MS Support for XP Pro x64 after Vista

Microsoft hasn't exactly pushed hard to port over its utilities to x64 so
for. Secondly, it is obious that they have not taken the lead with hardware
vendors to ensure that driver support is there also. The XP Pro x64 home
page is surprising short on information such as compatibility. Anyone find a
hardware and software compatibility list on Microsoft's site lately? Is
anyone concerned that support for XP Pro x64 will be virtually non-existant
after Vista comes out? By the way, a good example it no MP 11 beta for XP
Pro x64. Is anyone out there participating in any betas for XP Pro x64?
Microsoft or other?


--
Whenever you think you are having a bad day, just remember it could be you
saying over and over again: "Welcome to MacDonalds, may I take your order
please?"

John
Sat Sep 02 10:05:53 CDT 2006

Their support is virtually non-existent now. Why would you think it might
get better when Vista is released, or even between now and then?
Microsoft was one of the last vendors to port their keyboards etc and even
then my keyboard was dropped from support even though relatively new.

"DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2AFBEC79-52CC-4E60-81CE-6F1D8FFFD412@microsoft.com...
> Microsoft hasn't exactly pushed hard to port over its utilities to x64 so
> for. Secondly, it is obious that they have not taken the lead with
> hardware
> vendors to ensure that driver support is there also. The XP Pro x64 home
> page is surprising short on information such as compatibility. Anyone
> find a
> hardware and software compatibility list on Microsoft's site lately? Is
> anyone concerned that support for XP Pro x64 will be virtually
> non-existant
> after Vista comes out? By the way, a good example it no MP 11 beta for XP
> Pro x64. Is anyone out there participating in any betas for XP Pro x64?
> Microsoft or other?
>
>
> --
> Whenever you think you are having a bad day, just remember it could be you
> saying over and over again: "Welcome to MacDonalds, may I take your order
> please?"
>

DeathNACan
Sat Sep 02 10:36:02 CDT 2006

That was the point of the thread. Hoping someone could say otherwise.
--
Whenever you think you are having a bad day, just remember it could be you
saying over and over again: "Welcome to MacDonalds, may I take your order
please?"



"John Barnes" wrote:

> Their support is virtually non-existent now. Why would you think it might
> get better when Vista is released, or even between now and then?
> Microsoft was one of the last vendors to port their keyboards etc and even
> then my keyboard was dropped from support even though relatively new.
>
> "DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:2AFBEC79-52CC-4E60-81CE-6F1D8FFFD412@microsoft.com...
> > Microsoft hasn't exactly pushed hard to port over its utilities to x64 so
> > for. Secondly, it is obious that they have not taken the lead with
> > hardware
> > vendors to ensure that driver support is there also. The XP Pro x64 home
> > page is surprising short on information such as compatibility. Anyone
> > find a
> > hardware and software compatibility list on Microsoft's site lately? Is
> > anyone concerned that support for XP Pro x64 will be virtually
> > non-existant
> > after Vista comes out? By the way, a good example it no MP 11 beta for XP
> > Pro x64. Is anyone out there participating in any betas for XP Pro x64?
> > Microsoft or other?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Whenever you think you are having a bad day, just remember it could be you
> > saying over and over again: "Welcome to MacDonalds, may I take your order
> > please?"
> >
>
>
>

Colin
Sat Sep 02 10:42:42 CDT 2006

Yes, I am participating in a beta program for XP Pro x64 Service Pack 2.

It is not true that MS has not worked hard to get hardware vendors to
support x64. But MS can only persuade, they cannot dictate.

Why does MS need a public beta of WMP11 for x64? They think they can
develop WMP11 fine without it. WMP11 x86 and x64 would be feature identical
anyway, so what would they gain?

"DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2AFBEC79-52CC-4E60-81CE-6F1D8FFFD412@microsoft.com...
> Microsoft hasn't exactly pushed hard to port over its utilities to x64 so
> for. Secondly, it is obious that they have not taken the lead with
> hardware
> vendors to ensure that driver support is there also. The XP Pro x64 home
> page is surprising short on information such as compatibility. Anyone
> find a
> hardware and software compatibility list on Microsoft's site lately? Is
> anyone concerned that support for XP Pro x64 will be virtually
> non-existant
> after Vista comes out? By the way, a good example it no MP 11 beta for XP
> Pro x64. Is anyone out there participating in any betas for XP Pro x64?
> Microsoft or other?
>
>
> --
> Whenever you think you are having a bad day, just remember it could be you
> saying over and over again: "Welcome to MacDonalds, may I take your order
> please?"
>

DeathNACan
Sat Sep 02 11:05:02 CDT 2006

Dont take this the wrong way but EA learned the hard way the value of public
betas. They have been plagued with problems and patches that create more
problems then they fix. Sound familiar? They finally started going to more
public beta testing. It seem to be working better. Who better to tell you
whats buggy than a very large group of your users? I am simply suggesting
that they could help persuade the major hardware vendors like Logitech to
jump on the xp x64 band wagon.

Read Logitech's x64 forum and you will get an idea of whats going on. Just
remember that the forum has only been up for about four months.


--
Whenever you think you are having a bad day, just remember it could be you
saying over and over again: "Welcome to MacDonalds, may I take your order
please?"



"Colin Barnhorst" wrote:

> Yes, I am participating in a beta program for XP Pro x64 Service Pack 2.
>
> It is not true that MS has not worked hard to get hardware vendors to
> support x64. But MS can only persuade, they cannot dictate.
>
> Why does MS need a public beta of WMP11 for x64? They think they can
> develop WMP11 fine without it. WMP11 x86 and x64 would be feature identical
> anyway, so what would they gain?
>
> "DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:2AFBEC79-52CC-4E60-81CE-6F1D8FFFD412@microsoft.com...
> > Microsoft hasn't exactly pushed hard to port over its utilities to x64 so
> > for. Secondly, it is obious that they have not taken the lead with
> > hardware
> > vendors to ensure that driver support is there also. The XP Pro x64 home
> > page is surprising short on information such as compatibility. Anyone
> > find a
> > hardware and software compatibility list on Microsoft's site lately? Is
> > anyone concerned that support for XP Pro x64 will be virtually
> > non-existant
> > after Vista comes out? By the way, a good example it no MP 11 beta for XP
> > Pro x64. Is anyone out there participating in any betas for XP Pro x64?
> > Microsoft or other?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Whenever you think you are having a bad day, just remember it could be you
> > saying over and over again: "Welcome to MacDonalds, may I take your order
> > please?"
> >
>
>
>

Colin
Sat Sep 02 11:54:55 CDT 2006

The difference between WMP11 for x86 and x64 is only the target of the
compilation. MS does not lack testers to double check the x64 version of
the build. They do want feature and functionality testing and that is
easily done with the much larger x86 user base.

"DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3334A282-F4B5-4B52-ACCF-ED5C7B8D1417@microsoft.com...
> Dont take this the wrong way but EA learned the hard way the value of
> public
> betas. They have been plagued with problems and patches that create more
> problems then they fix. Sound familiar? They finally started going to
> more
> public beta testing. It seem to be working better. Who better to tell
> you
> whats buggy than a very large group of your users? I am simply suggesting
> that they could help persuade the major hardware vendors like Logitech to
> jump on the xp x64 band wagon.
>
> Read Logitech's x64 forum and you will get an idea of whats going on.
> Just
> remember that the forum has only been up for about four months.
>
>
> --
> Whenever you think you are having a bad day, just remember it could be you
> saying over and over again: "Welcome to MacDonalds, may I take your order
> please?"
>
>
>
> "Colin Barnhorst" wrote:
>
>> Yes, I am participating in a beta program for XP Pro x64 Service Pack 2.
>>
>> It is not true that MS has not worked hard to get hardware vendors to
>> support x64. But MS can only persuade, they cannot dictate.
>>
>> Why does MS need a public beta of WMP11 for x64? They think they can
>> develop WMP11 fine without it. WMP11 x86 and x64 would be feature
>> identical
>> anyway, so what would they gain?
>>
>> "DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:2AFBEC79-52CC-4E60-81CE-6F1D8FFFD412@microsoft.com...
>> > Microsoft hasn't exactly pushed hard to port over its utilities to x64
>> > so
>> > for. Secondly, it is obious that they have not taken the lead with
>> > hardware
>> > vendors to ensure that driver support is there also. The XP Pro x64
>> > home
>> > page is surprising short on information such as compatibility. Anyone
>> > find a
>> > hardware and software compatibility list on Microsoft's site lately? Is
>> > anyone concerned that support for XP Pro x64 will be virtually
>> > non-existant
>> > after Vista comes out? By the way, a good example it no MP 11 beta for
>> > XP
>> > Pro x64. Is anyone out there participating in any betas for XP Pro
>> > x64?
>> > Microsoft or other?
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Whenever you think you are having a bad day, just remember it could be
>> > you
>> > saying over and over again: "Welcome to MacDonalds, may I take your
>> > order
>> > please?"
>> >
>>
>>
>>

