It's too bad about Vista Beta 2 (x64)

[wgd]

Vista Beta 2 (32-bit) has worked great for me. I'm currently using it full
time on my second computer system. It started out as a stand alone test
system since I didn't know how stable the beta would be, how many problems
I would have, etc. But now it has replaced by secondary Windows XP Pro
computer.

I was never that interested in the x64 version since 64-bit on the desktop
offers limited, if any, benefits at this time. But since I downloaded it
and burned a DVD I thought I should at least take a look at it.

Vista Beta 2 x64 was installed on the second half of a 160GB SATA2 hard
drive. I can now boot to either Vista B2 x86 or Vista B2 x64 on this
computer (Pentium D 805, P945G Express chipset motherboard, 1 GB DDR2 667,
etc.)

The x64 install when smoothly. As in the x86 install my onboard Realtek
ALC 882 HD audio was not recognized. Using the same Realtek Vista Beta 2
driver package (supports both 32-bit and 64-bit) I followed the same
installation procedure. But I got a completely different result - no
sound! Even though the driver install apparently completed successfully.
None of the audio devices that should have been created appear in the
audio section in control panel. So, of course, the speaker icon still has
an X and no sound.

Even though my HP LaserJet 1012 was recognized as as 1284.4 DOT4 printer
no USB printer driver was installed. I used the XP drivers under 32-bit
Vista, but there is no 64-bit driver for this printer and probably never
will be.

Although, I have to say the Nvidia 64-bit driver for my Geforce 7600GS
works great. As a whole Vista 64-bit seems somewhat faster and more
responsive than the 32-bit.

But failed drivers and the lack of 64-bit driver support is going to
prevent many people from selecting the 64-bit version of Vista. Which is
too bad because the 64-bit version of Vista is probably the better of the
two.

 

[deebs]

Luddites?

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

Email the manufacturer's of the devices you have driver concerns about. MS
does not make these drivers and can only use persuasion to move them along.
Your input will help.

 

[Raven Mill]

I have to agree with Colin here. MS has no responsibility for drivers at
that level. I've had fairly good luck with installing the XP Pro x64 (XP
Pro 2005) drivers on the few things that Vista didn't have it's own drivers
for. I was amazed that ANY OS had drivers for my Xerox Phaser 8550 printer,
but it popped right up with no problems...

As for whether the fall of x64 will take plave, I disagree, as I think that
Vista will make the 64-bit drivers more readily available. XP x64
definately didn't get much support that way. Remember...we're still on the
beta2 stage here. It's up to the hardware manufacturers to get out the
drivers. I do know that ASUS, Intel and nVidia are already doing pretty
good as far as 64-bit (and especially Vista in general) systems go...

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

Having used XP Pro since its infancy, the best thing I can say about it is
that it is rock solid and a real performer with things that require large
amounts of ram. Beyond that it is just XP. But I don't think it will
survive on any of my machines past the first couple of months after the
release of Vista x64.

Also, I think that drivers for x64 will be optimal for Vista x64 but not XP
x64.

There is no gauruntee that a driver for Vista will work in XP x64 just
because it is 64bit. The driver model for Vista is just too different.

 

[wgd]

Email the manufacturer's of the devices you have driver concerns about. MS
does not make these drivers and can only use persuasion to move them along.
Your input will help.

I never said MS was responsible for driver problems (either not working or
not available) with Vista B2 x64. Of course it is up to the hardware
manufacturers to supply drivers for their hardware.

And manufacturer's are not going to commit any resources to writing 64-bit
Vista drivers for hardware that is a year or more old.

Plus the resources they do commit to driver development will go toward the
largest installed Vista base. Which in all probability will be Vista
32bit.

Hardware manufacturers are just doing what is in their self interest.
Unless Vista x64 achieves widespread adoption no company will devote
resources to writing 64-bit drivers. And the driver situation will mirror
that of XP 64-bit.

 

[Raven Mill]

*snip*

Plus the resources they do commit to driver development will go toward the
largest installed Vista base. Which in all probability will be Vista
32bit.

