64 bit processor: XP 64 or not?

Hi,

I'm getting a new laptop with AMD 64 Dual Core processor. I'm using this pc
to develop in Visual Studio 2003, 2005, and will isntall also SQL Server
2000 and 2005, Visio etc.

- Should I install the XP 64-bit version or the 'normal' version?

- Does the 64-bit version will have a significant difference in performance?
If yes: how much percent is the difference? When using visual Studio?

- Will I find all the necessary drivers when I use 64-bit? Or is this a pain
in the *ss?

- Any other things I should think about/consider?

Thanks a lot in advance,

Pieter

Anando
Fri Mar 17 09:46:21 CST 2006

Hello Pieter,

You cannot buy Windows XP x64 edition through the retail channel. It will either come pre-installed
with the PC or if you have access to MSDN subscription downloads, you can get it from there.
Normally its quite a pain to get all the 64 bit drivers but more and more manufacturers are making
64 bit drivers available. It all depends on the kind of hardware that is present in your system.

You will not see any boost in performance under x64 unless the application you are running is coded
to run in 64 bit. In your case, I am not sure if Visual Studio 2005 is a 64 bit application.

You can get more information and post questions about Winodws XP x64 at the following newsgroup:

microsoft.public.windows.64bit.general

--

Anando
Microsoft MVP- Windows Shell/User
http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
http://www.mvps.org


Folder customizations
http://newdelhi.sancharnet.in/minku

Protect your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/protect


"Pieter" <pietercoucke@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:O57lsidSGHA.5924@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
>
> I'm getting a new laptop with AMD 64 Dual Core processor. I'm using this pc to develop in Visual
> Studio 2003, 2005, and will isntall also SQL Server 2000 and 2005, Visio etc.
>
> - Should I install the XP 64-bit version or the 'normal' version?
>
> - Does the 64-bit version will have a significant difference in performance? If yes: how much
> percent is the difference? When using visual Studio?
>
> - Will I find all the necessary drivers when I use 64-bit? Or is this a pain in the *ss?
>
> - Any other things I should think about/consider?
>
> Thanks a lot in advance,
>
> Pieter
>

Pieter
Fri Mar 17 09:55:59 CST 2006

Thanks for the quick response.
We do have a MSDN-subscription, so getting it won't be such a big problem.

So basicly I'll have to find out if Visual Studio is a 64-bit application,
and if it isn't, it won't give me any advantage, and will only be a pain
(drivers) :-S

So buying a 64-bit processor doesn't make sense at all?

Thomas
Fri Mar 17 09:57:47 CST 2006

Pieter wrote:
> I'm getting a new laptop with AMD 64 Dual Core processor. I'm using this pc
> to develop in Visual Studio 2003, 2005, and will isntall also SQL Server
> 2000 and 2005, Visio etc.
>
> - Should I install the XP 64-bit version or the 'normal' version?

Unless your laptop comes with 8 GB of memory (which would be a
surprise), you should probably go with the normal version.

> - Does the 64-bit version will have a significant difference in performance?
> If yes: how much percent is the difference? When using visual Studio?

In your case: no. Better performance is only gained with 64bit
applications. So far most 64bit applications are either scientific
software or for video processing.

> - Will I find all the necessary drivers when I use 64-bit? Or is this a pain
> in the *ss?

For a laptop, I would consider this very doubtful. You may end up in
many different environments using lots of devices. Having drivers for
all of them seems like a win in the lottery. My hit rate was about 80%.

> - Any other things I should think about/consider?

You can dual boot, but of course this also means dual cost. With VMware,
you can run both systems side by side, while the cost is roughly doubled
again.

Thomas

usasma
Fri Mar 17 10:01:28 CST 2006

In the tests that I've read, the x64 version of Windows isn't significantly
faster (as Anando said).

Unless you have a dire need for x64 on your laptop, I'd suggest that you
stay away from it. Even if you do find the drivers for it - will the laptop
be able to handle all the extra stuff that's required (remember the switch
from 16 bit to 32 bit OS's and the increases in system demands and file
sizes?)?

