At 08:57 AM 12/18/2008, you wrote:
how about backward compatibility ?
I have a couple of really old proggie I use all the time, one for
envelopes. Pretty sure these are 16bit, was a effort to get them to run in xp.
fp
nothing in 16bit runs in vista64, I don't know about XP64... I read
that was very problematic. In fact, I never read anything good about
it until I saw Brian's post.
What you can do with modern hardware and 8GB of RAM in Vista 64 is
run a XP VM and run anything you need in there. With this much RAM
and modern dual and quad core processors there is essentially no lag
in a VM as long as you are not doing something like gaming, or HD
video editing, or something equally video intensive.
And yes, I agree, Vista can be very annoying and frustrating. But my
experience has been that if you are running mulit threaded apps Vista
64 SP1 can be very quick. For example, I had an encoding race between
my dual XP32 Xeon 3.4hz 4GB of RAM and my new quad 3.0ghz Vista64 8GB
of RAM. I expected somewhere between 40 to 60 percent faster based on
the CPU speeds. However, what I got encoding a hour worth of HD using
TMPGenc DVD inc Authoring works 4 was
XP32 around 3 hours and forty minutes
Vista 64 55 minutes
of course a lot of this was the CPU but I think all the RAM helped.
At 09:22 AM 12/18/2008, Bryan Seitz Poked the stick with:
>I tried Vista twice and not only did it feel slow/bloated it had
several annoying things which made me run back to XP.
>I'm not saying I won't ever use Vista but until they pry XP64 from
my cold dead hands or Vista starts looking like a
>supermodel, I'm stickin where I am :)
--
Tallyho ! ]:8)
Taglines below !
--
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
"Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
-Benjamin Franklin, 1759
