RE: Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by =?Utf-8?B?dGhlcGVhcnRyZWU=?=, May 24, 2005.

  1. Let me add that if the column can point us to hard info on what software will
    or will not run under x64, I'll be happy.

    --
    It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop...


    "Kathie Werner" wrote:

    > New Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
    >
    > Columnist Charlie Russel provides an overview of Windows XP Professional x64
    > Edition, and explains what hardware and software it supports.
    >
    > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/64bit/russel_exploringx64.mspx
    >
    > Ask questions or post comments about the article here.
    >
    > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > --
    > Kathie Werner
    > Tech editor, vendor [MS]
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?dGhlcGVhcnRyZWU=?=, May 24, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. That is, as always, an ever moving target. But what we _can_ say with some
    certainty is that 32-bit applications that do NOT require an operating system
    level driver, and that aren't packaged with a 16 bit installer, will work.
    This leaves some obvious problem areas: Anti-Virus programs; some games,
    especially ones with copy protection schemes that use system level
    drivers;utilities that directly manipulate the hardware, such as
    defragmentation tools; and any application that has a 16-bit installer that
    MS can't substitute a 32-bit version for. Those that do work, will generally
    work as well, or even better, than they did under 32-bit Windows.

    --
    Charlie.

    thepeartree wrote:
    > Let me add that if the column can point us to hard info on what
    > software will or will not run under x64, I'll be happy.
    >
    >
    >> New Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
    >>
    >> Columnist Charlie Russel provides an overview of Windows XP
    >> Professional x64 Edition, and explains what hardware and software it
    >> supports.
    >>
    >> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/64bit/russel_exploringx64.mspx
    >>
    >> Ask questions or post comments about the article here.
    >>
    >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
    >> rights.
    >>
    >> Thanks,
    >> --
    >> Kathie Werner
    >> Tech editor, vendor [MS]
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, May 25, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Thanks, that does clear things up some. So... some obvious areas of conflict
    will be things like CD/DVD burner software, as well. Not to mention mouse,
    video, or keyboard drivers and software.

    --
    It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop...


    "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

    > That is, as always, an ever moving target. But what we _can_ say with some
    > certainty is that 32-bit applications that do NOT require an operating system
    > level driver, and that aren't packaged with a 16 bit installer, will work.
    > This leaves some obvious problem areas: Anti-Virus programs; some games,
    > especially ones with copy protection schemes that use system level
    > drivers;utilities that directly manipulate the hardware, such as
    > defragmentation tools; and any application that has a 16-bit installer that
    > MS can't substitute a 32-bit version for. Those that do work, will generally
    > work as well, or even better, than they did under 32-bit Windows.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    >
    > thepeartree wrote:
    > > Let me add that if the column can point us to hard info on what
    > > software will or will not run under x64, I'll be happy.
    > >
    > >
    > >> New Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
    > >>
    > >> Columnist Charlie Russel provides an overview of Windows XP
    > >> Professional x64 Edition, and explains what hardware and software it
    > >> supports.
    > >>
    > >> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/64bit/russel_exploringx64.mspx
    > >>
    > >> Ask questions or post comments about the article here.
    > >>
    > >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
    > >> rights.
    > >>
    > >> Thanks,
    > >> --
    > >> Kathie Werner
    > >> Tech editor, vendor [MS]

    >
    >
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?dGhlcGVhcnRyZWU=?=, May 25, 2005
    #3
  4. Yes, some CD/DVD software is having problems, others are working. And basic
    functionality is in the OS. Mouse/keyboard/etc -- basic functionality in the
    OS, extra stuff maybe not. There are not, for example, any intellipoint
    drivers from MS. Video -- both the primary vendors (ATI and NVIDEA) have
    updated drivers and packages available.

    --
    Charlie.

    thepeartree wrote:
    > Thanks, that does clear things up some. So... some obvious areas of
    > conflict will be things like CD/DVD burner software, as well. Not to
    > mention mouse, video, or keyboard drivers and software.
    >
    >
    >> That is, as always, an ever moving target. But what we _can_ say
    >> with some certainty is that 32-bit applications that do NOT require
    >> an operating system level driver, and that aren't packaged with a 16
    >> bit installer, will work. This leaves some obvious problem areas:
    >> Anti-Virus programs; some games, especially ones with copy
    >> protection schemes that use system level drivers;utilities that
    >> directly manipulate the hardware, such as defragmentation tools; and
    >> any application that has a 16-bit installer that MS can't substitute
    >> a 32-bit version for. Those that do work, will generally work as
    >> well, or even better, than they did under 32-bit Windows.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >>
    >> thepeartree wrote:
    >>> Let me add that if the column can point us to hard info on what
    >>> software will or will not run under x64, I'll be happy.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> New Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
    >>>>
    >>>> Columnist Charlie Russel provides an overview of Windows XP
    >>>> Professional x64 Edition, and explains what hardware and software
    >>>> it supports.
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/64bit/russel_exploringx64.mspx
    >>>>
    >>>> Ask questions or post comments about the article here.
    >>>>
    >>>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
    >>>> rights.
    >>>>
    >>>> Thanks,
    >>>> --
    >>>> Kathie Werner
    >>>> Tech editor, vendor [MS]
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, May 25, 2005
    #4
  5. Well, it all becomes a moot point until anti-virus, anti-spyware/ad-ware, and
    firewall vendors catch up. No-one in their right mind can operate without
    sufficient security in place.

