![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Going xp 64 bit but..
- Thread starter Nick_Leo
- Start date
silent-circuit
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2005
- Messages
- 16,136
Why are you going XP 64bit? Generally speaking if you're going to a Windows based 64bit OS right now you'd be best served by a Vista variant. Your hardware is certainly modern enough that slowdown would not be an issue.
I'm sorry, however, I don't know the answer to your question. AIM classic worked fine under Vista last I checked so I would assume it does in XP 64bit as well, though.
I'm sorry, however, I don't know the answer to your question. AIM classic worked fine under Vista last I checked so I would assume it does in XP 64bit as well, though.
Well i just dont like the look of vista.
silent-circuit
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2005
- Messages
- 16,136
...you can run it in classic mode and turn off UAC, and it's pretty much just like XP. I don't get why people say this. It doesn't look that much different. It doesn't work that much different. It's just like every previous version update of Windows -- very minor changes. Vista 64bit driver support is also far better than XP 64bit driver support.
I guess im not used to change. ive switched to vista many times and was back to xp within the month.
radiatinglines
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2008
- Messages
- 247
You're shooting yourself in the foot going XP, man. Trying to say it's a matter of taste isn't going to help when you're talking to people who actually know what they're talking about.
Joe Average
Ad Blocker - Banned
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,459
And neither does touting the "fact" that you or someone else "knows what they're talking about."
Vista is simply not for everyone, regardless of who, what, when, where, or why, and saying things like those that were just said is simply uncalled for.
If the OP wants to run XP Pro x64, so be it. I personally can't stand Vista myself, that's personal preference and as such should be respected as my decision not to run Vista even though I know it better than 98% of the people out there that don't work for Microsoft and didn't actually create it.
I just don't like it, and that's all that needs to be said.
The OP said he doesn't wish to run Vista, that's all that needs to be said in his case. Respect that and offer advice to answer his question, and move on. Knowing what you're talking about is meaningless when it's tainted by that "holier than thou" attitude laying the smackdown on the OP's decision to simply not run Vista.
Hell, I don't use it (but I have it in VMs), and I've written two stickies here about it as well as helped thousands of people since long before Vista was ever a product on a shelf. Doesn't mean I'm gonna use it as my primary OS...
Vista is simply not for everyone, regardless of who, what, when, where, or why, and saying things like those that were just said is simply uncalled for.
If the OP wants to run XP Pro x64, so be it. I personally can't stand Vista myself, that's personal preference and as such should be respected as my decision not to run Vista even though I know it better than 98% of the people out there that don't work for Microsoft and didn't actually create it.
I just don't like it, and that's all that needs to be said.
The OP said he doesn't wish to run Vista, that's all that needs to be said in his case. Respect that and offer advice to answer his question, and move on. Knowing what you're talking about is meaningless when it's tainted by that "holier than thou" attitude laying the smackdown on the OP's decision to simply not run Vista.
Hell, I don't use it (but I have it in VMs), and I've written two stickies here about it as well as helped thousands of people since long before Vista was ever a product on a shelf. Doesn't mean I'm gonna use it as my primary OS...
Guitarrasdeamor
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2008
- Messages
- 3,622
Vista is awesome. Use the 64x. You'll thank yourself.
Skin it if you don't like the look (which anybody who is in their right mind should....).
Skin it if you don't like the look (which anybody who is in their right mind should....).
Joe Average
Ad Blocker - Banned
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,459
XP Pro x64 can still be purchased, yep. If you search for it, you can find places selling it brand new in the box for $75-100 USD, sometimes less. If you get just the OEM installation CD with the COA sticker/Product Key, you'll find it for $50 or less... just takes time and searching but, it's out there.
Because Vista x64 popularity of the 64bit OS has started to catch on. I'm not a fan of Vista either, but awhile back I decided to try XP x64 and had absolutely no issues, no driver issues, no app issues, much faster than Vista - (what OS isnt?) I was really shocked that x64 drivers were so available and updated.
Thanks to Vista x64 XPx64 is that much better now
Thanks to Vista x64 XPx64 is that much better now
GushpinBob
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2007
- Messages
- 2,721
Then just stick with 32-bit XP. I currently run XP x64 on my computer and while it has some nice things like >4GB RAM support I lost
- Driver support for my wireless card. Had to swap my DLink DWA-552 for a wireless bridge because Dlink doesn't make XP/2003 x64 drivers and the unofficial Atheros drivers were terrible.
