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" <NoSpamphobergNoSpam@att.net>

| 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 ?

--
Dave
[url]http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html[/url]
Multi-AV - [url]http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp[/url]

Maybe the following link can provide some answers:

64-Bit Computing: The Next Big (Confusing) Thing:

[url]http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/techtonicshifts/archive/2009/09/16/64-bit-computing-the-next-big-confusing-thing.aspx[/url]

Good luck.

"Paul H" <NoSpamphobergNoSpam@att.net> wrote in message
news:OmP2pMpVKHA.4688@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> 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?
>[/color]

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

"David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message
news:ORx4xXpVKHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> From: "Paul H" <NoSpamphobergNoSpam@att.net>
>
> | 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 ?
>
> --
> Dave
> [url]http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html[/url]
> Multi-AV - [url]http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp[/url]
>
>[/color]

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:22:16 -0500, "Paul H"
<NoSpamphobergNoSpam@att.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
> I prefer 32 bit Windows - 64 bit requires special versions of some programs?[/color]


There are still *very* few programs that have 64-bit versions.
[color=blue]
> Is there some benefit for 64 bit Home Premium over 32 bit?[/color]



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.


--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

"Paul H" <NoSpamphobergNoSpam@att.net> wrote in message
news:exxnFjpVKHA.4816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> But that's my question. 32 bit seems satisfactory for me for a few years,
> at least.
>
> "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message
> news:ORx4xXpVKHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...[color=green]
>> From: "Paul H" <NoSpamphobergNoSpam@att.net>
>>
>> | 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 ?
>>
>> --
>> Dave
>> [url]http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html[/url]
>> Multi-AV - [url]http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp[/url]
>>
>>[/color]
>[/color]

A lot of people were happy with Win.98 too. They just keep going to better
and faster. I have a Vista Home Premium in both. For what I do the 64 bit is
no problem. It is faster to start and at some things, but not enough that I
would have gone out of my way for it, but for programs that are very
resource heavy the ability to use more RAM will be of course a good thing.
--
If we are what we eat, I'm cheap, fast, and easy.

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:30:21 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP"
<kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:22:16 -0500, "Paul H"
> <NoSpamphobergNoSpam@att.net> wrote:
>[color=green]
> > I prefer 32 bit Windows - 64 bit requires special versions of some programs?[/color]
>
>
> There are still *very* few programs that have 64-bit versions.[/color]


And I neglected to add that in the great majority of cases, 32-bit
versions of programs run just fine on 64-bit Windows.

[color=blue][color=green]
> > Is there some benefit for 64 bit Home Premium over 32 bit?[/color]
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
> --
> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
> Please Reply to the Newsgroup[/color]

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

Paul H wrote:[color=blue]
> 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?
>[/color]

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.

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:53:57 -0400, Van Chocstraw
<boobooililililil@roadrunner.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Paul H wrote:[color=green]
> > 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?
> >[/color]
>
> 1. So you can use more than 2 gig of ram.[/color]


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.

[color=blue]
> 2. Runs faster with most 64 bit programs like 64bit IE.[/color]


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

[color=blue]
> 3. 32bit programs run fine on 64 bit windows or linux.[/color]


Most do, but not all.

[color=blue]
> 4. I upgraded my 32 bit Vista with 64 bit Windows 7.[/color]


Undoubtedly you clean-installed 64-bit Windows 7, rather than doing an
upgrade.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:07:30 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP"
<kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:53:57 -0400, Van Chocstraw
> <boobooililililil@roadrunner.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
> > Paul H wrote:[color=darkred]
> > > 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?
> > >[/color]
> >
> > 1. So you can use more than 2 gig of ram.[/color]
>
>
> 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.[/color]


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.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

From: "Paul H" <NoSpamphobergNoSpam@att.net>

| 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.

--
Dave
[url]http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html[/url]
Multi-AV - [url]http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp[/url]

From: "Van Chocstraw" <boobooililililil@roadrunner.com>

| Paul H wrote:[color=blue][color=green]
>> 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?[/color][/color]


| 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.

--
Dave
[url]http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html[/url]
Multi-AV - [url]http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp[/url]

"xfile" <coucou@nospam.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:%23s0%23bYpVKHA.5208@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> Maybe the following link can provide some answers:
>
> 64-Bit Computing: The Next Big (Confusing) Thing:
>
> [url]http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/techtonicshifts/archive/2009/09/16/64-bit-computing-the-next-big-confusing-thing.aspx[/url]
>
> Good luck.
>
> "Paul H" <NoSpamphobergNoSpam@att.net> wrote in message
> news:OmP2pMpVKHA.4688@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...[color=green]
>> 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?
>>[/color]
>[/color]

Are you sure the author knows something about computers.

He writes about buying a 32 bit or 64 bit computer. But
nowadays computers all have 64 bit processors.

The OS can be 32 or 64 bits.

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.

"Natéag" <nul@nul.com> wrote in message
news:eq5DuxrVKHA.504@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
>
> "xfile" <coucou@nospam.com> a écrit dans le message de
> news:%23s0%23bYpVKHA.5208@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...[color=green]
>> Maybe the following link can provide some answers:
>>
>> 64-Bit Computing: The Next Big (Confusing) Thing:
>>
>> [url]http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/techtonicshifts/archive/2009/09/16/64-bit-computing-the-next-big-confusing-thing.aspx[/url]
>>
>> Good luck.
>>
>> "Paul H" <NoSpamphobergNoSpam@att.net> wrote in message
>> news:OmP2pMpVKHA.4688@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...[color=darkred]
>>> 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?
>>>[/color]
>>[/color]
>
> Are you sure the author knows something about computers.
>
> He writes about buying a 32 bit or 64 bit computer. But
> nowadays computers all have 64 bit processors.
>
> The OS can be 32 or 64 bits.[/color]

David H. Lipman wrote:[color=blue]
> From: "Van Chocstraw" <boobooililililil@roadrunner.com>
>
> | Paul H wrote:[color=green][color=darkred]
>>> 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?[/color][/color]
>
>
> | 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.
>[/color]
Twice as much data? That means faster to me.