So, with XP about to die, I'm not terribly fond of the idea of switching to Vista. I'm hearing some things about Windows 7 and students being able to get a copy for $30. Anybody tried 7 yet or heard anything good or bad?
Linky if you're a student. http://www.win741.com/ (http://www.win741.com/)
edit: Oh, I just submitted my email and found that I'm still able to get this. ;D But another quandary has arisen. 32 bit or 64 bit. I've got a 64 bit processor in my computer but I'm not utilizing it right now. I'm still running 32 bit OS and everything. What are the techies' thoughts on 32 bit vs 64 bit?
Quote from: erkishhorde on September 29, 2009, 03:52:41 PM
What are the techies' thoughts on 32 bit vs 64 bit?
there are only two reasons i would run a 32-bit OS:
1) i had a 32-bit-only processor
2) i had a peripheral without 64-bit drivers
Agreed - unless you have a real reason to run 32bit don't.
XP is hardly 'about to die'
To be sure, it is on its way out now, but it is so entrenched in the PC world it will still be common for at least another couple years.
Only microsoft could make an OS that was viable for 10 years!
x64 all the way. It can address and use waaaaay more memory than x86. It's code is inherently more stable than 32bit by thread design. Go for 64bit man! [thumbsup]
Quote from: hypurone on September 30, 2009, 09:33:33 AM
x64 all the way. It can address and use waaaaay more memory than x86.
waaaaay more memory than you'll ever need to use on a desktop system (in your near lifetime).
Quote from: factorPlayer on September 30, 2009, 09:18:37 AM
To be sure, it is on its way out now, but it is so entrenched in the PC world it will still be common for at least another couple years.
I have heard support & updates for XP until 2014.
mitt
Quote from: derby on September 29, 2009, 05:34:55 PM
there are only two reasons i would run a 32-bit OS:
1) i had a 32-bit-only processor
2) i had a peripheral without 64-bit drivers
Odd ball question - could autocad 2006 run on windows 7 64bit? That is one reason I have my main computer at home still running 32bit XP.
mitt
Quote from: mitt on September 30, 2009, 10:45:05 AM
Odd ball question - could autocad 2006 run on windows 7 64bit? That is one reason I have my main computer at home still running 32bit XP.
mitt
I get hangups with Autocad 2006 when i installed it onto windows 7 RC. Autodesk wont even work. I have Autocad 2006 on my Vista 64bit though. runs fine.
Quote from: derby on September 30, 2009, 10:08:36 AM
waaaaay more memory than you'll ever need to use on a desktop system (in your near lifetime).
"640K ought to be enough for anybody.."
I have 4 gigs in my XP desktop and pagefile is at 12 gigs. I seem to use a lot of RAM.
I want to switch to W7/64 but I am afraid some of my stuff won't go, like my APS film scanner. (I have a LOT of film I am scanning from my artfag days)
your best bet is to probably contact the manufacturer. If they cant give you any words of wisdom, then you can always install windows 7 RC 64bit as a dual boot and try it out. if it works then migrate to the real windows 7. if not then just take it off and stick with XP until theres more support.
Quote from: He Man on September 30, 2009, 11:14:55 AM
your best bet is to probably contact the manufacturer. If they cant give you any words of wisdom, then you can always install windows 7 RC 64bit as a dual boot and try it out. if it works then migrate to the real windows 7. if not then just take it off and stick with XP until theres more support.
Konica/Minolta is out of the film business, kaput. it's an orphaned product. It's a DiMage Scan Dual IV. ..
Quote from: ducatiz on September 30, 2009, 11:02:15 AM
"640K ought to be enough for anybody.."
i was thinking that when i wrote my comment. ;D
however, there's a big difference between 640K/~4GB and ~4GB/~16EB (16 million terabytes) of memory.
16EB is so ridiculous that current 64-bit architecture doesn't even support it (AMD64 has a 52-bit physical memory limit).
Quote from: ducatiz on September 30, 2009, 11:02:15 AM
I have 4 gigs in my XP desktop and pagefile is at 12 gigs. I seem to use a lot of RAM.
are you looking at "pf usage" or the "total physical memory available" in task manager? they tell you different things.
also, xp and vista/7/server2008 handle memory differently. the latter like to "fill up" much of the available physical memory to keep more stuff cached instead of swapping it out to disk to free up more physical memory.
