Go Back   Hardware Canucks > SOFTWARE > O/S's, Drivers & General Software

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41 (permalink)  
Old December 9, 2008, 12:59 AM
enaberif's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgahree, AB
Posts: 10,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by -n7- View Post
x64.

I have no idea how people can still be recommending x86.

4 GB of RAM has pretty much become standard, which already outdates x86.

6 GB is already looking to be the higher end standard for i7.

x86 is dead for all but those still clinging to XP, & even there, it's only a matter of time before they must switch to Vista x64 or 7 x64
How much you wanna bet on that? I'll put a bet down of $100.

Theres many other choices for an OS other than Windows.

And FWIW I run XP x64 and its a great OS and the only reason why people run 4gb for is because its so dirt cheap.

But what hasn't happened is developers coding for a 64bit OS so really at this point a 64bit OS is still for those who think they are getting more performance then they aren't with 4gb of memory.
Reply With Quote
  #42 (permalink)  
Old December 9, 2008, 01:54 AM
joeperson's Avatar
Top Prospect
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 238
Default

They cost the same. Buy the one that isn't artificially limited.
__________________
Q6600 3.0GHZ (9x333) stockV | ATI 5850 | OCZ Platinum 4GB PC2-6400 DDR2 5.4.4.15 1.9V | Silverstone Raven RV01 | Gigabyte EP45-DS3R
Corsair Professional HX750W | Windows 7 | Crossbow mounted Xigmatek HDT-S1283 | LG W2242TQ-BF 22" | Samsung 2253BW 22"
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old December 9, 2008, 01:55 AM
MVP
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 268
Default

I know you hate Vista & truely believe we don't need x64, but if you actually used Vista i suspect you'd start to understand why so many of us Vista x64 users have gone above 4 GB to 6 GB or 8 GB.

Of course, you also believe Superfetch is a waste, so it's hard to explain the concept to someone who still assumes the OS should be using as little RAM as possible instead of putting it to use.

As for putting down bets, no doubt x86 will still be available in mass for Windows 7, i'm not saying it will not be, so i'm not sure what you are trying to say there.

I'm saying anyone with any sense shouldn't be buying the x86 version...

Of course, crappy lower end pre-builts will still be sold with x86 for 7, so no doubt there will still be lots of users.

I just don't foresee too many wise gamers or enthusiasts using x86 in the near future, as already there's been a pretty big shift to x64 since people have realized Vista x64 is where it's at.

I know i'm a little ahead of the game.
I've used Vista as my main OS since the RTM over 2 years ago, & x64 for the last 1.5 yrs, not to mention 8 GB for around 10 months now i think.

But i'm not foolish.
I've seen so many people follow the same direction i've gone, & for those who didn't get Vista, most will be getting 7, which isn't all that different, at least at the core.

Obviously, anyone can build their own will have more choices, but the average consumer gets their OS with their PC, & they are getting Vista, & soon enough that'll be 7.

Media loves to hype up the mainly non-existent horrors of Vista & proclaim how no one is using it, but as a someone whose job is working amongst the average user, i see reality, & reality is, XP's days are over.
Obviously since Vista's release, everything prebuilt has had Vista, other than netbooks.

Anything higher end is sold with Vista x64, & with 7, we'll see even more of a transition toward x64 that's already begun.

You don't really have to agree...it's going to happen regardless of what you & i may think ;)
__________________
Gigabyte X58A-UD3R | i7 930 | Corsair H50
G.Skill RipJaws 4x2 GB DDR3 | HIS Radeon HD 5870
3x Intel X25-M 80 GB RAID-0; OCZ Agility 120 GB | Samsung SH-S243D
Corsair HX1000 | Dell 3007WFP & Samsung 204T | 7 Ultimate x64
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old December 9, 2008, 02:07 AM
enaberif's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgahree, AB
Posts: 10,679
Default

Change only happens because consumers are mindless drones as much as most people to behonest.

If someone started to say that jumping off a bridge is beneficial to your health people start to question it.

I HAVE used Vista on numerous times and absolutely hate it.

As I said 4gb of memory is more than enough for the consumer as is Windows XP but manufacturers need to make money, developers need to make money, and businesses need to make money and the only way that happens is by forcing more upon a person than is needed.

You have 10 billion computers switching over to x64 but that doesn't mean companies are going to start coding for a x64 OS as that means a lot of the software they have out now has to be rebuilt from the ground up and a lot of developers don't want to bother because why fix whats broken? Oh right.. because were being force fed something that isn't necessary; just like all the other crap out there.
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old December 9, 2008, 02:15 AM
MVP
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 268
Default

This really belongs in another thread, but why?
What makes you hate Vista?


