| Author |
Message |
|
EkO=GCHQ=
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate  Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:03 am |
|
 |
| Humping a Super Model |
 |
Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 4:17 pm
Posts: 3762
Location: NOT in IRAN!!!!!!!!!!!
|
TheMacOne=GCHQ= wrote: EkO=GCHQ= wrote: TheMacOne=GCHQ= wrote: Waiting for Windows 7 to be fixed by SP2 (as per standard new M$ OS deploy policy  ) In all seriousness, have you actually tried out the beta yet? It's free to try and you can give the 64bit version a spin to see what you make of it. Nothing to lose but a blank DVD. DVD's are so 1990's   iso mounts ftw!  And I think you ALREADY know the answer about if I tried it or not  But wasn't Vista like this on beta too?  I'm sorry, I'm just VERY cynical when it comes to M$ and it's "beta testing". Spose I've done the beta thing in the past and got burnt. Also (generally speaking), their upgrade path from beta to final release version has been reformat the machine. I understand M$ are going to make that path easier but why? So you don't have to reformat and start again? That answer depends IF you like a new OS to have a clean install. And my definition on a clean install is the final release on a newly formatted hard drive. There's cruft in betas... hence, why it's beta  Somethings get deleted, added and/or just left  In conclusion (Chips' style ), the only decent rig I have is either my one or my wife P4 3GHz S478 pc. IF I had another C2D rig laying about then yes, I'd try it. But NOT willing to put a beta onto a "production machine" (if you will). Chips=GCHQ= wrote: Too many points in a row looks more like a line... If you emphasise too many points that don't require emphasis, you actually negate the point of emphasising them as people don't take notice of each individually emphasised point  Stickler much? The library is THAT way \o-   Anyways, the sarcasm ALWAYS sounds better in my head... There's a thing that people even like myself that know absolutely nothing about pc's can do. It's called dual booting, you don't need to use W7 as your sole OS. Yes, it's a beta, but so what? Is there actually an officially finished OS out there? Is linux "finished", is Apples OS completed with no additions or changes ever to be made? So who cares if it's a beta, obviously being a newer version it'll have the basics from a previous OS but with tweaks and changes, so what's different? _________________  LINUX : If it was any good, they'd charge for it. I want to die peacefully in my sleep just like my Grandad, not kicking and screaming like his passengers...
|
|
  |
|
 |
|
TheMacOne=GCHQ=
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 2:38 pm |
|
|
| Bow down to the master |
 |
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:38 pm
Posts: 2499
Location: Between .local and dev:null :D
|
EkO=GCHQ= wrote: There's a thing that people even like myself that know absolutely nothing about pc's can do. It's called dual booting, you don't need to use W7 as your sole OS. Yes, it's a beta, but so what? Is there actually an officially finished OS out there? Is linux "finished", is Apples OS completed with no additions or changes ever to be made?
So who cares if it's a beta, obviously being a newer version it'll have the basics from a previous OS but with tweaks and changes, so what's different? Betas are full of bugs? Sure, it's pretty polished now but that wasn't always the case with W7 (or any other beta EVER). My personal preference is to not employ beta products unless I have to. Personally, I prefer to use the "released, final product" that hits the shelves over the beta that is currently out. I would rather learn the released one over beta for the sake of my customers and my sanity. Yes, while I agree that no OS is "ever finished", it never will be. Even in finished products, patches are released after the initial retail release. Some due to performance, others due to hackers finding exploits (to name a few). If W7 floats your boat, great, fantastic, I'm happy for you. I would rather base my opinion on a released retail version and then the question of, "Will the beta match the final release?" be answered. Wasn't Vista meant to be better than XP? All I'm saying is, don't solely base your opinion on a beta that can change drastically when released.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
happyslappy
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 3:43 pm |
|
|
| that was a stupid comment btw |
 |
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 12:40 pm
Posts: 109345
Location: manchester
|
your a odd one i tell you that mac  _________________ 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CoolMan=GCHQ=
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 3:44 pm |
|
|
| Bow down to the master |
 |
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 9:36 pm
Posts: 2808
Location: Ireland
|
|
I dual boot with xp and windows 7 64 bit and i have to say that win7 has improved a lot recently,
all my games now seem to work very nicely, no crashes and punkbuster works fine once you allow all permissions for game programs, only issie i have is that i cant seem to mute my mic, but i think i havent found the mute tab
_________________ 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
EkO=GCHQ=
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:40 pm |
|
|
| Humping a Super Model |
|
Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 4:17 pm
Posts: 3762
Location: NOT in IRAN!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
Put a bunch of convicts together and what do you get? A very confused race indeed.
