos limitations because all memory will be avaiolable to the O/S page. The limitation we have at present is legacy support. Once that is gone there will be no restriction on file attributes and boot tables, but alas still the attributes of bad or lazy programmers.
This my friends is where the problem lies. we have a good operating system but because there are some lazy programmers out there we don't get the support for 64 bit as we should because around 86% of pc owners are still using a 32 bit Operating system. A 32 bit O/S can only completely address 4GB of ram. This includes graphics memory and I/O protocols limited by a legacy Bios. The legacy bios is what slows up boot time because of addressing the I/O and IRQ addresses it has to compartmentalise every shadow address and shared IRQ instead of giving complete address access to input and output without a shareload.
Many have discussed this over the years on Technet, but until some Motherboard company takes the plunge and does away with it we will forever have the same restriction. The motherboard infrastructure has been around for years it just needs that nudge to give it free unparalelled reign.
Still I am sorry for boring you but I just had to say these things if no one else did.
Last edited:
Not that I can remember. I'm mainly working on ASP.Net applications and don't use the MS controls or forms that much at all. On my work machine, it only has one issue, it blue screens from a cold boot about once every month. When you reboot it its fine. Theres some driver issue with the hardware that I've neve been able to figure out. But thats not an OS issue.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 4,185
I've never had explorer restart when an application crashes, other than IE.
I think that only applies to bad IT depts. Not all IT depts are bad. The vast majority of users have no interest in computers other than they work. The avergae Joe you are talking about it actually a Hobbyist. Hobbyists aren't limited by time, or money restraints in the same way other people are, so its not a fair or useful comparision. The Average Joe in the real world has no interest in computers.
Thats because its shop. Full of sales people (not IT staff) with little or no training and paid relatively little. The only interest the shop has is in making a profit. Its the same thing if you go into a big car dealer vs a custom, specialist shop.
The vast majority of people are also still running motherboards which do not fully support 64bit. Software, or programmers are not going to get around that, without new hardware. Most people who just use their PC's for office work, email and the web do not need 4GB of ram, or a 64bit OS either. So companies have to consider does the potential market and profit justify the move to 64bit. It will happen over time, like any new technology, it takes time to gain mass acceptance.
The problems with Vista 32 is not it inability to access 4GB+ or instability vs Vista 64. Thats not a problem for the vast majoirity of users. MS lost slight of what the user wants out of their OS. For example in XP when I'm copying a folder from one driver to another I get a dialog thats far more useful than Vista where often you can't see details of the copying. Another one is if I copy a folder from my XP machine to my Vista machine Vista ignores the source folder structure wants to move docs to one folder and pictures to another. This kinda of nannying is counterintuitive. New users will be completely baffled why there files aren't where they expect them to be, or why Vista doesn't do what its asked.
I don't think a lot of people notice it tbh as they don't move around large amounts of data. Its bit like most people haven't come up problems with user rights/ownership of files and folder yet, were Vista won't let you do things to your own files, unless you reassign rights etc.
Sorry to dig up and old ( But still relevant thread ) but I have used XP64 since its launch over 3 years ago.
My main PC has moved to Vista64 a couple of weeks ago, but this is the 8th time in a year ( or so ) and it might stay, might not... At this time its perfect and I was to stay with Vista I really do.
However...
I am in a lucky position financially, and I have extended my house and built myself up a LAN room, and all these PCs are now also running XP64.
2 I have to also say are running Vista, one is Prem32 and the other is biz32 and they are fine.
Now when I first tried XP64, I tried the trial version and I had 2 issues with it
1 - My BT Voyager USB Modem
2 - My Epson C42 Printer
I no longer have that Epson although the drivers do now exist for it, and the Modem was simply replaced with a router.
I have NEVER seen a BSOD on XP64 ( If I have, I really cannot remember ) and the only issues that I do have, but these same issues also apply to Vista too, are :-
1 - Partition Magic 8 - Replaced with Acronis
2 - O&O DeFrag - But its available in both 32 and 64 Bit versions
3 - Page DeFrag - Great little tool that I do miss
4 - XG MidiFile playback
As for games, I have never come across a game that does not run better in XP64 than it does in XP32.
Basically I decided almost 3 years ago that I will neve3r go back to a 32Bit O/S and I have stuck with that.
The only reason why 2 PCs on the LAN are 32Bit Vista is that a friend sold me business 32 for cheap as chips and then when it failed to play DVDs, my mummy bought me Premium for xmas last year and I just didnt want to waste them.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 3,710
On Vista you know your licence covers both 32 & 64? You can install x64 on those two machines assuming they are x64 capable.
No it does not.
The ultimate boix set I got has a 32Bit DVD and a 64Bit DVD, but I can only use ONE of those at any one time.
Sure, that one serial covers me whether I use 32 or 64 but I can only have one of them installed at any one time.
The ultimate boix set I got has a 32Bit DVD and a 64Bit DVD, but I can only use ONE of those at any one time.
Sure, that one serial covers me whether I use 32 or 64 but I can only have one of them installed at any one time.