Good luck!

- John

"Pieter" wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm getting a new laptop with AMD 64 Dual Core processor. I'm using this pc
> to develop in Visual Studio 2003, 2005, and will isntall also SQL Server
> 2000 and 2005, Visio etc.
>
> - Should I install the XP 64-bit version or the 'normal' version?
>
> - Does the 64-bit version will have a significant difference in performance?
> If yes: how much percent is the difference? When using visual Studio?
>
> - Will I find all the necessary drivers when I use 64-bit? Or is this a pain
> in the *ss?
>
> - Any other things I should think about/consider?
>
> Thanks a lot in advance,
>
> Pieter
>
>
>

John
Fri Mar 17 10:08:57 CST 2006

You don't say what your machine is, but you could benefit if you have a
large amount of memory, but not sure how much of an improvement it would be
with a 32-bit program. You possibly could dual boot while you are trying to
get everything together for x64. Then you can try out programs on both
systems and decide which to keep later.


"Pieter" <pietercoucke@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eoecMtdSGHA.5500@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for the quick response.
> We do have a MSDN-subscription, so getting it won't be such a big problem.
>
> So basicly I'll have to find out if Visual Studio is a 64-bit application,
> and if it isn't, it won't give me any advantage, and will only be a pain
> (drivers) :-S
>
> So buying a 64-bit processor doesn't make sense at all?
>

Charlie
Fri Mar 17 10:08:07 CST 2006

Your laptop will certainly support x64, and the mfg of it may well provide
all the drivers you need _for the laptop_. Will it be faster? Well, SQL
Server and Visual Studio 2005 versions might be, since they have x64
versions. But given you'll top out of memory long before the top end of
32-bit Windows, the differences won't be huge.

You can obtain an OEM version of x64 Edition if your laptop didn't already
come with it. Using MSDN for it might be a problem, given the licensing of
MSDN - since this is your "production" machine, not a testing machine. You
can certainly dual boot - see my blog on setting that up, please, it will
save you some pain, especially if you do it in the wrong order.

For a general overview of x64 Edition, see the links in my blog post:
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/archive/2005/11/29.aspx

There are links to an article, an FAQ and a Web Cast that answer many of the
basic questions about x64 Edition.

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

Pieter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm getting a new laptop with AMD 64 Dual Core processor. I'm using this
> pc to develop in Visual Studio 2003, 2005, and will isntall also SQL
> Server 2000 and 2005, Visio etc.
>
> - Should I install the XP 64-bit version or the 'normal' version?
>
> - Does the 64-bit version will have a significant difference in
> performance? If yes: how much percent is the difference? When using
> visual Studio?
> - Will I find all the necessary drivers when I use 64-bit? Or is this a
> pain in the *ss?
>
> - Any other things I should think about/consider?
>
> Thanks a lot in advance,
>
> Pieter

beb
Fri Mar 17 10:27:20 CST 2006

It varies for application to application. You might be able to get a 32 bit
application to run better on 64 bit machine and another might run worst.
Some software gives you the choice of install as a 32 bit application or as
a 64 bit one. Check with the vendor of the applications your are interested
in.


"Pieter" <pietercoucke@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eoecMtdSGHA.5500@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for the quick response.
> We do have a MSDN-subscription, so getting it won't be such a big problem.
>
> So basicly I'll have to find out if Visual Studio is a 64-bit application,
> and if it isn't, it won't give me any advantage, and will only be a pain
> (drivers) :-S
>
> So buying a 64-bit processor doesn't make sense at all?
>

Anando
Fri Mar 17 10:33:09 CST 2006

Buying a 64bit based machine is good on the long run since Windows Vista will also be launched in a
64 bit flavour and more and more applications are being launched in 64 bit flavours too.