- Driver support for my USB floppy drive. I now have to depend on a VM with USB support or just use a different machine to use this now
- official Itunes support. There are ways to get Itunes to work even if you have an iPod/iPhone but it's a pain in the ass (still haven't updated to version 8 yet).
Joe Average
Ad Blocker - Banned
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,459
I'll address the 3 issues above:
- no issue with drivers, as for "unofficial" Atheros ones, I have "official" reference Atheros drivers that work without issues with any Atheros-chipset based wireless device under XP Pro x64.
- A USB floppy drive should not need drivers as it should be recognized almost like any generic USB stick. When plugged into a machine and the machine is powered on, the support for that USB floppy drive is hardware-based, not software, hence you being able to use it outside of any installed OS. Just to ask: people still use floppies in the age of USB sticks? Geezus...
- Blame Apple for being witless idiots. It's relatively easy to get iTunes 8.01 64 bit installed under XP Pro x64 takes about 1 minute of additional work and modifying one single parameter in the .msi installer, that's about it. Works for me but I can't stand iTunes anyway.
For every person that comes up with an "issue" with XP Pro x64, I'll provide a solution if necessary.
It just works...
- no issue with drivers, as for "unofficial" Atheros ones, I have "official" reference Atheros drivers that work without issues with any Atheros-chipset based wireless device under XP Pro x64.
- A USB floppy drive should not need drivers as it should be recognized almost like any generic USB stick. When plugged into a machine and the machine is powered on, the support for that USB floppy drive is hardware-based, not software, hence you being able to use it outside of any installed OS. Just to ask: people still use floppies in the age of USB sticks? Geezus...
- Blame Apple for being witless idiots. It's relatively easy to get iTunes 8.01 64 bit installed under XP Pro x64 takes about 1 minute of additional work and modifying one single parameter in the .msi installer, that's about it. Works for me but I can't stand iTunes anyway.
For every person that comes up with an "issue" with XP Pro x64, I'll provide a solution if necessary.
It just works...
The only way you have ever been able to buy XP x64 is OEM. You are not going to be able to get it from any store for under $100 especially since OEM licensing requires its sold with qualifying hardware.
Going the used route is your best bet, but good luck getting it for $50. Not saying its impossible but pretty damn close.
Not that it matters but my 2 cents are fuck XP x64 and get vista x64.
I used xp pro x64 for some time and i can tell you after using Vista x64 the driver support is lightyears ahead of xp x64 and its not going to get better as time gos on. The support is there in XP x64 unlike what some would tell you however vista gets priority from nearly everyone now and ends up with more updated drivers and software.
If you dont like the look, change it. There are tons of visual styles for vista and they are very easy to install. If you dont like how its different, well thats life it really wont take long to get used to.
If you dont like it just because you dont, i can understand that my 4 year old niece is like that sometimes people get stupid, closed minded or stubborn for no apparant reason.
haste
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 8,017
running vista 64 on my system with no probs. it would probably run real nice on the OPs system.
just installed it 3 days ago for the first time ( i meant to install 32-bit, but 64 got installed) and its been running like a charm. everyone seems to have drivers/software for it. i have yet to run into a program that wouldnt run. i installed xp on a seperate partition on my main drive just in case, but i doubt im gonna need it now...
just installed it 3 days ago for the first time ( i meant to install 32-bit, but 64 got installed) and its been running like a charm. everyone seems to have drivers/software for it. i have yet to run into a program that wouldnt run. i installed xp on a seperate partition on my main drive just in case, but i doubt im gonna need it now...
SuperSubZero
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2000
- Messages
- 3,780
Use what you want. I had decent luck with XP64, my desktop had full and current driver support, my laptop was close, I only was missing webcam and infrared drivers (oh noes). On a "lower end" x64 box with a lot of RAM it's not a bad choice as long as drivers exist for your hardware.
Unfortunately MS has pretty much kicked XP64 to the curb. The homepage for it is now a Vista x64 site. It was always kind of the red-headed stepchild but now it's been practically forgotten.
Unfortunately MS has pretty much kicked XP64 to the curb. The homepage for it is now a Vista x64 site. It was always kind of the red-headed stepchild but now it's been practically forgotten.
Im not going to touch the Vista/XP thing (except to say that you are shooting yourself in the foot using XP now that its almost 2009), but AIM? Really? I suggest trying out either Pidgin, Miranda, or Trillian. In that order. Good luck regardless!
