«

gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005" article.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1906396,00.asp

And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive for
drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm beginning
to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the 32-bit version
myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some, but I like the
32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway. Seems that 32-bit
OS and programs will be the standard for the home user for some time to come
and 64-bit for niche users.


"M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
news:...
> gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
> article.
>
> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1906396,00.asp
>
>

The ridiculous part is - and I'm not a programmer anymore for a long time
now, but I once was, so if I'm wrong about this observation, please chime in
here and educate me - that there appears to be plenty of guidance out there
on how to port a Windows driver to 64 bit. The issue is a bean-counter one,
in which hardware vendors won't devote the resources to doing the port until
they see enough volume of 64 bit usage out there to justify their
expenditures. And the adoption rate will suck until the drivers are there.

/vicious_circle

"John Barnes" <> wrote in message
news:...
> And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
> Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive
> for drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm
> beginning to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the
> 32-bit version myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some,
> but I like the 32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway.
> Seems that 32-bit OS and programs will be the standard for the home user
> for some time to come and 64-bit for niche users.
>
>
> "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
>> article.
>>
>> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1906396,00.asp
>>
>>
>
>

It's a fair assessment, and not surprising given the lack of a killer app.
If Adobe had cared enough to bring out the Suite in 64 bit, that alone might
swing the sentiment. I've often likened XP 64 bit to Windows ME... the
bridge for users who need to upgrade something until the real new OS (Vista)
comes along. Of course, ME was a piece of junk foisted on many poor saps,
whereas 64 bit is a robust, yet ignored, OS. No matter. Many of us still
like it and use it exclusively. If others don't share that enthusiasm, so be
it. It's only a piece of software...


"John Barnes" <> wrote in message
news:...
> And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
> Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive
for
> drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm
beginning
> to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the 32-bit
version
> myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some, but I like the
> 32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway. Seems that 32-bit
> OS and programs will be the standard for the home user for some time to
come
> and 64-bit for niche users.
>
>
> "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> > gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
> > article.
> >
> > http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1906396,00.asp
> >
> >
>
>

And system builders aren't going to install (or recommend) it on home
machines when they know they will have dissatisfied customers the first time
they hook up a peripheral that doesn't work or try to install their
favourite software and it fails. Not to mention the increased help desk
calls. At this point, and in the foreseeable future, there is just no need
for 64-bit computing for the home user.


"M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
news:...
> The ridiculous part is - and I'm not a programmer anymore for a long time
> now, but I once was, so if I'm wrong about this observation, please chime
> in here and educate me - that there appears to be plenty of guidance out
> there on how to port a Windows driver to 64 bit. The issue is a
> bean-counter one, in which hardware vendors won't devote the resources to
> doing the port until they see enough volume of 64 bit usage out there to
> justify their expenditures. And the adoption rate will suck until the
> drivers are there.
>
> /vicious_circle
>
> "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
>> Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive
>> for drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm
>> beginning to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the
>> 32-bit version myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some,
>> but I like the 32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway.
>> Seems that 32-bit OS and programs will be the standard for the home user
>> for some time to come and 64-bit for niche users.
>>
>>
>> "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
>>> article.
>>>
>>> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1906396,00.asp
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

I get by just fine using x64 Edition daily at home. I cannot use it at work
because there's no driver for the Netgear print server (you can kludge it,
but that's not acceptable in my work environment) Really, my biggest
disappointment is HP - I really would love to see x64 drivers for the
JetDirect 500 print server and for the scanners and large format color
output devices - then I'd have everything I need. There's no doubt in my
mind, I see little point in advocating 64 bit capable hardware platforms at
work before I see concrete proof that 64 bit OSs (x64, Vista) will get the
driver support needed to make the adoption as uneventful as 32 bit XP is
now...

"Dennis Gordon" <> wrote in message
news:ODOPA$...
> It's a fair assessment, and not surprising given the lack of a killer app.
> If Adobe had cared enough to bring out the Suite in 64 bit, that alone
> might
> swing the sentiment. I've often likened XP 64 bit to Windows ME... the
> bridge for users who need to upgrade something until the real new OS
> (Vista)
> comes along. Of course, ME was a piece of junk foisted on many poor saps,
> whereas 64 bit is a robust, yet ignored, OS. No matter. Many of us still
> like it and use it exclusively. If others don't share that enthusiasm, so
> be
> it. It's only a piece of software...
>
>
> "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
>> Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive
> for
>> drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm
> beginning
>> to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the 32-bit
> version
>> myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some, but I like the
>> 32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway. Seems that
>> 32-bit
>> OS and programs will be the standard for the home user for some time to
> come
>> and 64-bit for niche users.
>>
>>
>> "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>> > gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
>> > article.
>> >
>> > http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1906396,00.asp
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