    --
    It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop...


    "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

    > Yes, some CD/DVD software is having problems, others are working. And basic
    > functionality is in the OS. Mouse/keyboard/etc -- basic functionality in the
    > OS, extra stuff maybe not. There are not, for example, any intellipoint
    > drivers from MS. Video -- both the primary vendors (ATI and NVIDEA) have
    > updated drivers and packages available.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    >
    > thepeartree wrote:
    > > Thanks, that does clear things up some. So... some obvious areas of
    > > conflict will be things like CD/DVD burner software, as well. Not to
    > > mention mouse, video, or keyboard drivers and software.
    > >
    > >
    > >> That is, as always, an ever moving target. But what we _can_ say
    > >> with some certainty is that 32-bit applications that do NOT require
    > >> an operating system level driver, and that aren't packaged with a 16
    > >> bit installer, will work. This leaves some obvious problem areas:
    > >> Anti-Virus programs; some games, especially ones with copy
    > >> protection schemes that use system level drivers;utilities that
    > >> directly manipulate the hardware, such as defragmentation tools; and
    > >> any application that has a 16-bit installer that MS can't substitute
    > >> a 32-bit version for. Those that do work, will generally work as
    > >> well, or even better, than they did under 32-bit Windows.
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >> Charlie.
    > >>
    > >> thepeartree wrote:
    > >>> Let me add that if the column can point us to hard info on what
    > >>> software will or will not run under x64, I'll be happy.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>> New Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
    > >>>>
    > >>>> Columnist Charlie Russel provides an overview of Windows XP
    > >>>> Professional x64 Edition, and explains what hardware and software
    > >>>> it supports.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/64bit/russel_exploringx64.mspx
    > >>>>
    > >>>> Ask questions or post comments about the article here.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
    > >>>> rights.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> Thanks,
    > >>>> --
    > >>>> Kathie Werner
    > >>>> Tech editor, vendor [MS]

    >
    >
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?dGhlcGVhcnRyZWU=?=, May 25, 2005
    #5
  6. A-V -- Avast
    Anti-Spyware -- all three of my choices work fine - MS, Spybot S&D, AdAware.
    Firewall -- I use the Windows Firewall and am happy with it. Of course, my
    machines mostly sit behind an ISA server. However, I've had the x64 box
    directly connected to the internet for about 2 weeks now, so that I could let
    someone use it as a development platform for a piece of software I want. It's
    still happy and uncompromised.

    --
    Charlie.

    thepeartree wrote:
    > Well, it all becomes a moot point until anti-virus,
    > anti-spyware/ad-ware, and firewall vendors catch up. No-one in their
    > right mind can operate without sufficient security in place.
    >
    >
    >> Yes, some CD/DVD software is having problems, others are working.
    >> And basic functionality is in the OS. Mouse/keyboard/etc -- basic
    >> functionality in the OS, extra stuff maybe not. There are not, for
    >> example, any intellipoint drivers from MS. Video -- both the
    >> primary vendors (ATI and NVIDEA) have updated drivers and packages
    >> available.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >>
    >> thepeartree wrote:
    >>> Thanks, that does clear things up some. So... some obvious areas of
    >>> conflict will be things like CD/DVD burner software, as well. Not to
    >>> mention mouse, video, or keyboard drivers and software.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> That is, as always, an ever moving target. But what we _can_ say
    >>>> with some certainty is that 32-bit applications that do NOT require
    >>>> an operating system level driver, and that aren't packaged with a
    >>>> 16 bit installer, will work. This leaves some obvious problem
    >>>> areas: Anti-Virus programs; some games, especially ones with copy
    >>>> protection schemes that use system level drivers;utilities that
    >>>> directly manipulate the hardware, such as defragmentation tools;
    >>>> and any application that has a 16-bit installer that MS can't
    >>>> substitute a 32-bit version for. Those that do work, will
    >>>> generally work as well, or even better, than they did under 32-bit
    >>>> Windows.
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> Charlie.
    >>>>
    >>>> thepeartree wrote:
    >>>>> Let me add that if the column can point us to hard info on what
    >>>>> software will or will not run under x64, I'll be happy.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> New Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Columnist Charlie Russel provides an overview of Windows XP
    >>>>>> Professional x64 Edition, and explains what hardware and software
    >>>>>> it supports.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/64bit/russel_exploringx64.mspx
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Ask questions or post comments about the article here.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
    >>>>>> no rights.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>>> --
    >>>>>> Kathie Werner
    >>>>>> Tech editor, vendor [MS]
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, May 26, 2005
    #6
  7. Well, you'll pardon me if I don't share your confidence in either Avast! or
    the XP firewall. As you say, you spend time behind a brick wall. Having spent
    a year or so testing anti-virus products, I prefer something a little more
    comprehensive. Similar comment about the firewall. In any case, I can't
    afford to take any chances.

    Later,
    Jeff


    --
    It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop...


