windows vista 32/64 bit

Soldato
Joined
7 May 2006
Posts
12,192
Location
London, Ealing
To clear up the iTunes issue, iTunes works fine on Vista x64, the CD burning driver doesn't however. This can be downloaded separately from here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itunes#_note-28

However, synching the iPhone and iPod touch will not work because these new iPods use HFS+ as the file system, and Apple install a driver onto Vista x86 to allow iTunes to read them. I have no idea how they managed to get the driver signed without also making an x64 version.

Im guessing that they can if if they are showing that the 64bit version is being worked on & there may be a time frame agreement.
 
Associate
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
725
Location
York
Vista 32 on my intel would let me see 3710 MB of this according to the sidebar widget, I went 64bit on this one, only because I had a licence. I do not think the 64 bit version was any slower than 32 bit, but having the extra RAM (6GB in main rig) lets me have a lot more apps running at the same time - multiple firefox (3 separate ones each with say 20 tabs open, eats up the ram (like IE7 or any browser) and the beast still flies.

Peeps who come round and are running 32 bit XP can't believe how much my rig can do at the same time.

I am happy with 64 bit and didn't notice any difference to 32 bit vista, the biggest change/shock was actually going from XP to Vista as I had to self learns the 'design features' within vista, oh and the extra disc space needed.

I'm with Acidhell2 here in that I know that my OS won't need any major updates, and I upgrade 32 bit apps to 64 bit when they are released. Office 2007 etc. The only issue I had is that vista x64 runs the 32 bit sidebar version by default. Once I upped this to the 64 bit, widgets like the msn one now work properly.

Personally I don't think about whether the OS is 64 bit or 32 bit, everything I have thrown at it works, including itunes.

HTH
 
Soldato
Joined
7 May 2006
Posts
12,192
Location
London, Ealing
Vista 32 on my intel would let me see 3710 MB of this according to the sidebar widget, I went 64bit on this one, only because I had a licence. I do not think the 64 bit version was any slower than 32 bit, but having the extra RAM (6GB in main rig) lets me have a lot more apps running at the same time - multiple firefox (3 separate ones each with say 20 tabs open, eats up the ram (like IE7 or any browser) and the beast still flies.

Peeps who come round and are running 32 bit XP can't believe how much my rig can do at the same time.

I am happy with 64 bit and didn't notice any difference to 32 bit vista, the biggest change/shock was actually going from XP to Vista as I had to self learns the 'design features' within vista, oh and the extra disc space needed.

I'm with Acidhell2 here in that I know that my OS won't need any major updates, and I upgrade 32 bit apps to 64 bit when they are released. Office 2007 etc. The only issue I had is that vista x64 runs the 32 bit sidebar version by default. Once I upped this to the 64 bit, widgets like the msn one now work properly.

Personally I don't think about whether the OS is 64 bit or 32 bit, everything I have thrown at it works, including itunes.

HTH
Where can i find the 64bit sidebar ?
 
Associate
Joined
29 Jan 2006
Posts
857
Location
Wirral
So if i buy 64bit OEM vista i can install and use 32bit version? Sorry missed that bit but thanks for the info if thats correct. Excuse if this is side tracking the thread.

Eventually got round to ringing Microsoft for a replacement/supplementary disc as per my previous post (32bit OEM to 64bit OEM Home Basic)

After a short conversation I was told as I don't have a Microsoft System Builders number they cannot send me a disk. They went on to say I should send the OEM disk back to where I purchased it from and purchase the full retail package as the OEM licence I have is not valid for what I'm using it for?

Now after many attempts to explain my situation it felt like I was talking to a traffic warden and getting now where fast.

In a nutshell the man at Microsoft said that the OEM OS packages are for their registered system builders only, and not for resale onto a private system builder as he described me.

Can someone shed some light on this?
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Nov 2003
Posts
36,745
Location
Southampton, UK
In a nutshell the man at Microsoft said that the OEM OS packages are for their registered system builders only, and not for resale onto a private system builder as he described me.

