Vista64 - initial impressions:

[Deja Q]

Hardware:
Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3L
Intel Q6600 o/c to 3.0GHz
8GB Corsair RAM (two TWIN2X4096-6400C4DHX, set to 667MHz, 4-4-4-12 @ 2.0v stable - is rated to do 800mhz, 4-4-4-12 @ 2.1v)
Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit

1. RAM usage compared to 32-bit Ultimate edition is slightly more (initial boot usage is 900MB for 32-bit, 1.1GB for 64-bit)

2. Windows performance index shot up for all components; SATA performance really picked up. (Vista performance index, in 32-bit, put 5.3 for the HD. In 64-bit, went to 5.8. Everything else is already 5.9, but properly written drivers mean the difference between low and high scores too.)

3. Two old apps (truespace 3, truespace 4), from 1997, would not work in Win64 or under virtualized machines using Win2k or WinXP (virtualbox, vmware, virtualPC) - the same apps work perfectly in vista32 without needing compatibility mode. Core cause is a compatibility issue with opengl and the only solution is to buy a new version (6.6 or newer)

4. Photoshop CS3 and Bryce 6.1 work perfectly. Both, being 32-bit, only see 3.5GB, but can use ALL of it as there is no OS hogging 900MB or more. With Bryce, my need for truespace is superceded.

5. SiSoft Sandra, Speedfan, and various other testing apps (32-bit) do not work fully. Disabling signed drivers renders Vista64 unusable.

6. Once the license key is activated, it can NOT be re-used. It took an hour of searching Microsoft's KB pages to find anything even alluding to this. Surely this question could have been addressed up front, as it is the sort people would readily ask.

7. Sound Blaster Fatal1ty works, albeit with 32-bit drivers.

8. Canon's RAW plug-in for Windows explorer works, albeit 32-bit. Am contacting support to beg for 64-bit compatibility.

9. Sony's RAW plug-in for Windows explorer is not supported. Am contacting support to beg for 64-bit compatibility.

10. Olympus's plug-in for Windows explorer works, in 64-bit! They were early to get on the bandwagon, knowing
why people would bother with 64-bit in the first place.

11. Adobe flash plugin is not supported in 64-bit IE. Works in 32-bit firefox.

12. If vmware or microsoft would incorporate opengl or better directx in virtualization, the old apps will work.

13. Virtualizing 32-bit guest OS under 64-bit host yields no noteworthy performance drop.

14. With luck, MS will release 64-bit versions of their games, since they pitched 64-bit Vista for game players on their own web site (along with databases and other forms of fast number crunching.)

15. Some people report success with games on Vista64. I don't play games much anymore, so I cannot say. There are compatibility lists online that show which games work and how well, of course...

16. Kaspersky Internet Security is 32-bit. Trend Micro Internet Security has a true 64-bit version.

All in all, Vista64 is rather good. Even despite its memory footprint. I'm going to stick with it; the 64-bit license is on its way ($30 cheaper via newegg than from MS directly, oddly). Now if Microsoft can convince developers to go 64-bit, it'll be so much the better for end users. (Adobe claims to re-compile Photoshop would be an intensive process. Given how readily other developers re-compiled benchmarking apps from 32- to 64-bit, one has to wonder if Adobe is telling the complete truth, as rumor has it they are working on a web-based version of Photoshop and would rather work on that... Software as a Subscription too, no doubt. Money for nothing, but that bit is unsubstantiated tinfoil fodder...)

[hunter]

1. It's the activation hassles that made me quit Microsoft for good.

No matter how much money you pay Microsoft, it's clear you can never actually own the software, not even a single copy of it.

I've got files going back thirty years, and it was sometime around Windows 98 that I began to feel it was the Microsoft-centric programs and file formats that were bringing me the most grief whenever I upgraded to a new computer.

Nevertheless, I'm enjoying seeing your experiences with Vista here because I'm in a place where I won't touch anything Microsoft unless somebody is paying me, and except for the occasional repair or software patch, nobody is paying me for that.

[Deja Q]

3. It's the apps making me stay with them.

:(

The day photoshop, photoimpact, office 2007, and bryce will work fully and properly is when I'll switch back to Linux. Never mind proper support, which is less likely to occur under Linux than it does Win64... I'll miss truespace, a little, but it's easier to give up 2 antiquated apps than 4 new ones; and most of the 6 in general won't work in virtualized environments anyway. Too slow or crash because the virtualized environment doesn't completely support opengl, directx, whatever.