    "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

    > A-V -- Avast
    > Anti-Spyware -- all three of my choices work fine - MS, Spybot S&D, AdAware.
    > Firewall -- I use the Windows Firewall and am happy with it. Of course, my
    > machines mostly sit behind an ISA server. However, I've had the x64 box
    > directly connected to the internet for about 2 weeks now, so that I could let
    > someone use it as a development platform for a piece of software I want. It's
    > still happy and uncompromised.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    >
    > thepeartree wrote:
    > > Well, it all becomes a moot point until anti-virus,
    > > anti-spyware/ad-ware, and firewall vendors catch up. No-one in their
    > > right mind can operate without sufficient security in place.
    > >
    > >
    > >> Yes, some CD/DVD software is having problems, others are working.
    > >> And basic functionality is in the OS. Mouse/keyboard/etc -- basic
    > >> functionality in the OS, extra stuff maybe not. There are not, for
    > >> example, any intellipoint drivers from MS. Video -- both the
    > >> primary vendors (ATI and NVIDEA) have updated drivers and packages
    > >> available.
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >> Charlie.
    > >>
    > >> thepeartree wrote:
    > >>> Thanks, that does clear things up some. So... some obvious areas of
    > >>> conflict will be things like CD/DVD burner software, as well. Not to
    > >>> mention mouse, video, or keyboard drivers and software.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>> That is, as always, an ever moving target. But what we _can_ say
    > >>>> with some certainty is that 32-bit applications that do NOT require
    > >>>> an operating system level driver, and that aren't packaged with a
    > >>>> 16 bit installer, will work. This leaves some obvious problem
    > >>>> areas: Anti-Virus programs; some games, especially ones with copy
    > >>>> protection schemes that use system level drivers;utilities that
    > >>>> directly manipulate the hardware, such as defragmentation tools;
    > >>>> and any application that has a 16-bit installer that MS can't
    > >>>> substitute a 32-bit version for. Those that do work, will
    > >>>> generally work as well, or even better, than they did under 32-bit
    > >>>> Windows.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> --
    > >>>> Charlie.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> thepeartree wrote:
    > >>>>> Let me add that if the column can point us to hard info on what
    > >>>>> software will or will not run under x64, I'll be happy.
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>> New Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> Columnist Charlie Russel provides an overview of Windows XP
    > >>>>>> Professional x64 Edition, and explains what hardware and software
    > >>>>>> it supports.
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/64bit/russel_exploringx64.mspx
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> Ask questions or post comments about the article here.
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
    > >>>>>> no rights.
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> Thanks,
    > >>>>>> --
    > >>>>>> Kathie Werner
    > >>>>>> Tech editor, vendor [MS]

    >
    >
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?dGhlcGVhcnRyZWU=?=, May 26, 2005
    #7
  8. thepeartree <> wrote:
    > Well, you'll pardon me if I don't share your confidence in either
    > Avast! or the XP firewall. As you say, you spend time behind a brick
    > wall. Having spent a year or so testing anti-virus products, I prefer
    > something a little more comprehensive. Similar comment about the
    > firewall. In any case, I can't afford to take any chances.
    >
    > Later,
    > Jeff
    >

    No problem here for the last three weeks with avast (a few updates and
    upgrades already) and the XPx64 firewall.
    I first installed Tiny Firewall but too much side effects for me.

    Cheers


    --
    Christian Hougardy (MS XP MVP)
    Johannesburg - South Africa
    http://msmvps.com/xpditif
     
    Christian Hougardy \(MS MVP XP\), May 26, 2005
    #8
  9. Well, if you need excuses, feel free to use this as one, then. But frankly,
    if you don't spend your time browsing around sites you probably know you
    shouldn't, and you set up your email client to only read in plain text, and
    you don't run peer to peer file sharing software, then you really don't need
    much of anything beyond Windows firewall and common sense.

    Yes, I'd prefer it if Trend were running on x64, and it will be soon. But
    until then, Avast is adequate and works fine. If you have some other you
    prefer, by all means bug them about an x64 version.

    As for the XP firewall -- the new one that first appeared with XP SP2 is
    pretty good, IMHO. Yes, it isn't as full featured as some others, and no it
    doesn't filter outbound. But I'm not worried about outbound unless I have a
    big network, and then you need that brick wall. ;) And, as I said, I've had
    my x64 machine sitting directly on the internet for 2 weeks at least, without
    a problem.


    --
    Charlie.