DeaconFrost
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2007
- Messages
- 11,588
I have to agree with the above. Choosing an OS based on IM compatibility is like choosing a car based on the cup-holders. Who honestly installs any product made by AOL anymore??? Pidgin, Digsby, Miranda, Trillian, Meebo, and others are all out there and free. If you still use an AOL product, I can now see why Vista might not be for you. Some people don't like change...and some people act like they are fatally allergic to change.
Well it seems like everyone in town here uses aim.
Hmm, I think you are getting confused with the AIM service, which, yes, everyone uses, and the actual AIM application.
Pidgin, Miranda, Trillian, Meebo, etc... All can connect to the AIM service. Thats what they are designed to do. And they are MUCH better from a software standpoint.
*thinks to myself, someone on this forum didn't know that??*
GushpinBob
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2007
- Messages
- 2,721
1. erm... my mistake; they were official Atheros drivers. However, my card would just stop working after several minutes of use when using WPA-PSK AES, regardless of the driver version. Using TKIP as opposed to AES solved the reliability problem, but the speed of the connection would drop from N speeds (~100-300 Mbps) to around 54Mbps. For regular internet usage this was acceptable, but I usually transfer large files (>100MB) to and from the home server so the slow speeds or dropouts got old real fast. This type of behavior never happened to me when running XP 32-bit and as an extra note, the card/PC was close in proximity to the wireless router.
2. For some reason, this one does, and it's a generic brand. Dunno why the manufacturers decided to go with a special kind of driver. I do need it for some legacy hardware though (I still have a couple of Dell's that don't have the ability to boot from USB).
3. Yeah, Apple sucks when it comes to iTunes and it's compatibility (well, iTunes in general). I am intrigue, however, as to how you are installing iTunes 8; are you expanding the .MSI file and installing the components one by one (itunes interface + msi version modification via Orca, quicktime, bonjour, 3rd party CD drivers) or are you installing the modified MSI as a whole? (I've done the former BTW)
I wasn't saying or implying that Windows XP x64 sucks or that it's an old horse that should be left in the field to die. It's an awesome OS based off of the Server 2003 platform that allows me to take advantage of more RAM (too bad my s939-based system supports up to 4 gigs max
), run many of my 32-bit programs faster than ol' 32-bit XP, and restarts are now less frequent when changing certain settings e.g. changing the IP address or installing a new network protocol. Now, it isn't a perfect OS. Things can break and that's not always the fault of the newer OS. That fault usually lies in the hands of developers of third party hardware and software and there's a plenty of reasons whether the developer went out of business, writes terrible code (iTunes for Windows), simply likes to cut corners when it comes to compatibility (I'm looking at you, DLink, Apple), or all of them combined.I was just telling the OP that if he is not accustom to change then he shouldn't bother with upgrading from his current OS.
Joe Average
Ad Blocker - Banned
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,459
Yah, I got all that, I just didn't want to cross the line as another poster did and call someone STUPID because they choose to run an OS that's more stable, more developed, performs just as well (if not more so) and other things. I mean, I know I come off sometimes bluntly, but I wouldn't ever go so far as to outright call people STUPID because they prefer to run an OS that works just as well if not more so. To do such a thing... well, it's FUCKING STUPID, but so be it.
Anywho... I found some instructions on taking the iTunes64 installer and doing a modification to the primary iTunes .msi file (you simply alter one variable in one of the installation strings) using a tool from Microsoft called ORCA. Found some relatively simplistic instructions at:
http://yukichigai.googlepages.com/iphonex64
The biggest issue sometimes is finding a direct download link to the actual iTunes x64 installer which is now up to 8.01. That's the toughest part of all, come to think of it.
The most "logical" reason for all the issues with XP Pro x64 and iTunes x64 is they simply don't want people calling them and asking for support for the older OS - they'd prefer to have everyone using Vista x64 if they can, and a funny thing about that is iTunes is shit in Vista x64 too. I truly believe that Apple puts inherent glitches in iTunes on the Windows platform just to piss people off and make it unstable - thereby giving people more reason to consider getting a Mac and running OSX. I've seen entirely too many cases of issues that simply have no serious basis other than "It only happens on Windows versions" of iTunes...
Worked great for me first time out, but I was installing iTunes in a VM anyway for testing; it wasn't done on my primary host OS (XP Pro x64, of course). I won't let Apple products touch my primary OS...
ps
This post:
http://www.planetamd64.com/index.php?showtopic=35132&pid=327503&mode=threaded&start=
has some info and a link to the already modified 8.01 x64 installer for iTunes.