In my personal view, an OS only becomes "not" a "beta" because they've decided now is the time to start charging you for it. In no way whatsoever is it a finished product, so you are more than happy to pay to beta test for M$ but don't want to do it for free?
Was a bloke in town today giving out free ice cream, I offered to pay but he refused my money, so I told him to shove the ice cream up his arse.
_________________ LINUX : If it was any good, they'd charge for it. I want to die peacefully in my sleep just like my Grandad, not kicking and screaming like his passengers...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
LeBeourfCurtaine
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 11:36 pm |
|
|
| Decidedly uninterested |
 |
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 11:10 pm
Posts: 10184
Location: I watch you while you sleep
|
GeneralPublic=GCHQ= wrote: Vista 64 with 8Gb and everything runs very smoothly Not really had an issue with it - other than UpTempo not supporting 64bit OSes, TF2 crashes when I exit, but thats more a Vista problem lol Lies....  ...but at least my TF2 doesn't crash Windoze 7 > Vista  _________________  The Pancreas of S.T.F.U. | Never take life too seriously - nobody gets out alive anyway. Disco_jim: um..... I have no excuse. | Chips: Thank the Beef | Rev Dr: Beef, I think i wee'd a little
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SO19Firearms=GCHQ=
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:37 am |
|
|
| call me J-Lo ;-) |
 |
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:54 pm
Posts: 10761
Location: Making magic!
|
EkO=GCHQ= wrote: Was a bloke in town today giving out free ice cream, I offered to pay but he refused my money, so I told him to shove the ice cream up his arse. PICS or it DIDN'T happen I'M afraid
_________________
Yeah, but a good joke is a good joke - Lemon=GCHQ=
It is JGC right? Or did i just piss my pants in front the geeks? - Wowyouareacow
Just loading up now....
Stay Frosty
|
|
| |
|
|
|
TheMacOne=GCHQ=
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 11:14 am |
|
|
| Bow down to the master |
|
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:38 pm
Posts: 2499
Location: Between .local and dev:null :D
|
EkO=GCHQ= wrote: In my personal view, an OS only becomes "not" a "beta" because they've decided now is the time to start charging you for it. In no way whatsoever is it a finished product, so you are more than happy to pay to beta test for M$ but don't want to do it for free? I buy the retail product mainly because people like yourself have gone through and ironed out most of the bugs to begin with. And why bother with the beta when you have to pay for it anyways? Considering the possible hardware combinations on the Windows platform, can you blame them for NOT making updates after release? Meh, anyways, beta or retail, it doesn't matter. We have two different opinions on the same subject and that's what makes the human race.... frustrating ... at times [/quote] happyslappy wrote: your a odd one i tell you that mac That's why you keep me around CoolMan=GCHQ= wrote: I dual boot with xp and windows 7 64 bit and i have to say that win7 has improved a lot recently,
all my games now seem to work very nicely, no crashes and punkbuster works fine once you allow all permissions for game programs, only issie i have is that i cant seem to mute my mic, but i think i havent found the mute tab They should fix that by the time the retail version comes out LeBeourfCurtaine wrote: Windoze 7 > Vista Then again, Vista was meant to be better than XP. We ALL know how that went SO19Firearms=GCHQ= wrote: PICS or it DIDN'T happen I'M afraid More like: PICS or it didn't happen I'M AFRAID
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gemma=GCHQ=
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 1:00 pm |
|
|
| Made in Taiwan |
 |
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 9:14 pm
Posts: 3549
Location: Bonneville salt flats.
|
|
Mac why don't you just go and use windows 3.0. If you think 32 bit is more stable than 64 bit then 16 bit must be really really stable.
_________________
Don't worry Sony, I'll just cancel my date of birth and get a new one.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
EkO=GCHQ=
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:15 pm |
|
|
| Humping a Super Model |
|
Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 4:17 pm
Posts: 3762
Location: NOT in IRAN!!!!!!!!!!!
|
gmar=GCHQ= wrote: Mac why don't you just go and use windows 3.0. If you think 32 bit is more stable than 64 bit then 16 bit must be really really stable. It's ok Gmar, I've sussed it........... If he doesn't take part in the beta test, he can't be held responsible in anyway and still has someone to point the finger at and complain......... _________________ LINUX : If it was any good, they'd charge for it. I want to die peacefully in my sleep just like my Grandad, not kicking and screaming like his passengers...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gemma=GCHQ=
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:54 pm |
|
|
| Made in Taiwan |
|
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 9:14 pm
Posts: 3549
Location: Bonneville salt flats.
|
|
I have 6GB of RAM and kinda wish is were 64GB+ because then I could copy the whole windows folder to RAM drive (using a technique I haven't though of yet) and boot off that. Hell lets call that 6TB. I wish MS would simply stop supporting 32bit full stop so people can stop playing about with it and winging when their puny machines can't run the latest software. It uses more resources because it does more stuff people. Upgrade or don't, just don't keep shouting wait for me.
_________________
Don't worry Sony, I'll just cancel my date of birth and get a new one.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CoolMan=GCHQ=
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:21 pm |
|
|
| Bow down to the master |
|
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 9:36 pm
Posts: 2808
Location: Ireland
|
|
k, since windows 7 has been pushed back to 2010(the year we make contact?) i now have to think about xp 64 or (shudders) vista 64 if i want to have any chance of running my 2 vid cards as they have 4 gigs between them leaving bugger all for windows itself.
_________________
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chips=GCHQ=
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:55 pm |
|
|
| I'm ghey 4 teh Hoff! |
 |
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 5:18 pm
Posts: 4142
|
Mac - surely there is a good point in using a beta? A lot of folks complained about Vista. If they'd beta tested Vista, then surely they'd have been able to make a more informed decision as to whether they wished to purchase it when it came to being retailed? You may decide to wait until Windows 7 is released - but at least trying it will let you know whether you're going to want to part with your hard earned cash for it first! From what some people said about Vista when it was first released and they upgraded/bought it - if they had hindsight, they may have beta tested it first and then steered clear! Can be wise to try before you buy Evidently I suck at evaluating OS though - the only thing I notice about Vista is the fact that I have to click the "admin permission required" thing every now and then, which is annoying Other than that... 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gemma=GCHQ=
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:02 pm |
|
|
| Made in Taiwan |
|
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 9:14 pm
Posts: 3549
Location: Bonneville salt flats.
|
|
UAC helps me to choose what to run and is a great idea. I really like Vista 64. I even liked the coding challenge when writing installers, (extra security). Sadly my current employers think its 2003 and I am stuck with ancient 32bit abacus err I mean XP.
_________________
Don't worry Sony, I'll just cancel my date of birth and get a new one.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
TheMacOne=GCHQ=
|
Post subject: Re: The 32 vs 64 bit debate Posted: Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:28 am |
|
|
| Bow down to the master |
|
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:38 pm
Posts: 2499
Location: Between .local and dev:null :D
|
The problem is, Vista WAS a release candidate before release. And everyone was saying how well the RC1 ran on their system and when Vista released the retail version, it all went to shit. I know how Vista original retail version was..... I setup a customer with it and had no end of trouble. Once SP1 came along, my thought was, "Why didn't they do this at the start?" The fact IS that M$ tried to get the jump on Mac OS 10.5 Leopard and Apple faked them out. Once Microsoft released Vista, Apple pulled their Leopard release back. Hence why Vista was so shit. (Could be other reasons, just my observation.) I like Vista SP1 MUCH more than XP tbh. So long as the hardware is available to run it properly. UAC in Vista is the best thing since XP imo. Most business won't touch a new OS until a service pack is released anyways. You could prolly count the amount of businesses on one hand that went from XP to Vista It's all good saying, "upgrade your machine" but if your business has 10, 100, 1000, the cost adds up after a while. So I can understand the reluctance by business to do so. There will always be someone, somewhere saying that "it doesn't work on my 486 PC" That was the main reason why I started this thread.. mainly to gather info about gaming on x64 more than anything. I will still wait for SP1 of W7 before I get it tbh. Has been the way since 3.0 and still proves to be a sensible solution. So what if I don't have the latest, shiny OS from M$? I got bitten in the worst kind of way with Vista and am not prepared to make the same mistake twice.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