    thepeartree wrote:
    > Well, you'll pardon me if I don't share your confidence in either
    > Avast! or the XP firewall. As you say, you spend time behind a brick
    > wall. Having spent a year or so testing anti-virus products, I prefer
    > something a little more comprehensive. Similar comment about the
    > firewall. In any case, I can't afford to take any chances.
    >
    > Later,
    > Jeff
    >
    >
    >
    >> A-V -- Avast
    >> Anti-Spyware -- all three of my choices work fine - MS, Spybot S&D,
    >> AdAware. Firewall -- I use the Windows Firewall and am happy with
    >> it. Of course, my machines mostly sit behind an ISA server. However,
    >> I've had the x64 box directly connected to the internet for about 2
    >> weeks now, so that I could let someone use it as a development
    >> platform for a piece of software I want. It's still happy and
    >> uncompromised.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >>
    >> thepeartree wrote:
    >>> Well, it all becomes a moot point until anti-virus,
    >>> anti-spyware/ad-ware, and firewall vendors catch up. No-one in their
    >>> right mind can operate without sufficient security in place.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> Yes, some CD/DVD software is having problems, others are working.
    >>>> And basic functionality is in the OS. Mouse/keyboard/etc -- basic
    >>>> functionality in the OS, extra stuff maybe not. There are not, for
    >>>> example, any intellipoint drivers from MS. Video -- both the
    >>>> primary vendors (ATI and NVIDEA) have updated drivers and packages
    >>>> available.
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> Charlie.
    >>>>
    >>>> thepeartree wrote:
    >>>>> Thanks, that does clear things up some. So... some obvious areas
    >>>>> of conflict will be things like CD/DVD burner software, as well.
    >>>>> Not to mention mouse, video, or keyboard drivers and software.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> That is, as always, an ever moving target. But what we _can_ say
    >>>>>> with some certainty is that 32-bit applications that do NOT
    >>>>>> require an operating system level driver, and that aren't
    >>>>>> packaged with a 16 bit installer, will work. This leaves some
    >>>>>> obvious problem areas: Anti-Virus programs; some games,
    >>>>>> especially ones with copy protection schemes that use system
    >>>>>> level drivers;utilities that directly manipulate the hardware,
    >>>>>> such as defragmentation tools; and any application that has a
    >>>>>> 16-bit installer that MS can't substitute a 32-bit version for.
    >>>>>> Those that do work, will generally work as well, or even better,
    >>>>>> than they did under 32-bit Windows.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> --
    >>>>>> Charlie.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> thepeartree wrote:
    >>>>>>> Let me add that if the column can point us to hard info on what
    >>>>>>> software will or will not run under x64, I'll be happy.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> New Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Columnist Charlie Russel provides an overview of Windows XP
    >>>>>>>> Professional x64 Edition, and explains what hardware and
    >>>>>>>> software it supports.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/64bit/russel_exploringx64.mspx
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Ask questions or post comments about the article here.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
    >>>>>>>> confers no rights.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>>>>> --
    >>>>>>>> Kathie Werner
    >>>>>>>> Tech editor, vendor [MS]
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, May 26, 2005
    #9
  10. Charlie Russel - MVP <> wrote:
    > Well, if you need excuses, feel free to use this as one, then. But
    > frankly, if you don't spend your time browsing around sites you
    > probably know you shouldn't, and you set up your email client to only
    > read in plain text, and you don't run peer to peer file sharing
    > software, then you really don't need much of anything beyond Windows
    > firewall and common sense.
    >


    Come on buddy, that's exactly what 80% of the end users are doing ;););)
    What do you expect ??? :)

    Cheers

    --
    Christian Hougardy (MS XP MVP)
    Johannesburg - South Africa
    http://msmvps.com/xpditif
     
    Christian Hougardy \(MS MVP XP\), May 26, 2005
    #10
  11. Yeah. About outbound protection. I can tell you've never been hit by a worm.
    I have. My system was one of the first in the world to be attacked by this
    particular worm and if I'd ha outbound protection at that time, it would have
    saved a LOT of trouble. Unfortunately, I was testing an Internet security
    suite that didn't have it. It sailed right by a really good firewall and was
    properly(?) ignored by the anti-virus tool. It generated countless outbound
    spam messages and it took me almost a week to figure out what was wrong and
    another 4 days to get everyone involved to admit that there was a problem.
    Then I figured out how to kill it, even though it didn't show up in any
    scans. Then, a few days later, the rest of the world found out there was a
    problem. I'm guessing it was AFTER people figured out how to block it.

    So, you're welcome to your shallow protection. I prefer something a little
    more comprehensive.

    --
    It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop...