DP
Sat Sep 02 12:24:02 CDT 2006


"DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2AFBEC79-52CC-4E60-81CE-6F1D8FFFD412@microsoft.com...
> Is anyone out there participating in any betas for XP Pro x64?
> Microsoft or other?

What about the beta of 64-bit IE7? Does that count?

John
Sat Sep 02 12:43:02 CDT 2006

Since RC1 was already released, probably not. But at least it shows some
support.


"DP" <nospamxx@xyzddd.com> wrote in message
news:%23bBeZSrzGHA.2300@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
> "DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:2AFBEC79-52CC-4E60-81CE-6F1D8FFFD412@microsoft.com...
>> Is anyone out there participating in any betas for XP Pro x64?
>> Microsoft or other?
>
> What about the beta of 64-bit IE7? Does that count?
>
>

Colin
Sat Sep 02 12:49:40 CDT 2006

And Windows Defender for x64.

"DP" <nospamxx@xyzddd.com> wrote in message
news:%23bBeZSrzGHA.2300@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
> "DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:2AFBEC79-52CC-4E60-81CE-6F1D8FFFD412@microsoft.com...
>> Is anyone out there participating in any betas for XP Pro x64?
>> Microsoft or other?
>
> What about the beta of 64-bit IE7? Does that count?
>
>

Charlie
Sat Sep 02 12:58:32 CDT 2006

And other things we can't discuss.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64


Colin Barnhorst wrote:
> And Windows Defender for x64.
>
> "DP" <nospamxx@xyzddd.com> wrote in message
> news:%23bBeZSrzGHA.2300@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:2AFBEC79-52CC-4E60-81CE-6F1D8FFFD412@microsoft.com...
>>> Is anyone out there participating in any betas for XP Pro x64?
>>> Microsoft or other?
>>
>> What about the beta of 64-bit IE7? Does that count?

DP
Sat Sep 02 13:06:40 CDT 2006


"Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
news:uIgRlgrzGHA.2208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> And Windows Defender for x64.
>

Correct. I was going to mention that as well.

BTW: I'm not defending MS, just answering a specific question.

However, I wonder if the OP's question is flawed. I say this because I would
estimate that the vast majority of x64 installs (not counting any trial
versions that haven't expired yet) is the OEM version. The OEM version has
NO support from Microsoft. The support is supposed to come only from the
OEM.
(BTW: When I say "vast majority" of installs are OEM, I say that to
recognize that there also are academic versions of x64 out there, as this
forum has pointed out recently.)

At any rate, I realize I may be splitting hairs here. The OP probably didn't
mean help-line-type support, but simply meant whether MS would come out with
more products for x64. But I just thought I'd point out the OEM-support
aspect of this as well so that we're all talking about the same thing.

Colin
Sat Sep 02 14:16:54 CDT 2006

Them too.

"Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message
news:%235xiolrzGHA.4448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> And other things we can't discuss.
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
>
>
> Colin Barnhorst wrote:
>> And Windows Defender for x64.
>>
>> "DP" <nospamxx@xyzddd.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23bBeZSrzGHA.2300@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>> "DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>> news:2AFBEC79-52CC-4E60-81CE-6F1D8FFFD412@microsoft.com...
>>>> Is anyone out there participating in any betas for XP Pro x64?
>>>> Microsoft or other?
>>>
>>> What about the beta of 64-bit IE7? Does that count?
>
>

Colin
Sat Sep 02 14:19:49 CDT 2006

I understand that MS does give more help than they do with x86 OEM Windows
because they realize that there are system builders who do not give very
good support and that there is no retail alternative for their customers.