And i'm shocked you'd be arguing in favor of holding back progress.

Why in the world shouldn't we be looking toward a future without all the limitations that we have to fight with in x86?!

I cannot understand why you could possibly think moving forward to a 64-bit OS is a bad thing.

I actually personally wish Microsoft had pushed it a lot harder; it would have forced developers to get onboard sooner, rather than this stupid delaying game.

It's one thing to delay developing 64-bit software 10 yrs. ago, but it's been very obvious the days of x86 have needed to come to and end for a while now.

Just because developers are lazy & don't want to bother improving things doesn't mean we should be saying, aw crap, 640k is enough for everyone, don't bother moving forward please.

I can't even believe this is even worth arguing...i'm really having a hard time believing you believe what you are saying...
__________________
Gigabyte X58A-UD3R | i7 930 | Corsair H50
G.Skill RipJaws 4x2 GB DDR3 | HIS Radeon HD 5870
3x Intel X25-M 80 GB RAID-0; OCZ Agility 120 GB | Samsung SH-S243D
Corsair HX1000 | Dell 3007WFP & Samsung 204T | 7 Ultimate x64
Reply With Quote
  #46 (permalink)  
Old December 9, 2008, 02:19 AM
enaberif's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgahree, AB
Posts: 10,679
Default

Not once did I say I believe in holding back technology.

Most consumers will spend money on a machine and pay too much for more than they will ever use.

For people like you or me yes a x64 OS with 4gb or more memory is a good thing.

If x64 is such the future why is W7 going to be x86 and x64 again? Because developers don't feel the need to code for x64 yet.

Argue all you want but I look out for the consumer and don't let them make irrational decisions based off media hype. I'll honestly give a customer my opinion of what they need and for a good price so that their dollar is well spent for something that will actually be useful for them.
Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old December 9, 2008, 02:26 AM
joeperson's Avatar
Top Prospect
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 238
Default

xp home is only marginally cheaper
vista 64 is more secure then 32
__________________
Q6600 3.0GHZ (9x333) stockV | ATI 5850 | OCZ Platinum 4GB PC2-6400 DDR2 5.4.4.15 1.9V | Silverstone Raven RV01 | Gigabyte EP45-DS3R
Corsair Professional HX750W | Windows 7 | Crossbow mounted Xigmatek HDT-S1283 | LG W2242TQ-BF 22" | Samsung 2253BW 22"
Reply With Quote
  #48 (permalink)  
Old December 9, 2008, 02:27 AM
enaberif's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgahree, AB
Posts: 10,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeperson View Post
xp home is only marginally cheaper
vista 64 is more secure then 32
64bit OS is not more secure than a 32bit.

They are both just as insecure as each other no matter how you may like to think that.
Reply With Quote
  #49 (permalink)  
Old December 9, 2008, 02:51 AM
joeperson's Avatar
Top Prospect
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 238
Default

You sir are exceedingly opinionated :O
The x64 includes security measures not possible or unimplemented in the 32 bit version. To put it in more exacting terms; vista x64 takes steps to reduce that available attack vectors it's 32 bit counterpart cannot.

Instead of opening places for you to scratch at the following paragraphs were removed

something something

something something

something something

OH wait there's no point arguing with you
__________________
Q6600 3.0GHZ (9x333) stockV | ATI 5850 | OCZ Platinum 4GB PC2-6400 DDR2 5.4.4.15 1.9V | Silverstone Raven RV01 | Gigabyte EP45-DS3R
Corsair Professional HX750W | Windows 7 | Crossbow mounted Xigmatek HDT-S1283 | LG W2242TQ-BF 22" | Samsung 2253BW 22"
Reply With Quote
  #50 (permalink)  
Old December 9, 2008, 06:32 AM
Cranky's Avatar
Top Prospect
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Windsor Ontario
Posts: 149
Default

Here's a screenshot of my memory usage:

__________________
Asus P5K Deluxe / Intel Core2Quad Q9550@8x425@3400mhz(1.225v) / Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro / 4Gigs DDR2 1066mhz(5-5-5-15) Corsair Dominator / Diamond HD4870x2 / Asus Xonar / WD Raptor 74gb / Hitachi 160GB / Antec Quattro 850w / Logitech Z-680 5.1 / Dell Ultrasharp 24" / 2 LG Optical Drives / Vista Ultimate 32bit / A tower that's been drilled, cut, and bent to fit all of my fans
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes