«

Has anyone tried this yet? Does it improve compatibility? I would really
like to use a 64-bit browser, but I have heard there are too many problems
as of yet.

http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail...t/1204745864/2

For everything that 64-bit IE can do, it works perfectly. There is no
"compatibility" to improve. You may be thinking of plugins.. Well,
since 64-bit IE can **ONLY** use 64-bit plugins, I'd say the
compatiblity there is 100% when talking about 64-bit plugins (which
there are few if any).

On 27/08/2008 in message <> TJD wrote:

>Has anyone tried this yet? Does it improve compatibility? I would really
>like to use a 64-bit browser, but I have heard there are too many problems
>as of yet.
>
>http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail...t/1204745864/2

You could always use IE7 64 bit until the bugs are out of IE8.

--
Jeff Gaines Damerham Hampshire UK
There are 3 types of people in this world. Those who can count, and those
who can't.

> Has anyone tried this yet? Does it improve compatibility? I would really
> like to use a 64-bit browser, but I have heard there are too many problems
> as of yet.

I don't do beta releases. But I use IE7's 64-bit browser for nearly all
my browsing, and never encountered anything I consider a problem
with compatibility.

I resist using ActiveX controls (like Adobe Flash), nearly all of which
are still 32-bit. If the compatibility issues you mention are due to
ActiveX controls, nothing in IE8 *can* fix your problem: it's up
to the provider of those add-ons to make them 64-bit compatible.

- David Stevens

Thanks, David. Your reply clarifies and answers my question exactly. I need
to be able to run Flash, Shockwave, Java, etc. and I was under the false
assumption that IE8 64-bit might be able make these somehow more compatible.
Too bad. I guess we have to wait for 64-bit to become more mainstream.

"David Stevens" <> wrote in message
news:ep$...
>> Has anyone tried this yet? Does it improve compatibility? I would really
>> like to use a 64-bit browser, but I have heard there are too many
>> problems as of yet.
>
> I don't do beta releases. But I use IE7's 64-bit browser for nearly all
> my browsing, and never encountered anything I consider a problem
> with compatibility.
>
> I resist using ActiveX controls (like Adobe Flash), nearly all of which
> are still 32-bit. If the compatibility issues you mention are due to
> ActiveX controls, nothing in IE8 *can* fix your problem: it's up
> to the provider of those add-ons to make them 64-bit compatible.
>
> - David Stevens
>

Beta2 is now available. I believe you will find that the download "for
Windows Vista... 64 bit ..." is actually a 32 bit application. If you want
an indication, set it as the default browser. 64 bit versions of IE cannot
be set to be the default, by design. At least, that has been the case up
until now. I'd be grateful if someone can provide authoritative reference to
the contrary.
--

Tom
MSMVP 1998-2007


"TJD" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Has anyone tried this yet? Does it improve compatibility? I would really
> like to use a 64-bit browser, but I have heard there are too many problems
> as of yet.
>
> http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail...t/1204745864/2

Hi, Tom.

I'm running Vista Ultimate x64 SP1. I've been running Google Earth for
nearly a year, but had to reinstall it (and everything else, including
Vista) after bad RAM crashed my computer last month. Google Earth has been
running fine as a 32-bit application in Vista x64. There is evidently no
such thing as 64-bit Google Earth. There is not even a Google folder in my
Program Files folder, even though there is one in Program Files (x86).

I installed IE8b2 yesterday. I never checked the "bitness" until now. I've
been running only the 32-bit IE8b2 in 64-bit Vista. (Help | About Internet
Explorer does not mention "bits" in the 32-bit version, except for Cipher
strength.) Just now, I've navigated to C:\Program Files\Internet
Explorer\iexplore.exe to be sure I have the 64-bit version running. The
good news is that 64-bit IE8b2 runs in Vista x64. The bad news is that
there still is apparently not a 64-bit version of Google Earth.

At http://earth.com, there is a menu offering to download several packages,
including both "Google Earth 2008" and "Google Earth 4.3". Both claim to be
the "Latest Version of Google Earth". I'm too confused and too busy right
now to check it out. The 32-bit version that I'm now running shows:

Google Earth 4.2.0205.5730
Build Date Nov 13 2007

So I guess 4.3 is newer, but I don't know if it is different from "2008", or
newer or older.

I don't have time to fully explore now, but at least one glaring problem
seems to be fixed. Google Maps (32-bit) was badly mangled in IE8b1 on my
computer, but now seems to be displaying correctly. ;<) Yes, in both
32-bit and 64-bit IE8b2!

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX

Microsoft Windows MVP
(Running Windows Live Mail 2008 in Vista Ultimate x64 SP1)

"Tom Ferguson" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Beta2 is now available. I believe you will find that the download "for
> Windows Vista... 64 bit ..." is actually a 32 bit application. If you want
> an indication, set it as the default browser. 64 bit versions of IE cannot
> be set to be the default, by design. At least, that has been the case up
> until now. I'd be grateful if someone can provide authoritative reference
> to the contrary.
> --
>
> Tom
> MSMVP 1998-2007
>
>
> "TJD" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> Has anyone tried this yet? Does it improve compatibility? I would really
>> like to use a 64-bit browser, but I have heard there are too many
>> problems as of yet.
>>
>> http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail...t/1204745864/2

FWIW - The only strange thing which I found with IE 8 is that it's a huge
resource hog. In this day and age, I believe Microsoft could have coded the
browser thinner and better, like Firefox, for instance. I am trying to
unintall the IE 8 beta 2 but don't know how.......

done better when compared to Firefox.
"TJD" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Has anyone tried this yet? Does it improve compatibility? I would really
> like to use a 64-bit browser, but I have heard there are too many problems
> as of yet.
>
> http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail...t/1204745864/2

You are forgetting that IE8 is still in "Beta2", let's wait for RTM to come
out and then we can see how much of a resource hog it really is. I've been
using Google Chrome and IE8 Beta2 and I can easily say that IE8 is faster
than Chrome. I am hoping for it to be more stable and complete by the final
release.

Uninstalling IE8 can be done from Add/Remove programs (XP) or Programs and
Features (Vista).

"nospam" wrote:

> FWIW - The only strange thing which I found with IE 8 is that it's a huge
> resource hog. In this day and age, I believe Microsoft could have coded the
> browser thinner and better, like Firefox, for instance. I am trying to
> unintall the IE 8 beta 2 but don't know how.......
>
> done better when compared to Firefox.
> "TJD" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> > Has anyone tried this yet? Does it improve compatibility? I would really
> > like to use a 64-bit browser, but I have heard there are too many problems
> > as of yet.
> >
> > http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail...t/1204745864/2
>