I have to disagree with that. To be honest, I think that the 32-bit Vista
will be simply cover and sales revenue for legacy systems. I haven't seen a
NEW 32-bit system put out in more than a year now. (I have new systems sent
to me constantly due to my radio program.) The AMD64 did a GREAT job in
pushing the 64-bit CPU, even though most of them shipped with a 32-bit OS.
Now, with the onset of the Core2 Duo, I don't think that 32-bit will even
survive for long other than in systems built before now. Considering that
this week, both intel AND AMD will be dropping the prices of their (slightly
older) 64-bit cpu's (AMD both the Athlon64 & X2 and Intel the Presler core
(now that the core2 duo and solo have been released, which, everyone
expects, will replace the PentiumD and the CeleronD)) and that all of the
dual core chips (and most of the single-cores) are 64-bit, I actually think
that the x86 will be shoved to the slow lane of the OS world to, finally,
make way for x64.

That's my prediction...

 

[Chad Harris]

Microsoft - Want Vista x64 to Fail? Comments on Mandatorily Signed Drivers

http://www.longhornblogs.com/chris123nt/archive/2006/07/23/16462.aspx

32 vs. 64 Vista
http://blogs.msdn.com/tims/archive/2006/05/28/609372.aspx

CH

 

[wgd]

*snip*


I have to disagree with that. To be honest, I think that the 32-bit Vista
will be simply cover and sales revenue for legacy systems. I haven't seen a
NEW 32-bit system put out in more than a year now. (I have new systems sent
to me constantly due to my radio program.) The AMD64 did a GREAT job in
pushing the 64-bit CPU, even though most of them shipped with a 32-bit OS.
Now, with the onset of the Core2 Duo, I don't think that 32-bit will even
survive for long other than in systems built before now. Considering that
this week, both intel AND AMD will be dropping the prices of their (slightly
older) 64-bit cpu's (AMD both the Athlon64 & X2 and Intel the Presler core
(now that the core2 duo and solo have been released, which, everyone
expects, will replace the PentiumD and the CeleronD)) and that all of the
dual core chips (and most of the single-cores) are 64-bit, I actually think
that the x86 will be shoved to the slow lane of the OS world to, finally,
make way for x64.

That's my prediction...

As always happens the marketplace will determine how soon a 64-bit Windows
OS replaces the predominant 32-bit versions.

However there is a huge, gaping hole in your logic. You're equating the
fact that almost all current (and upcoming) processors are 64-bit capable
with an assumption that they will all be running a 64-bit OS in the near
future.

My prediction is that it will be years before this happens. The millions
of corporate desktops will run what they are capable of unless a business
case can be make to upgrade.

Large OEMs like Dell will sell what their customers want. And what their
customers want is for their printers, scanners, webcams, gaming
controllers, etc. etc. to work with their shiny new computer. And 32-bit
Vista is the undisputed choice for maximum hardware and software
compatibility.

Like another poster in this thread points out, Paul Thurroutt has an
excellent article on this topic. You can read it at the link below. Pay
special attention to his final thoughts paragraph.

http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_ff_x64.asp

 

[Raven Mill]

Chad...

I won't post it here, because it's not important to the ng, but I made some
comments on both of those blogs, in case you hadn't seen them...

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

Actually the Core Duo is only 32bit. The Core 2 line is 64bit. As to the
rest of your comments, I know of at least one large (arguably the largest)
system builder who will stop providing systems with 32bit cpu's at the end
of this year. Within a year it won't make sense to ship Vista x86 systems.

 

[Chad Harris]

Thanks. Those are good blogs well worth following.

CH

 

[Raven Mill]

I said core2 duo...
scroll down and look

Actually the Core Duo is only 32bit. The Core 2 line is 64bit. As to the
rest of your comments, I know of at least one large (arguably the largest)
system builder who will stop providing systems with 32bit cpu's at the end
of this year. Within a year it won't make sense to ship Vista x86
systems.