"DP" <nospamxx@xyzddd.com> wrote in message
news:Ogw6NqrzGHA.720@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:uIgRlgrzGHA.2208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> And Windows Defender for x64.
>>
>
> Correct. I was going to mention that as well.
>
> BTW: I'm not defending MS, just answering a specific question.
>
> However, I wonder if the OP's question is flawed. I say this because I
> would estimate that the vast majority of x64 installs (not counting any
> trial versions that haven't expired yet) is the OEM version. The OEM
> version has NO support from Microsoft. The support is supposed to come
> only from the OEM.
> (BTW: When I say "vast majority" of installs are OEM, I say that to
> recognize that there also are academic versions of x64 out there, as this
> forum has pointed out recently.)
>
> At any rate, I realize I may be splitting hairs here. The OP probably
> didn't mean help-line-type support, but simply meant whether MS would come
> out with more products for x64. But I just thought I'd point out the
> OEM-support aspect of this as well so that we're all talking about the
> same thing.
>
>
>

DeathNACan
Sun Sep 03 01:10:02 CDT 2006

Are the programs x64 MS is developing both designed to run on both XP Prox64
and Vista x64; that is to say, will the beta for XP Pro x64 also install on
Vista x64 or is there a seperate code for each? I would kind of like to know
if the Vista x64 apps will also run on XP Pro x64?



--
Whenever you think you are having a bad day, just remember it could be you
saying over and over again: "Welcome to MacDonalds, may I take your order
please?"



"Colin Barnhorst" wrote:

> I understand that MS does give more help than they do with x86 OEM Windows
> because they realize that there are system builders who do not give very
> good support and that there is no retail alternative for their customers.
>
> "DP" <nospamxx@xyzddd.com> wrote in message
> news:Ogw6NqrzGHA.720@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> >
> > "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
> > news:uIgRlgrzGHA.2208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >> And Windows Defender for x64.
> >>
> >
> > Correct. I was going to mention that as well.
> >
> > BTW: I'm not defending MS, just answering a specific question.
> >
> > However, I wonder if the OP's question is flawed. I say this because I
> > would estimate that the vast majority of x64 installs (not counting any
> > trial versions that haven't expired yet) is the OEM version. The OEM
> > version has NO support from Microsoft. The support is supposed to come
> > only from the OEM.
> > (BTW: When I say "vast majority" of installs are OEM, I say that to
> > recognize that there also are academic versions of x64 out there, as this
> > forum has pointed out recently.)
> >
> > At any rate, I realize I may be splitting hairs here. The OP probably
> > didn't mean help-line-type support, but simply meant whether MS would come
> > out with more products for x64. But I just thought I'd point out the
> > OEM-support aspect of this as well so that we're all talking about the
> > same thing.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Charlie
Sun Sep 03 01:39:40 CDT 2006

On hardware support - honestly, this is something that MS can't control, and
they have to be very, very careful how they handle it. (Any one heard the
term "consent decree"?)

As for the HCL - I think we all wish it were back. But it's been gone for
quite a long while, long before x64 Edition.

I honestly expect that the driver situation will stay about the same or get
a bit better as we move towards Vista. Once vendors have made the
committment to port to x64, it's not hard to do an XP version as well. And
there will continue to be XP x64 in the marketplace, at least for a while.
But the reality is that once XP shipped, Windows 2000 became a niche market.
Hello, that's how the software business is. Once Vista ships, no one's
attention will be on XP.

Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64

"DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2AFBEC79-52CC-4E60-81CE-6F1D8FFFD412@microsoft.com...
> Microsoft hasn't exactly pushed hard to port over its utilities to x64 so
> for. Secondly, it is obious that they have not taken the lead with
> hardware
> vendors to ensure that driver support is there also. The XP Pro x64 home
> page is surprising short on information such as compatibility. Anyone
> find a
> hardware and software compatibility list on Microsoft's site lately? Is
> anyone concerned that support for XP Pro x64 will be virtually
> non-existant
> after Vista comes out? By the way, a good example it no MP 11 beta for XP
> Pro x64. Is anyone out there participating in any betas for XP Pro x64?
> Microsoft or other?
>
>
> --
> Whenever you think you are having a bad day, just remember it could be you
> saying over and over again: "Welcome to MacDonalds, may I take your order
> please?"
>

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64

Colin
Sun Sep 03 01:45:31 CDT 2006

MS is committed to providing their products on all platforms currently in
active support when the nature of the product makes it reasonable to do so.
Each platform has its own requirements. There are things specifically
designed for Vista and introduced in Vista that will not be backported to
XP. There are usually architectual reasons for that, such as with
CompletePC Backup.

