What to get? 32bit versus 64bit version of VISTA

I think its x32 now and x64 in the future

I've read that there are a lot of programs that doesn't run in x64.. I think x64 would have a little more crisp in graphics especially the Aero

if you can try both,, running XP in 32 and Vista in both 32 and 64
once you iron out the kinks in vista x64 ( driver etc ) even in
x86 compatiblity mode things seems to be better ( at least to me)
gaming in x64 seems better but could be the dual core cpu and
better gpu on that system,
stick with the version that works best for you and what you use on the computer

in the long run 64 bit will be more supported (drivers softwarea
and hardware tuned to 64 bit)

This week I obtained both 64 bit and 32 bit vista RTM. After imaging my drive out I did a clean install of 64 bit. It was a bloody nightmare trying to
find drivers for my scanner, printer etc...the 64 bit drivers simply do not exist. It seems that hardware manufacturers are touting 64 bit, but the software vendors are not keeping up. So anyway, I reformatted my disk and installed 32 bit Vista. I managed to obtain drivers for everything. I recoomend the 32 bit now, and later if you think you can get the 64 bit drivers then go for it. Two things to consider: Are you running any 64 bit programs? Do you have the necessary drivers?

Just go with 32-bit for now. 64-bit has poor driver support, so if you have a printer or a mouse you need to use, there is no guarantee you can in 64-bit versions. If you don't run more than 4 GB of RAM, not much point in 64-bit right now. Sure you may see a performance increase, but it's not worth driver hell.

Just wait. Hell, just wait for Vista, too, I still have crap that doesn't work on with it (like my anti-virus).

32 bit. Ive tried 64 and had to change immediately. No driver support for my sound card= no sound. 32bit works much better so far.

I have the 64-bit version of vista running on my computer right now, and haven't had a problem with driver support. The 64-bit version of vista will be much more secure as opposed to the 32-bit, the reason is that the 64-bit version will require signed drivers to access the kernel therefore stopping massive amounts of malware/viruses/trojans/nasty stuff from having complete access to the kernel. You can find much more information about 32-bit vs. 64-bit vista by listening to Steve Gibson's podcast, Security Now Episodes 66 and 67.

From running the 64-bit version I haven't noticed any speed increases. I would think that the power of 64-bit will not be seen until most of the community has switched and all the major software manufacturers are programming solely in 64-bit.

Thanks everyone.
Well, I guess I go for the 32bit version.

However, once you have 64 bit Vista, does this mean all older XP software won't work? Like Office 2003, Quicken 2007, ACDSEE etc.

I thought the issue are only the drivers.

I do see a lot of 64 bit drivers on the various webpages at least for XP right now and I would assume that the 64 bit Vista versions will be posted soon by the big companies like HP, Logitech, Creative etc.

I tried the 64 bit version of Vista. I didn't have any problems with drivers, but hated having a lot of programs duplicated. Ie: Internet Explorer, Windows Mail, Calendar, Media player, etc.

Funny thing is, when I clicked on the IE desktop icon, it always opened a 32 bit IE. The same is true for opening an .eml file (An OE email), queueing some mp3 in a playlist for WMP, etc. So I went mad and deleted the entire Program Files (x86) folder and the extensions stopped working (Clicking desktop IE does nothing, mp3 won't queue, etc). After that, I copied the 64 bit IE from the program files folder to the x86 and voilá! It worked fine.

Now, why the hell did they do it this way? I install a 64 bit OS to get the speed advantage of it and every extension is associated with the 32 bit versions of almost all the programs. Trying to associate it with the 64 bit versions was a no go too. The ONLY way is doing what I did, replace every program in the x86 folder with his 64 bit counterpart.

Will that be that way on the feb release? If so, I'm sticking to 32 bits.

Sorry for my english! I'm sure there's quite a lot of errors.  

i think im gonna go x64, 1 because i dont want to have to upgrade later down the road, i dont need a printer, we have 2 other computers to do that off of, and most of the components im getting atleast have beta drivers for x64, so im hoping it wont be too much of a problem. if it is i'll just weather the storm for a few months until they get them working alright

That's what we need more of because if people keep using 32-bit versions of everything then it'll just cause the change to 64-bit to be prolonged. The consumers (yes, that's us   ) just need to suck it up and switch over if their hardware allows, and then worry about drivers because if consumers demand the 64-bit software the programmers will have more reason to release the 64-bit versions, and everyone will live happily ever after...well....not really  

Since Vista isn't even out yet to consumers, do you think that come January 30th lots of companies will release 64 bit drivers?

i would imagine, that since 64bit vista will be an officially supported OS upon release, alongside the 32bit version, that 64bit software support in general will then get a major boost after not too long...

this is unlike winXP x64, which wasnt officially supported by MS at all really, and still isnt, so software availability in general was/is more lacking so far... it was more of a 'use at your own risk' kinda thing, so to speak... you dont really see any computers shipping with it installed, at least not that ive seen anyhow... and IIRC, MS asks that you exchange your existing 32bit cdkey, to receive a copy of x64 and an x64 cd key (though that might not quite be the case now, not sure)

Are you kidding me? Your English is great. And if you continue to read and write in English it will get better. But I'm curious about that one French word. Shouldn't the accent be grave instead of acute?