Its the application and device drivers thats causing the problems and it
looks like its gonna be the same with Vista x64. Not until we see parallel
support in terms of applications and device drivers for x86/x64 will users
have confidence investing in the platform. My stance is that, Windows XP
Professional x64 is explicitly a scientific/engineering workstation
operating system.
--
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
"John Barnes" <> wrote in message
news:...
> And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
> Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive
> for drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm
> beginning to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the
> 32-bit version myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some,
> but I like the 32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway.
> Seems that 32-bit OS and programs will be the standard for the home user
> for some time to come and 64-bit for niche users.
>
>
> "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
>> article.
>>
>> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1906396,00.asp
>>
>>
>
>

Agreed.


"Andre Da Costa" <> wrote in message
news:%...
> Its the application and device drivers thats causing the problems and it
> looks like its gonna be the same with Vista x64. Not until we see parallel
> support in terms of applications and device drivers for x86/x64 will users
> have confidence investing in the platform. My stance is that, Windows XP
> Professional x64 is explicitly a scientific/engineering workstation
> operating system.
> --
> --
> Andre
> Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
> Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
> http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
> FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
> "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
>> Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive
>> for drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm
>> beginning to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the
>> 32-bit version myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some,
>> but I like the 32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway.
>> Seems that 32-bit OS and programs will be the standard for the home user
>> for some time to come and 64-bit for niche users.
>>
>>
>> "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
>>> article.
>>>
>>> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1906396,00.asp
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Works well for the wife who just uses it to surf, post to Money and
occasionally look up a word or item in the encyclopedia.
Many of my programs don't install or don't work properly in x64. Programs I
use multiple times a day that do things in 1 step that mostly can be kludged
around in x64 in multiple steps with multiple programs. Why bother when
nothing runs faster or better. And OE crashes several times a day when
running in the background.


"M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
news:...
>I get by just fine using x64 Edition daily at home. I cannot use it at
>work because there's no driver for the Netgear print server (you can kludge
>it, but that's not acceptable in my work environment) Really, my biggest
>disappointment is HP - I really would love to see x64 drivers for the
>JetDirect 500 print server and for the scanners and large format color
>output devices - then I'd have everything I need. There's no doubt in my
>mind, I see little point in advocating 64 bit capable hardware platforms at
>work before I see concrete proof that 64 bit OSs (x64, Vista) will get the
>driver support needed to make the adoption as uneventful as 32 bit XP is
>now...
>
> "Dennis Gordon" <> wrote in message
> news:ODOPA$...
>> It's a fair assessment, and not surprising given the lack of a killer
>> app.
>> If Adobe had cared enough to bring out the Suite in 64 bit, that alone
>> might
>> swing the sentiment. I've often likened XP 64 bit to Windows ME... the
>> bridge for users who need to upgrade something until the real new OS
>> (Vista)
>> comes along. Of course, ME was a piece of junk foisted on many poor saps,
>> whereas 64 bit is a robust, yet ignored, OS. No matter. Many of us still
>> like it and use it exclusively. If others don't share that enthusiasm, so
>> be
>> it. It's only a piece of software...
>>
>>
>> "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
>>> Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive
>> for
>>> drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm
>> beginning
>>> to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the 32-bit
>> version
>>> myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some, but I like
>>> the
>>> 32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway. Seems that
>>> 32-bit
>>> OS and programs will be the standard for the home user for some time to
>> come
>>> and 64-bit for niche users.
>>>
>>>
>>> "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
>>> news:...
>>> > gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
>>> > article.
>>> >
>>> > http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1906396,00.asp
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

In his posting of Fri, 30 Dec 2005, Andre Da Costa writes
>Its the application and device drivers thats causing the problems and it
>looks like its gonna be the same with Vista x64. Not until we see parallel
>support in terms of applications and device drivers for x86/x64 will users
>have confidence investing in the platform. My stance is that, Windows XP
>Professional x64 is explicitly a scientific/engineering workstation
>operating system.
>--

Dear Andre

You are forgetting the marketing benefit.....all those 32bit machines
are old and you really should get a 64 bit future proofed because this
is the future etc. crap!

I've just spent half today with Adobe support trying to get Photoshop
CS2 sorted on both the OS's on this quad box. As many will know this
version of PS needs to be activated via a special code, and whilst Adobe
is happy to allow one to have a copy running on both OS on the same
computer they had not realized what could happen. Install the code on
say the 64bit OS, then close that down and do it again on the 32bit OS
and that's fine too. Close that down and restart in 64bit and open up
PS and yes you have guessed it....it demands to be re-activated with a
new key! Has anyone else seen this behaviour? Oh yes I know that
officially Adobe do not support XP64.

Cheers
--
Richard