Other betas, such as the One Care beta, are only released in x86 form
because the public beta is for feature testing and usability feedback, not
for code checking. An x64 version is not seen until launch time. The same
thing is happening with WMP11 beta.


"DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A8DE3CA2-082B-41C0-8AE2-A2962BD4CDBF@microsoft.com...
> Are the programs x64 MS is developing both designed to run on both XP
> Prox64
> and Vista x64; that is to say, will the beta for XP Pro x64 also install
> on
> Vista x64 or is there a seperate code for each? I would kind of like to
> know
> if the Vista x64 apps will also run on XP Pro x64?
>
>
>
> --
> Whenever you think you are having a bad day, just remember it could be you
> saying over and over again: "Welcome to MacDonalds, may I take your order
> please?"
>
>
>
> "Colin Barnhorst" wrote:
>
>> I understand that MS does give more help than they do with x86 OEM
>> Windows
>> because they realize that there are system builders who do not give very
>> good support and that there is no retail alternative for their customers.
>>
>> "DP" <nospamxx@xyzddd.com> wrote in message
>> news:Ogw6NqrzGHA.720@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> >
>> > "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
>> > news:uIgRlgrzGHA.2208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> >> And Windows Defender for x64.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Correct. I was going to mention that as well.
>> >
>> > BTW: I'm not defending MS, just answering a specific question.
>> >
>> > However, I wonder if the OP's question is flawed. I say this because I
>> > would estimate that the vast majority of x64 installs (not counting any
>> > trial versions that haven't expired yet) is the OEM version. The OEM
>> > version has NO support from Microsoft. The support is supposed to come
>> > only from the OEM.
>> > (BTW: When I say "vast majority" of installs are OEM, I say that to
>> > recognize that there also are academic versions of x64 out there, as
>> > this
>> > forum has pointed out recently.)
>> >
>> > At any rate, I realize I may be splitting hairs here. The OP probably
>> > didn't mean help-line-type support, but simply meant whether MS would
>> > come
>> > out with more products for x64. But I just thought I'd point out the
>> > OEM-support aspect of this as well so that we're all talking about the
>> > same thing.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>

John
Sun Sep 03 05:20:42 CDT 2006


> On hardware support - honestly, this is something that MS can't control,
> and
> they have to be very, very careful how they handle it. (Any one heard the
> term "consent decree"?)

What was it Shakespeare said about lawyers? but since he failed to garner
enough support they have multiplied to where they control too many
governments.



> I honestly expect that the driver situation will stay about the same or
> get a bit better as we move towards Vista. Once vendors have made the
> committment to port to x64, it's not hard to do an XP version as well. And
> there will continue to be XP x64 in the marketplace, at least for a while.
> But the reality is that once XP shipped, Windows 2000 became a niche
> market. Hello, that's how the software business is. Once Vista ships, no
> one's attention will be on XP.

Especially now that RC1 has shipped and developers have THE version to
develop to, what developer will even bother with XP x64. After all, we all
know it has a very small installed base and Vista will have a larger
installed base, probably by February 2007, if not the week it is available
in stores.
>

Charlie
Sun Sep 03 10:49:29 CDT 2006

And in every one of those, there's a PM or two who has heard the requirement
to support x64 LOUD and CLEAR. ;) I'm getting a bit of a reputation, I fear.
<g>

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64


Colin Barnhorst wrote:
> Them too.
>
> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message
> news:%235xiolrzGHA.4448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> And other things we can't discuss.
>>
>> --
>> Charlie.
>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
>>
>>
>> Colin Barnhorst wrote:
>>> And Windows Defender for x64.
>>>
>>> "DP" <nospamxx@xyzddd.com> wrote in message
>>> news:%23bBeZSrzGHA.2300@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>> "DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:2AFBEC79-52CC-4E60-81CE-6F1D8FFFD412@microsoft.com...
>>>>> Is anyone out there participating in any betas for XP Pro x64?
>>>>> Microsoft or other?
>>>>
>>>> What about the beta of 64-bit IE7? Does that count?

