Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

WinXP 64 - When to Upgrade

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
May 24, 2005 6:06:42 PM

We keep seeing the same posts over and over on this.

I'm going to solve it.

Upgrade IF:
You have the required hardware.
You have the patience to deal with the chance of having driver problems.
You have a way to download the 64 bit edition.
You have the technical know-how on how to troubleshoot Windows, figure things out for yourself, and basically know what the hell you're doing.

DON'T upgrade IF:
You don't know what a 64 bit processor is.
You post regular questions in these forums on "how do I log in as administrator?"
You don't have the hardware.
Or a legit version of Pro.
Or the patience to figure out why your hardware isn't working.
You can't deal with not having your computer if a problem comes up.
And the #1 reason not to upgrade:
IF YOU HAVE TO ASK IF YOU SHOULD UPGRADE, YOU PROBABLY SHOULDN'T.

Thank you, feel free to append to my small list.

More about : winxp upgrade

May 24, 2005 6:45:31 PM

but, what if I have a P3? Is that the right hardware? I do want the newest stuff. :wink: I installed ME by myself, but it keeps giving me this weird blue screen, so I wanted to upgrade to xp64. How do I know if mine is PRO or not?

<font color=green> AMD- Intel's choice for Best CPU manufacturer </font color=green>
May 24, 2005 7:09:01 PM

Fuhgitaboutit!

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>
Related resources
May 24, 2005 8:34:04 PM

Come here...



So I can smack you..
May 24, 2005 8:36:41 PM

What?? Not funny?

Sorry :_(

<font color=green> AMD- Intel's choice for Best CPU manufacturer </font color=green>
May 25, 2005 9:25:22 PM

Not quite.

You can order the Win x64 CD from Microsoft (including a 180 day trial) or buy an OEM CD from an online retailer. See Newegg.com.

The most important consideration is the lack of 64bit drivers for the parts. For instance, none of the major manufacturers make 64bit drivers for wireless devices. Also, 64bit printer drivers are extremely rare.

Almost all 32-bit software will run in Win x64.

It's real easy to setup a dual boot of Win x64 and Win XP. Put Win x64 on its own partition.

To be honest, it ain't all that hard to use Win x64.

But, I do not necessarily recommend a "switch" or "upgrade" to Win x64 as your sole OS. The dual boot is highly recommended and is fun.
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by BruxBox on 05/25/05 05:33 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
May 26, 2005 1:57:41 PM

Your post is totaly pointless.

Read my post over. It's aimed at people who are not technical and answers a few simple questions that non-technical people would have.

Sure, you can run 64 on a 32 bit OS.. but.. why? Other than to say you have it? There might be a slight increase, but is it worth the trouble for someone who isn't technical?
And that was the point of my post.
May 26, 2005 5:40:44 PM

No need to get ranty. Your post needed clarification.

You were unnecessarily negative, inaccurate, and misleading.

I recommend all folks to try Win x64, if only as a dual boot with Win XP.
May 27, 2005 1:15:03 PM

Oh you're killing us..

The post wasn't negative.. the post was designed to keep people who don't anything about it from not jumping into it.

now you're post is telling people to go ahead and jump into it and give them headaches.

Maybe you should go and actually read how many posts are out there on "should I upgrade to 64?"

If the person doesn't know if they should upgrade to 64 bit yet, I'm sure they probably aren't too comfortable doing a dual boot..

Now shush up.

grin
May 27, 2005 6:29:51 PM

Quote:
(newbie)


Know thy place.

______________
Welcome to my Shed of Pleasure
May 27, 2005 7:51:23 PM

Read my first post in this thread,,,, I think he was aiming at that kind of thing. :) 

Everybody breathe.

<font color=blue> You are only as cool as you think you are, which makes me pretty lame. :_( </font color=blue>
May 27, 2005 7:51:40 PM

So, who made you everybody's technology daddy?

If a person is curious about a technology, I say let them explore to their heart's content.

I happily urge anyone who is curious about Win X64 and has an Athlon 64 box already to install Win X64 in a dual boot.
May 27, 2005 9:22:36 PM

I say let them install it and let them f*ck it up. People learn from their mistakes... if you're not making mistakes, you're not learning.

If people weren't so damn afraid of their computers, perhaps they would be more knowledgable when it came to solving problems on their own. How can you learn to correct issues when you rely on others to do it for you?

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
May 27, 2005 11:04:45 PM

damn, I should be one learned Mofo then huh? ;) 
May 31, 2005 12:42:22 AM

Very true point about making mistakes - I have made plenty of mistakes with computers, some are just too embarassing to mention. Then again what are these these forums for? So other people can share their experiences and seek help from their superiors when things go belly up for them and they are fed up of trying. I have managed to solve PC problems after a while but there are some issues which drive me beserk and I have no choice but to post them here for an expert opinion!

BTW in repsonse to the topic - I am happy with Windows XP PRO atm and I don't have a 64bit processor (Athlon 64/ 64 FX) to enjoy x64 version of Windows. Do not replace your existing version of Windows until everything works on the x64 version - thats why I'm holding back until I am sure that every piece of my hardware will work until Windows x64. However, having a dual boot of x64 and XP normal is worth it if you got the hardware - a good way to tread water in the new technology while still having something to fall back on when the new technology doesn't take too kindly to your old software.

PC Spec: AMD Athlon XP 2000+, ECS K7S5A Motherboard, 768MB SDRAM PC133, Sparkle nVidia Riva TNT2 M64 32MB AGP Graphics Card, Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2 6.1, Windows XP
May 31, 2005 2:58:30 PM

I agree.. but the post was aimed more at people who don't have the patience to deal with it.. If you have to ask if you should upgrade, don't upgrade.

If you're asking, you probably didn't read up enough on it to know if you should.

If they want to install it, go for it. But then again, we'll keep seeing posts in here "should I upgrade?" or "my printer doesn't have a 64 bit driver and I really need to print something."

I guess I should have put "READ UP ON XP64 BEFORE INSTALLING" .. that would have probably been useful.. but I also said people can append to my posting.. :) 
June 1, 2005 3:18:38 PM

Is XP 64 a memory hog? LH damn sure is.

Intel P4 550(3.4)@<font color=green>5Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@<font color=red>DDR2 800<font color=red> DDR2 855 using 3.73EE<font color=red>
TT 680W PSU
June 1, 2005 3:36:43 PM

MS = Memory Starved

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>
June 1, 2005 5:20:49 PM

?

Intel P4 550(3.4)@<font color=green>5Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@<font color=red>DDR2 800<font color=red> DDR2 855 using 3.73EE<font color=red>
TT 680W PSU
June 1, 2005 5:23:09 PM

Is XP 64 a memory hog?
It is Microsoft's (MS) product
MS = Memory Starved

<pre>nevermind</pre><p><pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>
June 2, 2005 7:31:31 PM

Come, come. Fellas.

Let's be honest on the Win x64 OS and how it handles memory differently from Win XP 32bit.

You know as well as I do that "memory hog" is misleading and inaccurate.

Why don't you do your research on how Win x64 handles memory and report back here your findings.

You have a responsibility to the readers of this forum to be technically corrrect.
June 2, 2005 8:20:21 PM

Your the one thats off base here. You just completely took my question out of text. Something is in the friggin water today. Why would you think that you could possibly know what I was thinking or talking about with no more info that I provided? Would you care to know why I asked the question the way I did?"

Intel P4 550(3.4)@<font color=green>5Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@<font color=red>DDR2 800<font color=red> DDR2 855 using 3.73EE<font color=red>
TT 680W PSU
June 2, 2005 8:23:18 PM

Dont you come in here telling me or anyone else about responsibility. You did the very thing that you are accusing someone else of doing. {Pot calling the kettle black}

Intel P4 550(3.4)@<font color=green>5Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@<font color=red>DDR2 800<font color=red> DDR2 855 using 3.73EE<font color=red>
TT 680W PSU
June 2, 2005 8:53:10 PM

What did you mean when you said "memory starved" if not to confirm that Win x64 is a memory hog?

That's what I was objecting to. "Memory hog" is not correct. I understood "memory starved" to mean the same thing.

If you meant something different, you have my apologies.
June 2, 2005 10:34:13 PM

I never even used the term Memory starved, Rich did but it was a joke. MS=Microsoft MS=MemoryStarved It had nothing to do with what our talking about.

I asked if WinXP was a memory Hog. I have a post up that aks for everyone to tell me what their page file usage is after a fresh bootup. The other thing I said was that LH damn sure is.LH=Longhorn I was curious about how much memory ws used because i have seen LH seriously bog a system down that had 512MB of RAM

Intel P4 550(3.4)@<font color=green>5Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@<font color=red>DDR2 800<font color=red> DDR2 855 using 3.73EE<font color=red>
TT 680W PSU
June 3, 2005 2:28:05 AM

Back to the original question...
Quote:
WinXP 64 - When to Upgrade

How does next Tuesday sound? Is that good for everyone?

....WW (5.1)
June 3, 2005 3:48:42 AM

Mmmmm Let me check.
Is 8:30 OK?

Nothing is as easy as it looks
June 3, 2005 12:05:36 PM

...*wanders in, huge cock waving about dangerously*...

:eek:  I'm the good time that was had by all :eek: 
June 3, 2005 2:16:59 PM

Tuesday.. mmm. Nono.. I plan on crashing a server that day upgrading from 2003 to NT...

How about Wednesday, 4am? I think by that time my caffeine will have worn off and I'll be sure to finish off the night and mornin troubleshooting why it won't accept my license key.
June 3, 2005 2:19:25 PM

Technically......

(Ok MS uses a lot of memory) but this is a technical, philosophical post..

We by all rights can't call MS a memory hog because we don't have something equivilent to compare it to, so therefor it's unreasonable to call it a memory hog. :) 

BUT it's a memory hog compared to what today's hardware is capabable of suppling if you compare it other programs that aren't equivilent..

But I agree, it's a memory hog.. otherwise I wouldn't be using 1.5GB of RAM.
June 4, 2005 8:10:09 AM

...*wanders out again, looking for slippery Oprahsex*...

:eek:  I'm the good time that was had by all :eek: 
June 4, 2005 12:19:01 PM

You can thank BruxBox for all this friggin confusion. If you will go back and look at my original question you will see that I used the letters LH. All I wanted to know was if Win64 was a memory HOG because LH damn sure is. Even if you dont know what LH stands for you should still see the context of what I said did not imply that WIN64 was a memory HOG because I was asking the question. I did imply that LH was. The reason that I didnt spell out the name instead of using LH is because I didnt feel like answering a ton of questions that I would get from people sending PM's. LH=LONGHORN This OS is a friggin MEMORY HOG any way you want to slice it.

Intel P4 550(3.4)@<font color=green>5Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@<font color=red>DDR2 800<font color=red> DDR2 855 using 3.73EE<font color=red>
TT 680W PSU
June 4, 2005 12:20:13 PM

Watch out where you swing that thing[/limps back home]

Intel P4 550(3.4)@<font color=green>5Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@<font color=red>DDR2 800<font color=red> DDR2 855 using 3.73EE<font color=red>
TT 680W PSU
June 6, 2005 3:14:25 PM

haha yeah.. I was just screwing around at that point..

Wait for LH to get tweaked, the memory should improve, but it won't be any better than XP.

I was just reading up on Microsoft's other OS that is designed to run on older PCs that perform really good. I forget the codename for it, but it was a odd name for it.
Basically, this thing is supposed to run a secured version of XP on older PCs of like 300-400mhz systems with 128mb RAM. For the CPU, that's a lot of memory still.

With all the crap they're tossing in LH, it's sure to make for a lot of memory.

And Bill Gates was the guy who said we would never ever need more than 1MB of RAM.. he said that back in the early 80s..

But they do put a lot into memory.. and with memory speeds increasing.. maybe on a top end machine the memory usuage won't look so bad?
June 7, 2005 6:08:51 AM

The version that I am referring to uses 399MB. Who knows what it will end up using. Something about the way its designed sure does make up for it. Its a smooth running OS AFAICT.

<font color=green>NED FLANDERS FOR PRESIDENT</font color=green> Its justa nother gansta PARTY!
Intel P4 Extreme(3.73)@<font color=green>5.6Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@DDR2 855
!