I don't see anyone porting the useful stuff to Linux, and it has a better chance of survival than OS X because that not only requires new hardware, the hardware is the same thing as what I've got but for only 3 times the price.

Between a rock, a hard place, and a prostitute with herpes. For once I'll chose option 3; the other two simply crush peoples' skulls in with their heavyhanded actions. :D

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

2. Vista64 on our new HP Laptop is....just O.K.

I am getting real tired of "re-learning" windows... I always expect the different changes among different Linux's.
One big problem with it is my new wireless mouse // Microsoft Wireless Laser Mouse 5000 // Software that comes with it (64) freezes the mouse. When I un-install the software, about 90% done....the basic mouse functions are back. I like my custom buttons. Can't have them with this system.

FYI:
I pulled the Vista HD out and put in a new one and got Windows XP Pro SP2 (Thanks to nLite :) ) I got everything installed and working. Even my mouse works(image that!)
I keep the Vista HD on the shelf if I ever want to play with Vista. I'm sticking with XP.

Maby Vista SP1 will fix it, I don't care, Microsoft.Wireless.Mouse.Software.Should.Work.With.Microsoft.OS.

[Deja Q]

4. 64-bit Windows is a far different beastie to 32-bit Windows.

Most vendors put Vista32 on their PCs; almost always for laptops. Seems odd HP would put it on a consumer model. What's the specs on your HP laptop? I'd only expect to see Win64 on a PC with, at the bare minimum, 4GB, as x64 is designed to let users use rather more than just 4...

Sorry to hear about the mouse. :(

As for why MS can't keep their OS and products synchronized, I dunno. They're probably too busy offshoring jobs. :silly:

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

5. Microsoft offshoring jobs? You sure? No way....

Anyhow, My Laptop is HP Pavilion Enterainment / Altic Lansing design. 2gig Ram. I can't put more memory in it at this time, someday.

It would be interesting if I were to install XP 64 and test the mouse with it.

[Deja Q]

6. Ha-ha

:)

Only 2GB, yipes. Seems silly to run a 64-bit OS with 2GB, but okay...

I'd avoid XP64. I only recall people reading having lots of problems with that; more people liking Vista64 (or living with its problems)...

[Kutjara]

7. Somewhere 'round here in my pile of laptops is an HP Pavilion tx1420us.

It came with Vista Home Premium 32-bit preinstalled, but was grindingly slow. I tried to install the 64-bit version of Ubuntu Linux on it, but the 64 bit drivers for the wifi card aren't there yet. I tried Ubuntu 7.10 32-bit, but half the features of the laptop couldn't be made to work, so I reluctantly made the decision to go back to Vista on the machine. I was damned if I was going to use 32-bit Home Premium, so I found a spare license for 64-bit Ultimate.

It's been something of a revelation. Vista is now (with a fair amount of tweaking) running very fast. Startup, shutdown, application loading...everything is faster and more responsive. The extra 2GB of RAM I shoved in to bring the laptop up to its 4GB maximum probably doesn't hurt either (especially since it allowed me to force Vista to load its core system into RAM rather than keep it on disk). HP have provided all the 64-bit drivers for the tx1000 range, so I didn't have any problems getting anything to work.

All in all, the tx1420 is now a fast, capable, functional machine. It runs much more happily under 64-bit Vista that it did under 32. It's still nowhere near as fast as my MacBook is running Vista 64 natively (even though the machine specs are comparable), but that's a religious war for another day.

Now, if we really want to get into one, none of this explains how the utterly crappy throwaway $400 Acer Aspire 4315 I'm typing this on (which is running Ubuntu Linux 7.10 32 bit), with only 1 GB of RAM, can be faster than just about every M$ and Apple box I own for basic day-to-day activities (including Mac Pros, self-built uber-gaming rigs, and desktop replacement laptops so powerful you could use their exhaust fans to strip paint). It's a bit embarrassing, really. Makes me want to try getting the tx1420 onto Linux again. That would fly.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

8. WIFI chipset:

Broadcom? I can get them working quickly under Linux.