Colin
Sun Sep 03 12:41:59 CDT 2006

I forgot to mention Windows Desktop Search 3.0 beta for x64.

"Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
news:uIgRlgrzGHA.2208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> And Windows Defender for x64.
>
> "DP" <nospamxx@xyzddd.com> wrote in message
> news:%23bBeZSrzGHA.2300@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "DeathNACan" <DeathNACan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:2AFBEC79-52CC-4E60-81CE-6F1D8FFFD412@microsoft.com...
>>> Is anyone out there participating in any betas for XP Pro x64?
>>> Microsoft or other?
>>
>> What about the beta of 64-bit IE7? Does that count?
>>
>>
>
>

Mark
Wed Sep 06 19:36:02 CDT 2006

On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 07:39:40 +0100, Charlie Russel - MVP
<Charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.com> wrote:

> On hardware support - honestly, this is something that MS can't control,
> and they have to be very, very careful how they handle it. (Any one
> heard the term "consent decree"?)
>
> As for the HCL - I think we all wish it were back. But it's been gone
> for quite a long while, long before x64 Edition.
>
> I honestly expect that the driver situation will stay about the same or
> get a bit better as we move towards Vista.

I think the exact opposite will happen, as Vista forces signed drivers in
x64. Much of my working hardware is currently on unsigned drivers, and
given the manufacturers reluctance to bother getting them signed in the
past, I don't think Vista will change their mindset.

I have a choice, stick with XP x64, move to Vista 32bit, or buy from that
miniscule list of signed driver hardware...

Charlie
Thu Sep 07 00:47:27 CDT 2006

That list won't stay short, IMNSHO. Primarily because of the Vista logo
requirements, frankly. And there are levels of signing which are not
onerous, but will meet the requirements.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
"Mark Gillespie" <mark.gillespie@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:op.tfhfyclej2q9yy@desktop64...
> On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 07:39:40 +0100, Charlie Russel - MVP
> <Charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.com> wrote:
>
>> On hardware support - honestly, this is something that MS can't control,
>> and they have to be very, very careful how they handle it. (Any one
>> heard the term "consent decree"?)
>>
>> As for the HCL - I think we all wish it were back. But it's been gone
>> for quite a long while, long before x64 Edition.
>>
>> I honestly expect that the driver situation will stay about the same or
>> get a bit better as we move towards Vista.
>
> I think the exact opposite will happen, as Vista forces signed drivers in
> x64. Much of my working hardware is currently on unsigned drivers, and
> given the manufacturers reluctance to bother getting them signed in the
> past, I don't think Vista will change their mindset.
>
> I have a choice, stick with XP x64, move to Vista 32bit, or buy from that
> miniscule list of signed driver hardware...

John
Thu Sep 07 06:39:43 CDT 2006

Unless 64-bit systems become much more numerous, I don't know how much the
Vista logo will be worth if they can just say it works with Vista X86. It
could be still a small group of diehards like this group. Microsoft is
shooting Vista x64 in the foot by providing coupons for discount upgrades.
Those that buy during that period will most likely have xp86 installed on
the machine and upgrade to Vista86, and will the system builders switch over
to Vista64. Why? It doesn't help the average home user and will swamp
their help desk.


"Mark Gillespie" <mark.gillespie@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:op.tfhfyclej2q9yy@desktop64...
> On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 07:39:40 +0100, Charlie Russel - MVP
> <Charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.com> wrote:
>
>> On hardware support - honestly, this is something that MS can't control,
>> and they have to be very, very careful how they handle it. (Any one
>> heard the term "consent decree"?)
>>
>> As for the HCL - I think we all wish it were back. But it's been gone
>> for quite a long while, long before x64 Edition.
>>
>> I honestly expect that the driver situation will stay about the same or
>> get a bit better as we move towards Vista.
>
> I think the exact opposite will happen, as Vista forces signed drivers in
> x64. Much of my working hardware is currently on unsigned drivers, and
> given the manufacturers reluctance to bother getting them signed in the
> past, I don't think Vista will change their mindset.
>
> I have a choice, stick with XP x64, move to Vista 32bit, or buy from that
> miniscule list of signed driver hardware...