Can someone shed some light on this?

That is, quite frankly wrong. You have never been required to register to be a system builder. If you want a 64 bit disc, goto the link at the bottom of my posts in the licensing sticky and there is a link to a MS knowledgebase article.

I'm a registered system builder and I couldn't tell you what my 'Microsoft System Builders number' is :confused:

Burnsy
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
29 Jan 2006
Posts
857
Location
Wirral
thanks for the quick reply.

What is annoying is the nice man from MS only told me this after he took my name, address, telephone number and email address. Lets see if anything arrives from them....

Anway I've read again the link you posted - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/326246

especially the OEM section which does say to replace your media you need to contact the OEM for replacement, whose details will be on the COA and only to contact MS if the OEM is no longer in business.

Whilst it looks like I would be licensed to use my 32bit key on a 64bit version of Vista, obtaining a disc might not be so easy.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Nov 2003
Posts
36,745
Location
Southampton, UK
thanks for the quick reply.

What is annoying is the nice man from MS only told me this after he took my name, address, telephone number and email address. Lets see if anything arrives from them....

Anway I've read again the link you posted - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/326246

especially the OEM section which does say to replace your media you need to contact the OEM for replacement, whose details will be on the COA and only to contact MS if the OEM is no longer in business.

Whilst it looks like I would be licensed to use my 32bit key on a 64bit version of Vista, obtaining a disc might not be so easy.

Ignore what it says, it's there because of differences in media between system builder and large OEM media. Fill out the form and a disc will be sent :)

Burnsy
 
Associate
Joined
28 Feb 2008
Posts
185
Running the same benchmark 2 times on an identical system can give that small of a difference. The only reason there is even a 32 bit vista is because of semprons/p4s/athlon xps/other old processors, the next version of windows will be 64 bit only.

That isn't actually true, Windows 7 has so far been divulged to be released in 32bit and 64bit versions. So much for Microsoft pushing for progress. I'd switch to x64 if i wasn't bound to a 32bit Mobile Core Duo
 
Associate
Joined
28 Feb 2008
Posts
185
I read it on Softpedia a while back, can't seem to find the news item, it was from a while ago. It does make sense though in a way, there must still be hundreds of thousands of computers in offices that won't be upgraded in 2 years time because they do what they do well. Businesses must already be put off Vista because of the hardware requirements for it, though from how Windows 7 so far has been represented, it would seem Windows 7 might not quite be the resource hog Vista is.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Nov 2003
Posts
36,745
Location
Southampton, UK
though from how Windows 7 so far has been represented, it would seem Windows 7 might not quite be the resource hog Vista is.

Vista isn't a resource hog, it has higher requirements, but is much more efficient with what it has then XP.

Anyway, most businesses will replace PCs that won't run vista fairly soon due to hardware replacement cycles. Perfectly in time to start out a Vista roll out by the start of next year then ;)

Burnsy
 
Associate
Joined
28 Feb 2008
Posts
185
Isn't resource hog a negative play on higher requirements? It might be more efficient, but it demands quite a shift in technology to run properly. My 2 year old laptop with 2Gb RAM doesn't run it too well, and my 4 year old laptop with 512Mb RAM doesn't even pass ACPI when you try and install it, and predictably, when you manage to get it on via other means, it's unusable.

Perhaps, we'll have to wait and see really, now that SP1 is out I'm sure people might start to adopt it.

If they are replacing all their machines, they may as well stick vista 64bit on there then :p
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Nov 2003
Posts
36,745
Location
Southampton, UK
Isn't resource hog a negative play on higher requirements?
No.

It might be more efficient, but it demands quite a shift in technology to run properly. My 2 year old laptop with 2Gb RAM doesn't run it too well, and my 4 year old laptop with 512Mb RAM doesn't even pass ACPI when you try and install it, and predictably, when you manage to get it on via other means, it's unusable.

My old desktop with a P4 2.4 and 1gb ram loves vista.

Burnsy
 
Back
Top Bottom