I’m looking forward to not running into the 2 gigabyte limit anymore on development.
So you're comparing one OSes mainstream support to another OSes extended support. Yeah, that doesn't work.
The more people are on it, they more money they'll have to fix it!
definitely, CPUs had those capabilities since ~2003 and yet developers are rarely using them. Effectively under utilizing your hardware.
PS. the strawman is that 64bit is ONLY for RAM... 64bit windows has a higher ram limit than 32bit windows, that is true, what isn't true is the claim that it is the ONLY reason to use 64bit. A good portion of your CPU remains unused and wasted in 32bit mode.
Virtual Desktops will not run on Win7 home premium 64 bit ed. Will it run on any other Win7 version? Or just not at all on Win7? Virtual Desktops is one of my favorite Stardock apps so would like to see it work on Win7. Will it ever or is there something in Win7 which prevents that?
Well, XP have somehow a very long life and seem to refuse to die...
Microsoft has planed to stop licensing of Windows XP to OEMs and terminated retail sales of the OS on June 2008... due to externe influence, Microsoft announced on April 2008, that they will continue licensing/sale xp until one year after the availability of Windows 7 (October 22, 2010)...
Will not surprise me that the extended support will be extended again in the future... and extended support is nothing bad, it mean no new feature ( and not more new bug introduced with these new feature ) but security updates and security-related hotfixes continue...
So, i will wait Windows 8 and see if it is really the planned "revolution"... my laptop is a good and cheap computer... soon, i will need to change it because upgrade a laptop ( if possible ) can be more expensive that buy a new one... will wait until windows 8...
For my main computer, i don't know... no one version of windows can use it full power... mainly due to the fact that my motherboard is a server board build for Unix... Linux run good on it but until now, Solaris is the good OS for a max of power...but if windows 8 please me on the laptop, it is very possible that i move my desktop to the next generation of windows server OS, there being build in the same time that windows 8...
I am not ready to change from OS each 2 year for please the wallet of Microsoft but when it is worthy, i will accept to jump several generation in one step...
In fact, with my XP pro x64, i am already in the x64 world and benefice for upgrade to Windows 7 x64 is very minimal ( if not negative due to the huge memory use of the Win7 OS )
http://forums.impulsedriven.com/379026 ... the two first reply ...
Taltamir brings up an excellent point. Corporations are not home users. And what Windows 7 brings to the corporate table is minimal compared to the pain of upgrading thousands of computers. Microsoft is a victim of its own success with that OS. They got it right, and have not been able to duplicate it with succeeding versions. Not that Vista (I think it sucks, but that is just MHO) or Windows 7 are not good - they just do not have anything extra to entice corporations to upgrade.
Indeed, very true.
Although, when the original post was made for this thread, draginol, a windows game developer, said he wishes to not have to worry about 2GB (per app) limit of 32bit windows and move on to 64bit windows games. Corporate customers with custom software and vetted computers (only large corporations can afford to vet their computers) are not the target audience of the products he makes. We went off on a tangent arguing about the need/usefulness of upgrading in the corporate market.
The way I see it, I expect many corporations to just stick with XP for a little while yet... Home users on the other hand will continue buying new computers (with latest versions bundled), buying an OS upgrade (either cheap as a student, or expensive as a home user), or even pirating one... While a few will simply stick with whatever older OS they have. Those home users that DO transition from winXP to win7 have no reason at all to get 32bit win7. Anti virus programs for home users are all subscription based and all will let you install either 32bit or 64bit with the same subscription, and any other 32bit program you want works like a charm on 64bit windows. (sandboxie is slightly more limited in its capability due to 64bit windows including kernel patch protection and 32bit windows arbitrarily don't, but that has nothing to do with them being 64bit, just a weird choice by MS to cut features from 32bit)
Actually that's not true. AVG, Avast!, and a few others are free and work great.
this is kind of missing my point. I meant that any home use anti virus you pay for is subscription model such that you can get the 64bit version at no additional cost. The free ones you also get at no additional cost.
Although I disagree with the "working great" part. they are horribly sub par.
taltalmir, I have found that BOTH the commercial AND majority of free antivirus programs fail to completely protect the computer that they are installed on from virii, trojans AND rootkits that they have the detection strings for, but as this IS one of my main areas of income ie visiting the customers and REMOVING said virii,trojans rootkits AND spyware to restore the proper functioning of computers that have entered the customer's computer from the normal operation by the customer. personally I would prefer to NOT have this income area, but the customers NEED the service, so I supply it.
harpo
... I am not sure what your point is harpo99999.
I do find many commercial anti virus apps to be a blight, but not all. ALL the free anti virus solutions are crap, SOME of the commercial ones are crap.
ESET anti virus is fairly good. Not perfect, but fairly good.
taltamir, my point is that in my experience most if not all COMMERCIAL and FREE anti-virus programs FAIL to do what they CLAIM to do mostly because they are ONLY interested in the old methods of attack (ie file infector/email attack) and have not covered the current attack types (ie web browser/im attack types) and often FAIL to detect infections that have bypassed the limited preventers that they offer.
Personally I stick with MSE, it isn't the absolute best with detection but I hate false positives with passion (that's all I get a lot of the time with other solutions.) - http://av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc_od_aug2010.pdf
The next ver of MSE has proper network protection and all that jazz.
With the handle limits and all on 32 bit I imagine they had other reasons.
I know my local hospital network (Mayo Clinic) is already migrating to 7. Security is important at these places, even if there's a migration headache. They get hit by the stupid user bug too, so very important.
Then why do the free AV programs rate better in most security tests? There was a link posted on here a few years ago that ranked all the AV programs. The free ones came out near the top. The do that test every year.
Easy solution. stay away from using Internet Explorer and don't use any IM programs.