Quote from: ducatiz on September 30, 2009, 11:02:15 AM
I want to switch to W7/64 but I am afraid some of my stuff won't go, like my APS film scanner. (I have a LOT of film I am scanning from my artfag days)
make sure there are 64-bit drivers avail before making the switch. check with the manufacturer. it'll either say they have some, they're built into windows, or they're not available.
Quote from: ducatiz on September 30, 2009, 11:28:00 AM
Konica/Minolta is out of the film business, kaput. it's an orphaned product. It's a DiMage Scan Dual IV. ..
looks like there's no vendor-supplied driver for it, but applications like vuescan (http://www.hamrick.com/) have native support for the scanner using their own driver under vista/7.
Quote from: derby on September 30, 2009, 11:37:42 AM
i was thinking that when i wrote my comment. ;D
however, there's a big difference between 640K/~4GB and ~4GB/~16EB (16 million terabytes) of memory.
right, but i just need more than 4 gigs.. don't need 16 EB, but I could use 16 Gb.,
Quote
are you looking at "pf usage" or the "total physical memory available" in task manager? they tell you different things.
total available and pf usage when under load.
Quote from: derby on September 30, 2009, 10:08:36 AM
waaaaay more memory than you'll ever need to use on a desktop system (in your near lifetime).
Not necessarily...I can take up 12gb with one large rendering project...all it takes is a program or program set that actually uses the resources available. Granted, this is not mainstream at all but it is possible.
Back on topic though, been using Win7 since beta day one and love every bit of it. Sure, there were some small hiccups in the beginning but things have smoothed out considerably and now I am running it on everything from my high end desktop to my netbook to my HTPC and just installed it on my work laptop. And all x64. I wouldn't worry too much about peripheral compatability...most hardware manufacturers jumped on the Win7 bandwagon very early on compared to Vista and even XP.
As a side note, the "XP Compatability Mode" in Win7 works wonderfully in all of my older programs. In fact, I have 3 games that never would run under Vista and even had some issues under Xp Pro but run flawlessly under the compatability mode...
Quote from: ZLTFUL on September 30, 2009, 08:27:46 PM
Not necessarily...I can take up 12gb with one large rendering project...all it takes is a program or program set that actually uses the resources available. Granted, this is not mainstream at all but it is possible.
i was referring to the high end (16EB), not the low end.
fwiw, microsoft hasn't had an issue addressing >4GB (even up to 128GB) of memory on their 32-bit server products. they just chose not to include that ability in their 32-bit desktop/workstation OS.
Quote from: derby on October 01, 2009, 02:14:39 AM
i was referring to the high end (16EB), not the low end.
fwiw, microsoft hasn't had an issue addressing >4GB (even up to 128GB) of memory on their 32-bit server products. they just chose not to include that ability in their 32-bit desktop/workstation OS.
EXACTLY.. but why would I run server on my desktop? I know they're essentially teh same kernal..
wait, maybe that's an idea?
Quote from: ducatiz on October 01, 2009, 06:01:15 AM
EXACTLY.. but why would I run server on my desktop? I know they're essentially teh same kernal..
wait, maybe that's an idea?
http://www.geoffchappell.com/viewer.htm?doc=notes/windows/license/memory.htm (http://www.geoffchappell.com/viewer.htm?doc=notes/windows/license/memory.htm)
(he gets to hacking around the 4GB limit near the bottom of the article)
Win 7 is the first MS OS that hasn't had major issues for me. It's about time the pull their collective heads out of their asses and built a decent OS.
Quote from: ZLTFUL on September 30, 2009, 08:30:37 PM
As a side note, the "XP Compatability Mode" in Win7 works wonderfully in all of my older programs. In fact, I have 3 games that never would run under Vista and even had some issues under Xp Pro but run flawlessly under the compatability mode...
I didn't use it for games but I used it for Hulu. For some reason the first month or so Hulu wouldn't let Win 7 user watch any programs so I used CM and then it worked. :)
Quote from: Mad Duc on October 01, 2009, 11:06:14 AM
Win 7 is the first MS OS that hasn't had major issues for me. It's about time the pull their collective heads out of their asses and built a decent OS.
I wonder if it is true that W7 is just a GUI built on top of a Linux kernel...