Mark
Thu Sep 07 16:05:53 CDT 2006

On Thu, 07 Sep 2006 12:39:43 +0100, John Barnes <jbarnes@email.net> wrote:

> Unless 64-bit systems become much more numerous, I don't know how much
> the
> Vista logo will be worth if they can just say it works with Vista X86.
> It
>

Does software ONLY get the "Made For Vista" logo, when it has BOTH signed
32bit and 64bit drivers? i.e. if hardware manufacturers want that logo,
they have to get off their lasy arses and write and get signed 64bit
drivers.

Anyone know?>

Charlie
Thu Sep 07 18:43:16 CDT 2006

Yes. The requirement is that a Made for Vista must work in x64. That does
not mean it has to be 64bit, just that it has to work in x64. So driver
manufacturers must do 64bit. But software mfgs can get away with well
behaved 32bit programs.

(note that running in 32bit is not required, since it might be a 64bit only
program.)


--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64


Mark Gillespie wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Sep 2006 12:39:43 +0100, John Barnes <jbarnes@email.net> wrote:
>
>> Unless 64-bit systems become much more numerous, I don't know how much
>> the
>> Vista logo will be worth if they can just say it works with Vista X86.
>> It
>>
>
> Does software ONLY get the "Made For Vista" logo, when it has BOTH signed
> 32bit and 64bit drivers? i.e. if hardware manufacturers want that logo,
> they have to get off their lasy arses and write and get signed 64bit
> drivers.
>
> Anyone know?>

Colin
Fri Sep 08 13:20:35 CDT 2006

If by "64bit systems" you mean the hardware,. then know that the largest of
the system builders plans to stop offering 32bit cpu's at all after the end
of this year.

"John Barnes" <jbarnes@email.net> wrote in message
news:u7Y1TJn0GHA.1256@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Unless 64-bit systems become much more numerous, I don't know how much the
> Vista logo will be worth if they can just say it works with Vista X86. It
> could be still a small group of diehards like this group. Microsoft is
> shooting Vista x64 in the foot by providing coupons for discount upgrades.
> Those that buy during that period will most likely have xp86 installed on
> the machine and upgrade to Vista86, and will the system builders switch
> over to Vista64. Why? It doesn't help the average home user and will
> swamp their help desk.
>
>
> "Mark Gillespie" <mark.gillespie@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:op.tfhfyclej2q9yy@desktop64...
>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 07:39:40 +0100, Charlie Russel - MVP
>> <Charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On hardware support - honestly, this is something that MS can't control,
>>> and they have to be very, very careful how they handle it. (Any one
>>> heard the term "consent decree"?)
>>>
>>> As for the HCL - I think we all wish it were back. But it's been gone
>>> for quite a long while, long before x64 Edition.
>>>
>>> I honestly expect that the driver situation will stay about the same or
>>> get a bit better as we move towards Vista.
>>
>> I think the exact opposite will happen, as Vista forces signed drivers in
>> x64. Much of my working hardware is currently on unsigned drivers, and
>> given the manufacturers reluctance to bother getting them signed in the
>> past, I don't think Vista will change their mindset.
>>
>> I have a choice, stick with XP x64, move to Vista 32bit, or buy from that
>> miniscule list of signed driver hardware...
>
>

Mark
Sat Sep 09 10:12:49 CDT 2006

On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 00:43:16 +0100, Charlie Russel - MVP
<charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote:

> Yes. The requirement is that a Made for Vista must work in x64. That does
> not mean it has to be 64bit, just that it has to work in x64. So driver
> manufacturers must do 64bit. But software mfgs can get away with well
> behaved 32bit programs.
>
> (note that running in 32bit is not required, since it might be a 64bit
> only
> program.)
>
>

That's good news then, driver support will improve, when manufacturers
realise that without that logo, people will shop elsewhere...