Why are new laptops having 64 bit W7 installed?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paul H
  • Start date Start date
P

Paul H

I prefer 32 bit Windows - 64 bit requires special versions of some programs?
Is there some benefit for 64 bit Home Premium over 32 bit?
 
From: "Paul H" <[email protected]>

| I prefer 32 bit Windows - 64 bit requires special versions of some programs?
| Is there some benefit for 64 bit Home Premium over 32 bit?


You mean like breaking the 4GB (2^32-1) RAM barrier ?
 
I prefer 32 bit Windows - 64 bit requires special versions of some programs?
Click to expand...


There are still *very* few programs that have 64-bit versions.
Is there some benefit for 64 bit Home Premium over 32 bit?
Click to expand...



Here's my standard reply:

The advantage of running a 64-bit version of Windows basically exists
only if you also run 64-bit applications under it. Bear in mind that
there are very few such applications available yet. If you are
presently running 32-bit Windows, you don't have any 64-bit
applications, so to achieve any advantage, you not only have to
replace Windows, but also your applications, *if* (and that's a big
"if") 64-bit versions exist.

Also note that you will need 64-bit drivers for all your hardware.
Those drivers may not all be available, especially if some of your
hardware is a few years old. So it's possible that you might also have
to replace things like your printer, scanner, etc.

So the answer to your question is that it may not be a great idea
right now. That will undoubtedly change in the near future, but for
now, 64-bit Windows mostly means some extra trouble and expense for
little or no benefit.

On the other hand, installing 64-bit Windows instead of 32-bit Windows
makes you able to buy 64-bit software as it becomes available, instead
of the older 32-bit versions. That means that installing 64-bit
Windows--even though it may do very little for you at present--puts
you into a better position for the future.

One additional point: the 64-bit version lets you use more than the
approximately 3.1GB of RAM that the 32-bit version can use. Very few
people need or can make effective use of more than 3.1GB, but if you
are one of those who can, that's something else to consider.
 
There are still *very* few programs that have 64-bit versions.
Click to expand...


And I neglected to add that in the great majority of cases, 32-bit
versions of programs run just fine on 64-bit Windows.
 
1. So you can use more than 2 gig of ram.
Click to expand...


Not true. 32-bit Windows can use somewhere around 3.1GB, depending on
your hardware configuration.

Moreover, it depends on what apps you run, but *very* few people
running Windows XP can make effective use of 2GB of RAM, let alone
more.

2. Runs faster with most 64 bit programs like 64bit IE.
Click to expand...


There are *very* few 64-bit programs yet.

3. 32bit programs run fine on 64 bit windows or linux.
Click to expand...


Most do, but not all.

4. I upgraded my 32 bit Vista with 64 bit Windows 7.
Click to expand...


Undoubtedly you clean-installed 64-bit Windows 7, rather than doing an
upgrade.
 
Not true. 32-bit Windows can use somewhere around 3.1GB, depending on
your hardware configuration.

Moreover, it depends on what apps you run, but *very* few people
running Windows XP can make effective use of 2GB of RAM, let alone
more.
Click to expand...


My apologies. I thought I was posting in a Windows XP group. This is
a Vista newsgroup, and the second sentence I wrote is true, but
completely irrelevant to this question.
 
From: "Paul H" <[email protected]>

| But that's my question. 32 bit seems satisfactory for me for a few years,
| at least.

There is *much* overhead in Vista and Win7 and thus the 4GB barrier looks very small.
 
From: "Van Chocstraw" <[email protected]>



| 1. So you can use more than 2 gig of ram.
| 2. Runs faster with most 64 bit programs like 64bit IE.
| 3. 32bit programs run fine on 64 bit windows or linux.
| 4. I upgraded my 32 bit Vista with 64 bit Windows 7.

Actually, 64bit apps will run slower than a 32bit app which runs slower than a 16bit app
which runs slower than an 8bit app.

The fact is with a 64bit app you move twice as much data per clock cycle.
 
The question is the same as "why newer cars had airbags. I prefer just
seatbelts - is there a special way to not smash my face against windshield
during collision? I really prefer the old seatbelts which rip shoulders
apart".

You're trying to spit against wind. But you have to go with the flow - most
new hardware is moving upto 64 bits.
That means data is processed in double-word lenghts as opposed to 32 bits,
in a very simplified "dummy" way I could say it doubles the execution speed.
In reality it's not always so but improvement is there.

Are you trying to stop the progress?
Then you cna go back to 16 DOS, ir hey try 8-bit Monitor from 1970's.
So you wouldn;t complain.
 
Hi,

64-bit hardware + 32-bit OS/applications = 32-bit computing.

64-bit hardware + (minimum) 64-bit OS + 32-/64-bit applications = 64-bit
computing.

The author, in my humble opinion, gives a brief and easy to understand
explanations for when and why someone would consider using a 64-bit OS and
that is one step closer to 64-bit computing.
 
There are still *very* few programs that have 64-bit versions.