    "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

    > Well, if you need excuses, feel free to use this as one, then. But frankly,
    > if you don't spend your time browsing around sites you probably know you
    > shouldn't, and you set up your email client to only read in plain text, and
    > you don't run peer to peer file sharing software, then you really don't need
    > much of anything beyond Windows firewall and common sense.
    >
    > Yes, I'd prefer it if Trend were running on x64, and it will be soon. But
    > until then, Avast is adequate and works fine. If you have some other you
    > prefer, by all means bug them about an x64 version.
    >
    > As for the XP firewall -- the new one that first appeared with XP SP2 is
    > pretty good, IMHO. Yes, it isn't as full featured as some others, and no it
    > doesn't filter outbound. But I'm not worried about outbound unless I have a
    > big network, and then you need that brick wall. ;) And, as I said, I've had
    > my x64 machine sitting directly on the internet for 2 weeks at least, without
    > a problem.
    >
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    >
    > thepeartree wrote:
    > > Well, you'll pardon me if I don't share your confidence in either
    > > Avast! or the XP firewall. As you say, you spend time behind a brick
    > > wall. Having spent a year or so testing anti-virus products, I prefer
    > > something a little more comprehensive. Similar comment about the
    > > firewall. In any case, I can't afford to take any chances.
    > >
    > > Later,
    > > Jeff
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >> A-V -- Avast
    > >> Anti-Spyware -- all three of my choices work fine - MS, Spybot S&D,
    > >> AdAware. Firewall -- I use the Windows Firewall and am happy with
    > >> it. Of course, my machines mostly sit behind an ISA server. However,
    > >> I've had the x64 box directly connected to the internet for about 2
    > >> weeks now, so that I could let someone use it as a development
    > >> platform for a piece of software I want. It's still happy and
    > >> uncompromised.
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >> Charlie.
    > >>
    > >> thepeartree wrote:
    > >>> Well, it all becomes a moot point until anti-virus,
    > >>> anti-spyware/ad-ware, and firewall vendors catch up. No-one in their
    > >>> right mind can operate without sufficient security in place.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>> Yes, some CD/DVD software is having problems, others are working.
    > >>>> And basic functionality is in the OS. Mouse/keyboard/etc -- basic
    > >>>> functionality in the OS, extra stuff maybe not. There are not, for
    > >>>> example, any intellipoint drivers from MS. Video -- both the
    > >>>> primary vendors (ATI and NVIDEA) have updated drivers and packages
    > >>>> available.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> --
    > >>>> Charlie.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> thepeartree wrote:
    > >>>>> Thanks, that does clear things up some. So... some obvious areas
    > >>>>> of conflict will be things like CD/DVD burner software, as well.
    > >>>>> Not to mention mouse, video, or keyboard drivers and software.
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>> That is, as always, an ever moving target. But what we _can_ say
    > >>>>>> with some certainty is that 32-bit applications that do NOT
    > >>>>>> require an operating system level driver, and that aren't
    > >>>>>> packaged with a 16 bit installer, will work. This leaves some
    > >>>>>> obvious problem areas: Anti-Virus programs; some games,
    > >>>>>> especially ones with copy protection schemes that use system
    > >>>>>> level drivers;utilities that directly manipulate the hardware,
    > >>>>>> such as defragmentation tools; and any application that has a
    > >>>>>> 16-bit installer that MS can't substitute a 32-bit version for.
    > >>>>>> Those that do work, will generally work as well, or even better,
    > >>>>>> than they did under 32-bit Windows.
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> --
    > >>>>>> Charlie.
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> thepeartree wrote:
    > >>>>>>> Let me add that if the column can point us to hard info on what
    > >>>>>>> software will or will not run under x64, I'll be happy.
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>> New Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
    > >>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>> Columnist Charlie Russel provides an overview of Windows XP
    > >>>>>>>> Professional x64 Edition, and explains what hardware and
    > >>>>>>>> software it supports.
    > >>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/64bit/russel_exploringx64.mspx
    > >>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>> Ask questions or post comments about the article here.
    > >>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
    > >>>>>>>> confers no rights.
    > >>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>> Thanks,
    > >>>>>>>> --
    > >>>>>>>> Kathie Werner
    > >>>>>>>> Tech editor, vendor [MS]

    >
    >
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?dGhlcGVhcnRyZWU=?=, May 26, 2005
    #11
  12. Yes, you're right. I haven't been hit. And that is NOT an accident, nor is it
    a result of any particular AV. It is the result of always applying critical
    security patches, and using careful and well documented behaviour when
    dealing with email. I was in a company that got hit by a worm. The person who
    propagated the worm worked for me, and ran all the latest corporate level AV.
    I was running XP in beta, and couldn't use any AV. OTOH, I was in the server
    room, pulling the plug on the external NIC within 15 seconds of his opening
    that email message. Yes, it took us >6 hours to clean up internally,
    including scrubbing the exchange database, and email was down for that entire
    time. And I had lots of fun cleaning it up, having to touch nearly every
    machine. But the lesson learned for all of us is that good A-V is nice, but
    can produce a false sense of security. Good behaviour was far more important.

    (and I won't even begin to start in on why it took you a week to figure out
    what was wrong, or how you got it in the first place. )


    --
    Charlie.