Anywho... I found some instructions on taking the iTunes64 installer and doing a modification to the primary iTunes .msi file (you simply alter one variable in one of the installation strings) using a tool from Microsoft called ORCA. Found some relatively simplistic instructions at:
http://yukichigai.googlepages.com/iphonex64
The biggest issue sometimes is finding a direct download link to the actual iTunes x64 installer which is now up to 8.01. That's the toughest part of all, come to think of it.
The most "logical" reason for all the issues with XP Pro x64 and iTunes x64 is they simply don't want people calling them and asking for support for the older OS - they'd prefer to have everyone using Vista x64 if they can, and a funny thing about that is iTunes is shit in Vista x64 too. I truly believe that Apple puts inherent glitches in iTunes on the Windows platform just to piss people off and make it unstable - thereby giving people more reason to consider getting a Mac and running OSX. I've seen entirely too many cases of issues that simply have no serious basis other than "It only happens on Windows versions" of iTunes...
Worked great for me first time out, but I was installing iTunes in a VM anyway for testing; it wasn't done on my primary host OS (XP Pro x64, of course). I won't let Apple products touch my primary OS...
ps
This post:
http://www.planetamd64.com/index.php?showtopic=35132&pid=327503&mode=threaded&start=
has some info and a link to the already modified 8.01 x64 installer for iTunes.
I was not calling him stupid, if you believe he falls into that category then you are the one calling him stupid. Personally i would just assume hes stubborn...
Honestly your being incredibly hypocritical here and i think its funny. The most outspoken vista supporter this forum has ever seen playing devils advocate against his own baby.
Going with XP x64 this late in the game is just "FUCKING STUPID" to use your own term. You should know that and im actually surprised to see you arguing the opposite. Driver and software support has always been shit for XP x64 and now that its been left for dead its going to get much worse. Suggesting someone pick up the dead OS and use it on thier everyday machine instead of pointing them in the direction of the better supported and more stable OS is assinine.
Yes i said vista x64 is more stable than XP x64 most people that have used both would agree. XP x64 has always been a poorly supported hackjob of server 2003 that had a bunch of annoying little quirks and issues. It was a good OS but microsoft learned from its mistakes with XP x64 and applied that knowledge to vista x64 and as a result you end up with a better OS all around.
Joe Average
Ad Blocker - Banned
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,459
I'm not arguing that Vista is better or worse than XP Pro x64, or vice versa. I'm saying - and have always said - that XP Pro x64 has a place and those that know it tend to stick with that OS because it's superior in some respects. Newer does not mean better, and I'll stand up and be first in line anytime to defend someone's choice to run it over Vista if they have reason to do so - and personal opinion and simply not liking one OS compared to another is a perfectly legitimate reason.
Some people choose Ford over Chevy for no other reason than "I've always owned Fords, my whole family has" even if you could prove to them a Chevy was better in terms of power, performance, gas mileage, and maybe even cheaper in price. So personal preference has to be accounted for, regardless of someone else considering it to be a "stupid" reason for making the choice or decision in the first place.
The problem with this forum and all the others when it comes to OS choice is that people always try to look at the situation from the "This OS is better" perspective, and "best" or "better" in terms of an OS is purely subjective stuff.
I'm all for people making a decision and sticking with it, and whenever I see someone getting chastised - even by implication - it's pretty irritating so I'll typically comment on it, such is the case with the "stupid" comment. It was implied, anyone with half a brain could read that.
I don't consider myself an outspoken supporter of Vista - I consider myself someone that knows the OS front to back and is simply sick of the FUD and ignorance about it, to be ever so blunt about it. As far as Vista x64 being a "better OS all around," once more it's a subjective thing, not something that can be proven beyond a shadow of any and all doubt.
In other words, it's a personal preference thing, so that's where you - and everyone else - should always come from when commenting on OSes. I could sit here and say "The Amiga OS is the best personal computer OS ever created" and while you and a few others may disagree, I know a few thousand folks that would agree with me even if it's coming from a personally subjective point of view.
Lack of drivers... that's funny considering I've never had one piece of hardware ever not be supported on XP Pro x64 myself. Maybe if people would stop buying the cheap low-end shit because it costs less they wouldn't have such issues. The only reason x64 driver support for Vista is where it is right now is because Microsoft made it plain and simple:
"If you want the "Made For Windows Vista" sticker/logo certification on your products, you must create 32 bit AND 64 bit drivers and submit them to us for testing. If you can't do that, you won't get certification..."
