How long to 32-bit?

landbeforetimelover · **on:** February 21, 2008, 03:33:16 AM

This question has been going through my mind. Ya know, I've always gotta plan ahead for stuff like this being a repair tech. We've got vista 32 and vista 64 right? This means that microbutt is going to move to 64 bit os's only, right? Well, of course they're gonna have to eventually. People are going to need more than 4gb of ram sooner or later. The big problem that's delaying this transformation is this:

Most people don't need more than 4 gigs of ram right now

There's not a whole lot of drivers for 64 bit OS's

most people don't even know the difference between 32 and 64 bit OS's

Most of the people who want the 64 bit revolution is heavy gamers, which only make up a very small percentage of the computer users

Now, microbutt plans to release a 32 and a 64 bit version of windows vienna (the OS that's coming after vista). It's planned to be released in 2009, so when do you think microbutt will give the announcement "okay folks, we're switching to a 64 bit OS only now so all you people with older computers are just tough out of luck"? I personally don't want it to totally switch to 64 bit OS's. Only about 70% of my computers have 64 bit processors, which means that 30% of my computers couldn't accept the newest OS. What are your thoughts on this? Do you want it to switch to all 64 bit or not? When do you think this change will occur?

EDIT: Sorry, my topic title is misleading. It's supposed to read "How long to 64-bit?"

Kor · **Reply #1 on:** February 21, 2008, 09:01:48 AM

Last I heard microsoft and said that Vista was going to be the last 32 bit operating system and the next one would be 64 bit only, though I'd not be surprised if they did change their minds. The change over will likely be filled with a huge amount of hassles.

Petrie. · **Reply #2 on:** February 21, 2008, 03:46:24 PM

You need a 64 bit OS to write emails and create presentations?

:

lbt/cty_lover · **Reply #3 on:** February 21, 2008, 06:18:55 PM

I think that you are forgetting the other OS: Leopard. It is capable of 64-bit processing.

landbeforetimelover · **Reply #4 on:** February 21, 2008, 06:58:21 PM

Quote

You need a 64 bit OS to write emails and create presentations?

Not now, but if Microbutt keeps this crap up, we'll soon need a 64 bit OS just so we can get over 4gb of ram to run the OS. Jeeze, I mean vista uses at least 2gb just to make it usable. If they screw up with vienna, it could require like 4-5gb of ram. That would suck so bad. -_-

Kor · **Reply #5 on:** February 22, 2008, 04:53:40 AM

They will likely continue to do what they usually do.

landbeforetimelover · **Reply #6 on:** February 22, 2008, 10:03:10 AM

I just don't see how they could ever fit more than 4gb of memory in a single module of ram without making a new design. If they can't make more than a 4gb module, they're gonna have to make a lot more slots on the MB's to handle it cuz the demand for ram is increasing and the maximum amount of ram available remains the same. They just can't make vienna use more resources than vista. It's the most resource selfish OS in the world! :mad

Petrie. · **Reply #7 on:** February 22, 2008, 10:08:35 AM

Quote

They just can't make vienna use more resources than vista. It's the most resource selfish OS in the world!

If Vienna is true (call me skeptical) then because people seem to be less happy with Vista because of all the requirements and drivers that just don't work, Viennna is unlikely to be all about eye candy. People like their perfectly basic xp machines.

landbeforetimelover · **Reply #8 on:** February 22, 2008, 10:15:06 AM

According to rumor, vienna is supposed to have a whole new interface. Someone said at a microsoft speech:

"If you've been impressed with the touch on your iphone, you haven't seen anything yet."

or something like that. I don't remember where I read it.

Kor · **Reply #9 on:** February 22, 2008, 12:26:43 PM

Hopefully more details will be coming out soon.

action9000 · **Reply #10 on:** February 23, 2008, 04:37:44 PM

Quote

If they can't make more than a 4gb module, they're gonna have to make a lot more slots on the MB's to handle it cuz the demand for ram is increasing and the maximum amount of ram available remains the same.

4x4 GB RAM sticks is still 16GB, which is more than most people will need for at least the next couple of years. By then, RAM may be more available in 8GB (or maybe even larger) sticks in the mainstream.

Even now, 8GB sticks (even 16GB sticks!)of RAM exist. They just aren't cheap. Thousands of dollars. But it's closer than we think.

4x8GB RAM
http://forum.ncix.com/forums/displaylink.c...no=KTM-P630/32G

2x16GB RAM (32GB, 2 DIMMs)
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku...IXForumMessages

$13,000 but it Does exist!

landbeforetimelover · **Reply #11 on:** February 23, 2008, 05:18:41 PM

That's really dumb then. I thought 4gb was the largest cuz the new apple master computer that costs $20,000 just has tons of slots for ram cuz all it can support is 4gb modules for a total of 32gb of ram. -_-

action9000 · **Reply #12 on:** February 23, 2008, 05:43:08 PM

Quote

$20,000 just has tons of slots for ram cuz all it can support is 4gb modules for a total of 32gb of ram.

$20,000 for 32GB of RAM..

Might as well buy 5 $2000 computers with 8GB each and get 40GB of RAM and 10/20 CPU cores clustered together.

for half the price

Quote

Most of the people who want the 64 bit revolution is heavy gamers, which only make up a very small percentage of the computer users

As for this...even the most intense games these days don't use more than 1GB of RAM or so at any one time. Gamers *can* benefit from 4GB of RAM right now (2GB for Vista, 1GB for game, 1GB for other apps, or 1.5GB for game and 500MB for apps), but they really don't need any more than that unless they're trying to run multiple apps while playing their game. This may change in the next couple of years though, when games start to move to more HD content and blu-ray games start to appear for the PC.

It's the multimedia producers that really need the 64-bit memory addressing. They're the ones who need to stream a bazillion GB of data in realtime.

landbeforetimelover · **Reply #13 on:** February 23, 2008, 06:59:42 PM

Still, you have to remember that the mac OS requires significantly less resources than windows. That master computer only had 3.2ghz

action9000 · **Reply #14 on:** February 23, 2008, 07:32:23 PM

3.2GHz, yes, but did you catch this part?

Quote

Quad-Core Intel Xeon processors up to 3.2GHz.

That's 3.2Ghz x 4 = 12.8GHz processing power!

Not to mention that's a Xeon, which is significantly more powerful than the mainsteam CPUs...this is probably closing in on 14-15GHz of actual performance. The Mac Pros are powerhouses!

..And that's the Quad Core...the 8-core units (dual Quad-core) are double that!
Equivalent to a 25-30GHz mainstream CPU! Now that's a computer!

landbeforetimelover · **Reply #15 on:** February 23, 2008, 08:00:49 PM

Well, no. I didn't actually look at the ad myself. My teacher told me about it. Holy crap. What would I do with 15ghz?!? :blink:

action9000 · **Reply #16 on:** February 23, 2008, 08:12:32 PM

Quote

What would I do with 15ghz?!?

Render faster? *shrugs*

Even I don't need that kind of CPU power!

my dual core is fine for now. Eventually a quad core may be useful but I can't see a need for an 8-core any time soon.

Kor · **Reply #17 on:** February 23, 2008, 08:32:13 PM

I guess it's mainly for the techofiles who feel they need the bleeding edge tech and such.