    thepeartree wrote:
    > Yeah. About outbound protection. I can tell you've never been hit by
    > a worm. I have. My system was one of the first in the world to be
    > attacked by this particular worm and if I'd ha outbound protection at
    > that time, it would have saved a LOT of trouble. Unfortunately, I was
    > testing an Internet security suite that didn't have it. It sailed
    > right by a really good firewall and was properly(?) ignored by the
    > anti-virus tool. It generated countless outbound spam messages and it
    > took me almost a week to figure out what was wrong and another 4 days
    > to get everyone involved to admit that there was a problem. Then I
    > figured out how to kill it, even though it didn't show up in any
    > scans. Then, a few days later, the rest of the world found out there
    > was a problem. I'm guessing it was AFTER people figured out how to
    > block it.
    >
    > So, you're welcome to your shallow protection. I prefer something a
    > little more comprehensive.
    >
    >
    >> Well, if you need excuses, feel free to use this as one, then. But
    >> frankly, if you don't spend your time browsing around sites you
    >> probably know you shouldn't, and you set up your email client to
    >> only read in plain text, and you don't run peer to peer file sharing
    >> software, then you really don't need much of anything beyond Windows
    >> firewall and common sense.
    >>
    >> Yes, I'd prefer it if Trend were running on x64, and it will be
    >> soon. But until then, Avast is adequate and works fine. If you have
    >> some other you prefer, by all means bug them about an x64 version.
    >>
    >> As for the XP firewall -- the new one that first appeared with XP
    >> SP2 is pretty good, IMHO. Yes, it isn't as full featured as some
    >> others, and no it doesn't filter outbound. But I'm not worried about
    >> outbound unless I have a big network, and then you need that brick
    >> wall. ;) And, as I said, I've had my x64 machine sitting directly on
    >> the internet for 2 weeks at least, without a problem.
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >>
    >> thepeartree wrote:
    >>> Well, you'll pardon me if I don't share your confidence in either
    >>> Avast! or the XP firewall. As you say, you spend time behind a brick
    >>> wall. Having spent a year or so testing anti-virus products, I
    >>> prefer something a little more comprehensive. Similar comment about
    >>> the firewall. In any case, I can't afford to take any chances.
    >>>
    >>> Later,
    >>> Jeff
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> A-V -- Avast
    >>>> Anti-Spyware -- all three of my choices work fine - MS, Spybot S&D,
    >>>> AdAware. Firewall -- I use the Windows Firewall and am happy with
    >>>> it. Of course, my machines mostly sit behind an ISA server.
    >>>> However, I've had the x64 box directly connected to the internet
    >>>> for about 2 weeks now, so that I could let someone use it as a
    >>>> development platform for a piece of software I want. It's still
    >>>> happy and uncompromised.
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> Charlie.
    >>>>
    >>>> thepeartree wrote:
    >>>>> Well, it all becomes a moot point until anti-virus,
    >>>>> anti-spyware/ad-ware, and firewall vendors catch up. No-one in
    >>>>> their right mind can operate without sufficient security in place.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Yes, some CD/DVD software is having problems, others are working.
    >>>>>> And basic functionality is in the OS. Mouse/keyboard/etc -- basic
    >>>>>> functionality in the OS, extra stuff maybe not. There are not,
    >>>>>> for example, any intellipoint drivers from MS. Video -- both the
    >>>>>> primary vendors (ATI and NVIDEA) have updated drivers and
    >>>>>> packages available.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> --
    >>>>>> Charlie.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> thepeartree wrote:
    >>>>>>> Thanks, that does clear things up some. So... some obvious areas
    >>>>>>> of conflict will be things like CD/DVD burner software, as well.
    >>>>>>> Not to mention mouse, video, or keyboard drivers and software.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> That is, as always, an ever moving target. But what we _can_
    >>>>>>>> say with some certainty is that 32-bit applications that do NOT
    >>>>>>>> require an operating system level driver, and that aren't
    >>>>>>>> packaged with a 16 bit installer, will work. This leaves some
    >>>>>>>> obvious problem areas: Anti-Virus programs; some games,
    >>>>>>>> especially ones with copy protection schemes that use system
    >>>>>>>> level drivers;utilities that directly manipulate the hardware,
    >>>>>>>> such as defragmentation tools; and any application that has a
    >>>>>>>> 16-bit installer that MS can't substitute a 32-bit version for.
    >>>>>>>> Those that do work, will generally work as well, or even
    >>>>>>>> better, than they did under 32-bit Windows.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> --
    >>>>>>>> Charlie.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> thepeartree wrote:
    >>>>>>>>> Let me add that if the column can point us to hard info on
    >>>>>>>>> what software will or will not run under x64, I'll be happy.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> New Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Columnist Charlie Russel provides an overview of Windows XP
    >>>>>>>>>> Professional x64 Edition, and explains what hardware and
    >>>>>>>>>> software it supports.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/64bit/russel_exploringx64.mspx
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Ask questions or post comments about the article here.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
    >>>>>>>>>> confers no rights.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>>>>>>> --
    >>>>>>>>>> Kathie Werner
    >>>>>>>>>> Tech editor, vendor [MS]
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, May 26, 2005
    #12
  13. ah, good common sense? At least from folks trying to be on the leading edge.

    I do run Trend on my main workstation, and on all the others here except the
    x64 ones, obviously.

    --
    Charlie.

    Christian Hougardy (MS MVP XP) wrote:
    > Charlie Russel - MVP <> wrote:
    >> Well, if you need excuses, feel free to use this as one, then. But
    >> frankly, if you don't spend your time browsing around sites you
    >> probably know you shouldn't, and you set up your email client to only
    >> read in plain text, and you don't run peer to peer file sharing
    >> software, then you really don't need much of anything beyond Windows
    >> firewall and common sense.
    >>

    >
    > Come on buddy, that's exactly what 80% of the end users are doing
    > ;););) What do you expect ??? :)
    >
    > Cheers
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, May 26, 2005
    #13
  14. Well, to satisfy your curiosity, the worm wasn't IN an e-mail or a site I
    visited, it was a totally free-standing thing, apparently. I've never heard
    of anyone figuring out any propagation vector. So, it wasn't filthy habits,
    it was being connected to the Internet that did it.

    Why did it take a week to figure out something was wrong?

    Because the worm had no outward effect on system performance AT ALL. The
    only thing it was doing was generating large amounts of spam and sending it
    out via its own built-in server. There were no outward signs of that EXCEPT
    that once in a blue moon, I would get a cryptic e-mail error message when
    sending an e-mail. It took me three of those days to get through to someone
    in the security department of my ISP who knew what was going on. It turned
    out they have a limiter on e-mail: no more than 500 every three hours,
    outbound. Of course that info isn't anywhere on the ISP's site or terms of
    service, nor did any but a select few seem to know about it. And that is why
    it took more than a little work to find out what the heck was going on. If it
    had attacked the system in a visible way, it would have been easier to
    handle.