That's it in a nutshell. That's the straw that broke the 64 bit camel's back in terms of support because without Microsoft laying the smackdown, we'd still have a lack of support for x64.
Some people choose Ford over Chevy for no other reason than "I've always owned Fords, my whole family has" even if you could prove to them a Chevy was better in terms of power, performance, gas mileage, and maybe even cheaper in price. So personal preference has to be accounted for, regardless of someone else considering it to be a "stupid" reason for making the choice or decision in the first place.
The problem with this forum and all the others when it comes to OS choice is that people always try to look at the situation from the "This OS is better" perspective, and "best" or "better" in terms of an OS is purely subjective stuff.
I'm all for people making a decision and sticking with it, and whenever I see someone getting chastised - even by implication - it's pretty irritating so I'll typically comment on it, such is the case with the "stupid" comment. It was implied, anyone with half a brain could read that.
I don't consider myself an outspoken supporter of Vista - I consider myself someone that knows the OS front to back and is simply sick of the FUD and ignorance about it, to be ever so blunt about it. As far as Vista x64 being a "better OS all around," once more it's a subjective thing, not something that can be proven beyond a shadow of any and all doubt.
In other words, it's a personal preference thing, so that's where you - and everyone else - should always come from when commenting on OSes. I could sit here and say "The Amiga OS is the best personal computer OS ever created" and while you and a few others may disagree, I know a few thousand folks that would agree with me even if it's coming from a personally subjective point of view.
Lack of drivers... that's funny considering I've never had one piece of hardware ever not be supported on XP Pro x64 myself. Maybe if people would stop buying the cheap low-end shit because it costs less they wouldn't have such issues. The only reason x64 driver support for Vista is where it is right now is because Microsoft made it plain and simple:
"If you want the "Made For Windows Vista" sticker/logo certification on your products, you must create 32 bit AND 64 bit drivers and submit them to us for testing. If you can't do that, you won't get certification..."
That's it in a nutshell. That's the straw that broke the 64 bit camel's back in terms of support because without Microsoft laying the smackdown, we'd still have a lack of support for x64.
I like you.
Someone standing up for the little guy.
XP x64 has been a great OS for me.
Joe its not about better or best its about current and outdated. XP x64 never had its day and never will.
Like your ford analogy its like someone buying a 20 year old ford in questionable condition over a brand new clean chevy for no reason other than "they just like ford". Being impractical and childish is not an excuse for stupidity and when you say "i just dont like it" thats what it is.
I never said xp x64 lacked drivers i said its not being kept up to date like Vista x64 is. Not that thats the fault of the OS its just the way the world works when writing software and drivers you do it for whats relevent now not 5 years ago.
It is a personal preference thing like you said, but when someone comes around talking about how they dislike something just because the cosmic forces dictate that they do so its going to get some negative attention. At least if you give a reason, even a silly one people can relate.
firebane:
It was a great OS. Let me ask you this though if you where sitting with a machine in front of you and you lacked an OS for it would you buy xp x64 or grab a copy of vista x64? Keep in mind its its damn near 2009 and you can bet microsoft wont prolong XP's life one second more than they have to. With windows 7 supposedly coming out in just over a year XP's days are very numbered. At least with buying vista you would get at least a few more years before its on the chopping block.
Like your ford analogy its like someone buying a 20 year old ford in questionable condition over a brand new clean chevy for no reason other than "they just like ford". Being impractical and childish is not an excuse for stupidity and when you say "i just dont like it" thats what it is.
I never said xp x64 lacked drivers i said its not being kept up to date like Vista x64 is. Not that thats the fault of the OS its just the way the world works when writing software and drivers you do it for whats relevent now not 5 years ago.
It is a personal preference thing like you said, but when someone comes around talking about how they dislike something just because the cosmic forces dictate that they do so its going to get some negative attention. At least if you give a reason, even a silly one people can relate.
firebane:
It was a great OS. Let me ask you this though if you where sitting with a machine in front of you and you lacked an OS for it would you buy xp x64 or grab a copy of vista x64? Keep in mind its its damn near 2009 and you can bet microsoft wont prolong XP's life one second more than they have to. With windows 7 supposedly coming out in just over a year XP's days are very numbered. At least with buying vista you would get at least a few more years before its on the chopping block.