Here's my standard reply:

The advantage of running a 64-bit version of Windows basically exists
only if you also run 64-bit applications under it. Bear in mind that
there are very few such applications available yet. If you are
presently running 32-bit Windows, you don't have any 64-bit
applications, so to achieve any advantage, you not only have to
replace Windows, but also your applications, *if* (and that's a big
"if") 64-bit versions exist.

Also note that you will need 64-bit drivers for all your hardware.
Those drivers may not all be available, especially if some of your
hardware is a few years old. So it's possible that you might also have
to replace things like your printer, scanner, etc.

So the answer to your question is that it may not be a great idea
right now. That will undoubtedly change in the near future, but for
now, 64-bit Windows mostly means some extra trouble and expense for
little or no benefit.

On the other hand, installing 64-bit Windows instead of 32-bit Windows
makes you able to buy 64-bit software as it becomes available, instead
of the older 32-bit versions. That means that installing 64-bit
Windows--even though it may do very little for you at present--puts
you into a better position for the future.

One additional point: the 64-bit version lets you use more than the
approximately 3.1GB of RAM that the 32-bit version can use. Very few
people need or can make effective use of more than 3.1GB, but if you
are one of those who can, that's something else to consider.
Click to expand...


Why do preinstalled laptops and desktop have 64bit installed. Dell,
Emachine, Gateway, etc. and some have no floppy option either (You
cant order any from dell, like you use to).

I am thinking of a computer shop and getting Vista and might upgrade
to W7, I always hate to be behind the times. I am running windows
98se and xp sp3 dual boot legally.



Greg
 
From: "Van Chocstraw" <[email protected]>



| Twice as much data? That means faster to me.

Exact opposite.
It has MORE work to do per clock cycle. Thus making it slower.
Click to expand...

Uh - the "more work" is done in parallel, i.e., n bits at a time. Note that
the unit is *per clock cycle*; the clock cycles aren't being changed to
accommodate different numbers bits.
 
Ken Blake said:
There are still *very* few programs that have 64-bit versions.




Here's my standard reply:

The advantage of running a 64-bit version of Windows basically exists
only if you also run 64-bit applications under it. Bear in mind that
there are very few such applications available yet. If you are
presently running 32-bit Windows, you don't have any 64-bit
applications, so to achieve any advantage, you not only have to
replace Windows, but also your applications, *if* (and that's a big
"if") 64-bit versions exist.

Also note that you will need 64-bit drivers for all your hardware.
Those drivers may not all be available, especially if some of your
hardware is a few years old. So it's possible that you might also have
to replace things like your printer, scanner, etc.

So the answer to your question is that it may not be a great idea
right now. That will undoubtedly change in the near future, but for
now, 64-bit Windows mostly means some extra trouble and expense for
little or no benefit.

On the other hand, installing 64-bit Windows instead of 32-bit Windows
makes you able to buy 64-bit software as it becomes available, instead
of the older 32-bit versions. That means that installing 64-bit
Windows--even though it may do very little for you at present--puts
you into a better position for the future.

One additional point: the 64-bit version lets you use more than the
approximately 3.1GB of RAM that the 32-bit version can use. Very few
people need or can make effective use of more than 3.1GB, but if you
are one of those who can, that's something else to consider.
Click to expand...

Ken,

The rapid switchover to 64 bit hardware and Windows is a good
thing, as it will accelerate the introduction of 64 bit apps.
Developers can now concentrate on 64 bit only code without the
cost of producing parallel 32 bit code. By the end of the year,
netbooks will probably be the only remaining 32 bit PCs. Even
Macs can now run true 64 bit code with OSX 10.6 Snow Leopard.
 
Paul H said:
I prefer 32 bit Windows - 64 bit requires special versions of some programs?
Click to expand...

No, it does not. Any 32 bit program should run in a 64-bit OS.
Is there some benefit for 64 bit Home Premium over 32 bit?
Click to expand...

Yes, you can have a LOT more RAM. No more 4GB limit, which translates
to 3.5 or so after BIOS and video RAM are mapped.
 
OK, I've read all the arguments.

1. I don't need speed for what I do.
a)Google
b)MicroFocus COBOL (version 3.1 will never use 64 bit)
c) email
d)FreeCell
e)applications I write in COBOL
f)I can be happy with a Celeron
g)network my 5 mostly laptop computers
1)one 32 bit W7 home premium
2)one 32 bit Vista home premium (soon to be W7)
3)one Vista basic on my wife's Celeron
4)one XP Pro (has apps. I can't bear to part with)
5)one old desktop XP Pro

2. I do not want to have to think abut 32 vs. 64 bit anything
a)just live a simple life for a few years
b)maybe my next computer will be 64 bit everything
c)they go obsolete in two or three years and
d)they get cheaper and cheaper.
e)I just don't care

3. So what won't they make some pre-installed 32 bit W7?
a)I'm not the only one who doesn't care.
b)is it some upgrade plot by Microsoft?

I'm an old guy - computers are just my hobby - I volunteer at senior
centers - www.PCHplano.com
 
Yup. I went to install a copy of Windows 7 on my brother's computer and
asked him if he wanted 32 or 64 bit. He said the 32-bit was OK and to
install that. 'Works very well.

Saucy
 
Back
Top