What a waste

[jmc]

Suddenly, without warning, Black Shuck exclaimed (5/13/2005 7:12 PM):

Richard Miller got up from the bar and shouted: :


Erm, did you really NEED 64 bit computing? DO you run large databases
thet require gigabytes of memory to run? Perhaps you run a web server
farm? If so, why do you need a printer or play games??

64-bit really is being missold to many people, who think it's going to
be a major leap in performance, when really it means your are moving to
Server 2003 SP1, and locked down drivers.

Actually, my 64-bit computer, running a 32-bit OS (Windows 2K, see no
need to go to XP), does run stuff noticibly faster - more than can be
accounted for by just a faster cpu, everything else is pretty much the same.

And I certainly don't feel like a beta-tester, the system's running rock
solid, no hardware issues at all. If I bought XP 64, or whatever it's
being called, *then* I'd be a beta tester.

jmc

 

[J.Venning]

And I certainly don't feel like a beta-tester, the system's running rock
solid, no hardware issues at all. If I bought XP 64, or whatever it's
being called, *then* I'd be a beta tester.
jmc<

I came on to this newsgroup over a month ago, after discovering that
I've bought a new computer with an AMD Athlon 64-bit processor but that it
didn't have anything to do with the capability of the 64-bit programming. A
few very helpful and knowledgeable posters introduced me to the Windows x64
RC1, and later the RC2, and I must admit that I noticed, and was very
enthusiastic (still am), about the difference in performance. However, my
hardware didn't have any of the compatible drivers necessary to make life
easy for me, and none of the Internet Security programs I bought with my own
hard-earned money worked with the x64. After having installed, deleted, and
re-installed the x64 OS over 10 times (no exaggeration), and even buying and
trying out the Linux 64-bit, I finally decided to go back to my old trusty
32-bit Windows XP OS. This does not mean that I have given up on the x64 OS,
far from it, I am looking forward to eventually use it, be it the XP or the
Longhorn version.

The point I'm trying to put across is - is it really so bad to be a
"Beta tester", when it comes to computers? After all we ourselves will
eventually benefit from the testing, and could even suggest a few changes
and modifications.
J.

 

[Andreas Ludwig]

Actually, my 64-bit computer, running a 32-bit OS (Windows 2K, see no
need to go to XP), does run stuff noticibly faster - more than can be
accounted for by just a faster cpu, everything else is pretty much the same.

Same here with dual Opteron running eComStation 1.2 (aka OS/2 version 4.52).

Cheers
Andreas

 

[Red PIll]

They work fine on planet Earth! Where are you?

Or did you buy cheap components that nobody supports?

run 64 bit SUSE Linux. they've been 64 bit for awhile and have many 64
bit apps too.


--redpill

 

[signmeuptoo]

What good is a 64 bit computer? Can't play games, can't print anything, not
even throw a network. I bought one and what a waste. Can anyone tell me what
this thing is good for, except to wait 2 years when all the drivers come
out?



Richard

Richard, what a waste you are. I am stuck here with a Pentium III 550 on
an old BX based motherboard. I wish that I had your problems. You don't
sound like you are all that in touch with the tech scene, so I wonder why
you even bothered to get up in the morning.

That AMD 64 CPU is kicking ass right now in performance. You are
complaining because Bill Gates is behind the hardware world. You have
hardware that is ready for the eventual OS upgrade, and you are
complaining? What an ass you are.

Please, PLEASE, send me your computer. I am very poor, I am stuck living
off of disability, and you won't catch *me* whining about having your
system, so let me have it.

If you really care so much about being able to run a 64 bit OS, then DO IT,
get a Linux Distro and run it on Dual Boot on your system and stop acting
pig headed and whining. Sounds to me like you are an unappreciative
spoiled brat.