Joe Average
Ad Blocker - Banned
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,459
No offense, but XP Pro x64 isn't XP. I thought you'd have figured that out by now.
Joe Average
Ad Blocker - Banned
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,459
I was sooooooooooooooooo going to mention cost considering I can get XP Pro x64 brand new for about $70 if necessary (no need as I have a VLK copy from the company I helped created years past), but even so... for some folks, cost IS another relevant issue...
elektronisch
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 2,305
XP 64-bit here for some time now, and my friend has been suggesting to upgrade to vista (which I have a copy of but never installed). Well anyway, my friend came over to use my computer and was amazed at how much faster my system was!
He has since not bothered me about "upgrading" to vista.
He has since not bothered me about "upgrading" to vista.
For all that Joe's been saying, that's really the only practical reason to go XP x64 rather than Vista x64. Simnple fact is that XP Pro x64 was intended for enthusisasts and early adoptors, whilst Vista x64 was intended from the outset to be a consumer-oriented OS choice. And Vista x64 support is, no matter what Joe or anybody else says, better than XP x64 support.
Choice, though, is another matter again. If people prefer XP to Vista then it's their right to run XP rather than Vista. Hell, I've even got one Windows 98 box still in use here. There's just no Earthly reason to change it to anything else, because it does what it does and has been doing so for a helluva long time!
IF you suffer no hardwae or software compatibility issues with what you have and use then XP Pro x64 is a perfectly functional OS choice. But then again there are hardware and software compatibility issues to be had with Vista too, if the hardware platform and software library in use isn't completely up to date.
When it comes to an actual purchase choice for a 'today' machine, though, it should really be somewhat of a 'no-brainer'. Vista is now a quite matured OS choice as well as a consumer-oriented 64-but Windows choice, and there's really no point to choosing a 'legacy' OS version for it.
I know... It quietly recieved the axe much sooner than XP... I thought you'd have figured that out by now.
I would like to know how you can legally pick up XP x64 for $70? Its more than vista home premium everywhere i can find. Thats the second time you have said you can get it for half what it costs normally, not to mention hardware purchase requirements of the OEM license.
Gorankar
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,114
By all means then go for it. Not having the money to buy it or just being cheap is a valid excuse in my book. Even just "not liking Vista" is an OK reason. Besides it is not like you can't upgrade later.
While Xp64 is a great OS, it has been, for all intents and purposes, red headed stepchilded by MS. Some hardware makers seem to not be spending much time bothering with drivers, and app writers, for the most part, seem to not be bothering to insure programs run correctly with XP64. You can get most everything to work, but you may have to work a bit harder for it sometimes. My opinion is that Vista 64 is the better choice for a new rig being built today. Ehhh, to each their own though.
Oh, as general rule, if you can't get something to run properly on Vista64 you are prolly not going to get it to run properly on Xp64 either. Vista is a lot closer to Xp64 than Xp32 is to XP64 when you get to the guts of the code.
I've got a couple of $3000 plotters and some $1500 OpenGL cards that just don't work with XP64. Hardly low end junk.
Joe Average
Ad Blocker - Banned
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,459
If their manufacturers didn't support XP Pro x64 at any point, then yes, I'd call 'em junk, but that's just me. For that kind of price for hardware I would expect high end support including drivers for the cutting edge OSes and that's precisely what XP Pro x64 always was and always will be.
Bleh...
Unknown-One
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 8,909
Run Vista x64, use this theme, and pretend you're running Windows XP
Seriously though, if you don't have any issues with XP x64 then lucky you! Vista x64 is, however, better supported all-around.
Seriously though, if you don't have any issues with XP x64 then lucky you! Vista x64 is, however, better supported all-around.
DeaconFrost
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2007
- Messages
- 11,588
If XP x64 flies on your computer, there's no reason to think Vista x64 wouldn't. In fact, as many people would atest, on recent hardware, Vista is snappier than any iteration of XP. Yes, I understand XP x64 isn't technically XP, and does perform better, allegedly, than XP x86, but on the same two computers, Vista x64 is much snappier for me than XP x64 was.
Don't take this as a bash against XP x64. Since Vista x64 was released, driver support for any Windows x64 OS has gotten much better. If I had to buy an OS, I couldn't see spending money for XP x64 instead of Vista at this point. But, if you are getting XP x64 for free, than go with it.