    Of course after all that, none of the anti-virus, anti-adware/spyware, or
    anti-Trojan products available to a non-corporate user could even see it, so
    I had to wipe as much as necessary and pray. Prayer is good- it worked.

    --
    It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop...


    "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

    > Yes, you're right. I haven't been hit. And that is NOT an accident, nor is it
    > a result of any particular AV. It is the result of always applying critical
    > security patches, and using careful and well documented behaviour when
    > dealing with email. I was in a company that got hit by a worm. The person who
    > propagated the worm worked for me, and ran all the latest corporate level AV.
    > I was running XP in beta, and couldn't use any AV. OTOH, I was in the server
    > room, pulling the plug on the external NIC within 15 seconds of his opening
    > that email message. Yes, it took us >6 hours to clean up internally,
    > including scrubbing the exchange database, and email was down for that entire
    > time. And I had lots of fun cleaning it up, having to touch nearly every
    > machine. But the lesson learned for all of us is that good A-V is nice, but
    > can produce a false sense of security. Good behaviour was far more important.
    >
    > (and I won't even begin to start in on why it took you a week to figure out
    > what was wrong, or how you got it in the first place. )
    >
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    >
    > thepeartree wrote:
    > > Yeah. About outbound protection. I can tell you've never been hit by
    > > a worm. I have. My system was one of the first in the world to be
    > > attacked by this particular worm and if I'd ha outbound protection at
    > > that time, it would have saved a LOT of trouble. Unfortunately, I was
    > > testing an Internet security suite that didn't have it. It sailed
    > > right by a really good firewall and was properly(?) ignored by the
    > > anti-virus tool. It generated countless outbound spam messages and it
    > > took me almost a week to figure out what was wrong and another 4 days
    > > to get everyone involved to admit that there was a problem. Then I
    > > figured out how to kill it, even though it didn't show up in any
    > > scans. Then, a few days later, the rest of the world found out there
    > > was a problem. I'm guessing it was AFTER people figured out how to
    > > block it.
    > >
    > > So, you're welcome to your shallow protection. I prefer something a
    > > little more comprehensive.
    > >
    > >
    > >> Well, if you need excuses, feel free to use this as one, then. But
    > >> frankly, if you don't spend your time browsing around sites you
    > >> probably know you shouldn't, and you set up your email client to
    > >> only read in plain text, and you don't run peer to peer file sharing
    > >> software, then you really don't need much of anything beyond Windows
    > >> firewall and common sense.
    > >>
    > >> Yes, I'd prefer it if Trend were running on x64, and it will be
    > >> soon. But until then, Avast is adequate and works fine. If you have
    > >> some other you prefer, by all means bug them about an x64 version.
    > >>
    > >> As for the XP firewall -- the new one that first appeared with XP
    > >> SP2 is pretty good, IMHO. Yes, it isn't as full featured as some
    > >> others, and no it doesn't filter outbound. But I'm not worried about
    > >> outbound unless I have a big network, and then you need that brick
    > >> wall. ;) And, as I said, I've had my x64 machine sitting directly on
    > >> the internet for 2 weeks at least, without a problem.
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >> Charlie.
    > >>
    > >> thepeartree wrote:
    > >>> Well, you'll pardon me if I don't share your confidence in either
    > >>> Avast! or the XP firewall. As you say, you spend time behind a brick
    > >>> wall. Having spent a year or so testing anti-virus products, I
    > >>> prefer something a little more comprehensive. Similar comment about
    > >>> the firewall. In any case, I can't afford to take any chances.
    > >>>
    > >>> Later,
    > >>> Jeff
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>> A-V -- Avast
    > >>>> Anti-Spyware -- all three of my choices work fine - MS, Spybot S&D,
    > >>>> AdAware. Firewall -- I use the Windows Firewall and am happy with
    > >>>> it. Of course, my machines mostly sit behind an ISA server.
    > >>>> However, I've had the x64 box directly connected to the internet
    > >>>> for about 2 weeks now, so that I could let someone use it as a
    > >>>> development platform for a piece of software I want. It's still
    > >>>> happy and uncompromised.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> --
    > >>>> Charlie.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> thepeartree wrote:
    > >>>>> Well, it all becomes a moot point until anti-virus,
    > >>>>> anti-spyware/ad-ware, and firewall vendors catch up. No-one in
    > >>>>> their right mind can operate without sufficient security in place.
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>> Yes, some CD/DVD software is having problems, others are working.
    > >>>>>> And basic functionality is in the OS. Mouse/keyboard/etc -- basic
    > >>>>>> functionality in the OS, extra stuff maybe not. There are not,
    > >>>>>> for example, any intellipoint drivers from MS. Video -- both the
    > >>>>>> primary vendors (ATI and NVIDEA) have updated drivers and
    > >>>>>> packages available.
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> --
    > >>>>>> Charlie.
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> thepeartree wrote:
    > >>>>>>> Thanks, that does clear things up some. So... some obvious areas
    > >>>>>>> of conflict will be things like CD/DVD burner software, as well.
    > >>>>>>> Not to mention mouse, video, or keyboard drivers and software.
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>> That is, as always, an ever moving target. But what we _can_
    > >>>>>>>> say with some certainty is that 32-bit applications that do NOT
    > >>>>>>>> require an operating system level driver, and that aren't
    > >>>>>>>> packaged with a 16 bit installer, will work. This leaves some
    > >>>>>>>> obvious problem areas: Anti-Virus programs; some games,
    > >>>>>>>> especially ones with copy protection schemes that use system
    > >>>>>>>> level drivers;utilities that directly manipulate the hardware,
    > >>>>>>>> such as defragmentation tools; and any application that has a
    > >>>>>>>> 16-bit installer that MS can't substitute a 32-bit version for.
    > >>>>>>>> Those that do work, will generally work as well, or even
    > >>>>>>>> better, than they did under 32-bit Windows.
    > >>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>> --
    > >>>>>>>> Charlie.
    > >>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>> thepeartree wrote:
    > >>>>>>>>> Let me add that if the column can point us to hard info on
    > >>>>>>>>> what software will or will not run under x64, I'll be happy.
    > >>>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>>>> New Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
    > >>>>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>>>> Columnist Charlie Russel provides an overview of Windows XP
    > >>>>>>>>>> Professional x64 Edition, and explains what hardware and
    > >>>>>>>>>> software it supports.
    > >>>>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/64bit/russel_exploringx64.mspx
    > >>>>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>>>> Ask questions or post comments about the article here.
    > >>>>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>>>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
    > >>>>>>>>>> confers no rights.
    > >>>>>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
    > >>>>>>>>>> --
    > >>>>>>>>>> Kathie Werner
    > >>>>>>>>>> Tech editor, vendor [MS]