Quote from: ducatiz on October 01, 2009, 11:31:44 AM
I wonder if it is true that W7 is just a GUI built on top of a Linux kernel...
highly unlikely.
that said, at least on the server side, they're adopting a less gui-centric design. just about everything is controlled via cli/powershell and the gui is just a front-end for the powershell commands.
Quote from: derby on October 01, 2009, 12:20:21 PM
highly unlikely.
that said, at least on the server side, they're adopting a less gui-centric design. just about everything is controlled via cli/powershell and the gui is just a front-end for the powershell commands.
ah, so it is becoming NetWare... :D
Quote from: ducatiz on October 01, 2009, 12:31:57 PM
ah, so it is becoming NetWare... :D
when did netware gain a (proper) gui?
;D
(i bailed at netware 4)
Bump.
B and I are considering upgrading our laptops from 32 bit XP Pro to 64-bit Win 7. Sounds like this is a good move.
Any more input from recent experiences....things to look out for?
I ran the Win 7 upgrade checker and it seems things will be fine.
Quote from: DesmoDiva on April 07, 2010, 07:08:48 AM
Any more input from recent experiences....things to look out for?
make sure that all your peripherals (printers, etc) have drivers that are supported on 64-bit.
My first thought:
That your system is running XP, have you first run the Win7 comparability test?
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=1B544E90-7659-4BD9-9E51-2497C146AF15&displaylang=en (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=1B544E90-7659-4BD9-9E51-2497C146AF15&displaylang=en)
Secondly, when considering 32bit or 64bit OS's, there are a few things go consider:
1) Check to make sure that you're system will fully support a 64bit OS by:
Open Performance Information and Tools by clicking the Start button , clicking Control Panel, clicking System and Maintenance, and then clicking Performance Information and Tools.
Click View and print details.
In the System section, you can see what type of operating system you're currently running under System type. Under 64-bit capable, you can see whether you can run a 64-bit version of Windows. (If your computer is already running a 64-bit version of Windows, you won't see the 64-bit capable listing.)
2) What are the limits of your motherboards memory capacity? If you are limited to 2 or 4GB, then a 64bit OS won't really show much performance difference. Some of that difference also depends on the speed/type of your memory (DDR, DDR2, DDR3, etc...)
3) What are your future computing plans? If you plan on upgrading your system anytime in the near future, I'd go ahead and get the 64bit OS because mostly all new systems fully support 64bit anyway.
Good luck! I hope that helps!
Thanks Derby and Dave.
Already checked for peripheral support. [thumbsup]
For Dave:
Quote from: DesmoDiva on April 07, 2010, 07:08:48 AM
I ran the Win 7 upgrade checker and it seems things will be fine.
1. I don't understand your instructions. I have my control panel in "classic" view so maybe my icons are different. :-\
2. I have 8GB capacity of DDR3 memory
3. My future computing plans are just to continue using it as I do now; internet, AutoCAD, Microstation, Adobe Creative Suite...More intensive 3D renderings are in the future. B is an architect and I'm an architectural designer. This will be my work station for all of the projects we are doing. Have a 23" monitor on the way to run dual screens.
Quote from: DesmoDiva on April 07, 2010, 08:49:55 AM
Thanks Derby and Dave.
Already checked for peripheral support. [thumbsup]
For Dave:
1. I don't understand your instructions. I have my control panel in "classic" view so maybe my icons are different. :-\
2. I have 8GB capacity of DDR3 memory
3. My future computing plans are just to continue using it as I do now; internet, AutoCAD, Microstation, Adobe Creative Suite...More intensive 3D renderings are in the future. B is an architect and I'm an architectural designer. This will be my work station for all of the projects we are doing. Have a 23" monitor on the way to run dual screens.
Diva,
Sorry about that, I put that directions in really quick from my system and didn't think about them being different than yours. The instructions that I gave are for Vista and up. Sorry. I don't think it's information so easily available in XP - sorry. :-\
If you right click on "my computer" and click on properties can you tell me what it says about your system processor? I can help you determine from there. Also, how large is your hard drive capacity? You certainly have enough memory, and the capacity alone (meaning more than 4GBs) leads me to believe that you are able to run 64bit OS. 32bit systems can't take advantage of more than 4GBs or memory.
For those who aren't certain and are running Vista you can follow these instrctions to find out:
http://www.winvistatips.com/tell-if-you-can-run-vista-64-bit-t157587.html (http://www.winvistatips.com/tell-if-you-can-run-vista-64-bit-t157587.html)