    >
    >
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?dGhlcGVhcnRyZWU=?=, May 26, 2005
    #14
  15. Why??????

    Why won't my CPU support windows XP Pro 64bit? anyone help????????:-(
     
    =?Utf-8?B?TWF0dA==?=, Oct 16, 2005
    #15
  16. Re: Why??????

    "Matt" <> wrote in:

    > Why won't my CPU support windows XP Pro 64bit? anyone help????????:-(


    Because it's not a 64 bit CPU? What CPU do you have?

    --
    David R. Norton MVP
    <>
     
    David R. Norton MVP, Oct 16, 2005
    #16
  17. Re: Why??????

    Just in the off chance that you still kept the receipt for you machine could
    you give us a

    FRIGGIN HINT ??

    i.e. CPU ? Motherboard ? Ram ? Chipset ?

    jeez man ....

    "Matt" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Why won't my CPU support windows XP Pro 64bit? anyone help????????:-(
     
    Norman Brooks, Oct 16, 2005
    #17
  18. Re: Why??????

    Matt wrote:
    > Why won't my CPU support windows XP Pro 64bit? anyone help????????:-(


    The Z-80 processor is only 4 bit. Or is that not the one you have? LOL (j/k)

    --
    Wayne Wastier
    Z-80 - AMD-64
    HwayneW
     
    Wayne Wastier, Oct 16, 2005
    #18
  19. =?Utf-8?B?dGhlcGVhcnRyZWU=?=

    NoNoBadDog! Guest

    Re: Why??????

    "Matt" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Why won't my CPU support windows XP Pro 64bit? anyone help????????:-(


    Because you have a 32 bit CPU!

    Bobby
     
    NoNoBadDog!, Oct 16, 2005
    #19
  20. Re: Why??????

    "Wayne Wastier" <> wrote in:

    > Matt wrote:
    >> Why won't my CPU support windows XP Pro 64bit? anyone help????????:-(

    >
    > The Z-80 processor is only 4 bit. Or is that not the one you have? LOL


    Is that why I'm having so much trouble installing it on my TRS-80 Model III?

    I was thinking maybe the 48k ram wasn't enough....

    --
    David R. Norton MVP
    <>
     
    David R. Norton MVP, Oct 16, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?dW5uZWZlcg==?=

    Re: Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition

    =?Utf-8?B?dW5uZWZlcg==?=, May 25, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    495
    John Barnes
    Dec 9, 2005
  2. =?Utf-8?B?R2VvcmdlIEFsZ3Jp?=

    Re: Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition

    =?Utf-8?B?R2VvcmdlIEFsZ3Jp?=, Oct 21, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    355
    =?Utf-8?B?R2VvcmdlIEFsZ3Jp?=
    Oct 22, 2005
  3. =?Utf-8?B?U3RldmUgSGlnaGFt?=

    RE: Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition

    =?Utf-8?B?U3RldmUgSGlnaGFt?=, Nov 25, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    582
    John Barnes
    Dec 9, 2005
  4. =?Utf-8?B?bHJzY2h3YXJ0ejI=?=

    Re: Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition

    =?Utf-8?B?bHJzY2h3YXJ0ejI=?=, Mar 30, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    374
    =?Utf-8?B?QWxpQXdhaXNLaGFu?=
    Feb 23, 2007
  5. =?Utf-8?B?ZmZfbWFj?=

    RE: Column: Exploring Windows XP Professional x64 Edition

    =?Utf-8?B?ZmZfbWFj?=, Apr 12, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    424
    Charlie Russel - MVP
    Apr 12, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page