--

Anando
Microsoft MVP- Windows Shell/User
http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
http://www.mvps.org


Folder customizations
http://newdelhi.sancharnet.in/minku

Protect your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/protect


"Pieter" <pietercoucke@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:eoecMtdSGHA.5500@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for the quick response.
> We do have a MSDN-subscription, so getting it won't be such a big problem.
>
> So basicly I'll have to find out if Visual Studio is a 64-bit application, and if it isn't, it
> won't give me any advantage, and will only be a pain (drivers) :-S
>
> So buying a 64-bit processor doesn't make sense at all?
>

Rob
Fri Mar 17 10:37:39 CST 2006

Pieter wrote:
> Thanks for the quick response.
> We do have a MSDN-subscription, so getting it won't be such a big problem.
>
> So basicly I'll have to find out if Visual Studio is a 64-bit application,
> and if it isn't, it won't give me any advantage, and will only be a pain
> (drivers) :-S

VS 2005 is capable of producing 64-bit applications. I don't know if the
IDE is 64-bit, since I can't think of a single reason why to write it
for 64-bit right now. But I can say with surety that it *runs* under x64
edition.

Rob

Andre
Fri Mar 17 12:49:10 CST 2006

I think only the Professional Edition and up can compile native 64-bit
applications.
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

"Rob Perkins" <rperkins@usa.net> wrote in message
news:4806u4FhmkhoU3@individual.net...
> Pieter wrote:
>> Thanks for the quick response.
>> We do have a MSDN-subscription, so getting it won't be such a big
>> problem.
>>
>> So basicly I'll have to find out if Visual Studio is a 64-bit
>> application, and if it isn't, it won't give me any advantage, and will
>> only be a pain (drivers) :-S
>
> VS 2005 is capable of producing 64-bit applications. I don't know if the
> IDE is 64-bit, since I can't think of a single reason why to write it for
> 64-bit right now. But I can say with surety that it *runs* under x64
> edition.
>
> Rob

Mike
Fri Mar 17 16:02:32 CST 2006

Hi Pieter,

If you are in development, I'd recommend getting onto the x64 platform.
There is where you will find out what it is about in leaps and bounds by
experience.

If you are on MSDN then a solution that is working for my setup is to boot
to Pro x64 and then run Virtual Server R2 with an x86 guest system.

So you can boot-to and be sitting on the unencumbered platform and still be
a click away from an x86 platform for an isolated test environment, even if
unplugged from the network (remote access via localhost/myGuest-x86).

In developing web server extensions and components I was a bit surprised on
the little dependencies of our stuff. Things that requires my prodding the
3rd party vendors along towards x64. Their C/C++ lib files and dlls need to
be compiled for 64 as well. I wouldn't have realized without deciding to sit
on x64. Am also realizing the Client-side ActiveX controls of our app need
some attention too to offer an IE-64 solution as well.

Lots to do out there, but it it is good fun.

- Mike

Rob
Fri Mar 17 16:07:40 CST 2006

Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:
> I think only the Professional Edition and up can compile native 64-bit
> applications.

Maybe, though one of the promises of the .NET Framework was object code
which could be optimized to any Windows platform, mobile, IA32, IA64, or
x64.

Stands to reason that unless the .NET assemblies are decorated only for
32-bit, that they'll compile for 64-bit when the 64-bit runtime JITs them.

And of course, 32-bit programs will run anyway under x64, so perhaps
this is something which doesn't matter very much for a bytecode-based
environment like .NET.

Rob

Steve
Fri Mar 17 17:14:48 CST 2006

Thomas Steffen wrote:

>Pieter wrote:
>>I'm getting a new laptop with AMD 64 Dual Core processor. I'm using this
>>pc to develop in Visual Studio 2003, 2005, and will isntall also SQL
>>Server 2000 and 2005, Visio etc.
>>
>>- Should I install the XP 64-bit version or the 'normal' version?
>
>Unless your laptop comes with 8 GB of memory (which would be a surprise),
>you should probably go with the normal version.
>
>>- Does the 64-bit version will have a significant difference in
>>performance? If yes: how much percent is the difference? When using
>>visual Studio?
>
>In your case: no. Better performance is only gained with 64bit
>applications. So far most 64bit applications are either scientific
>software or for video processing.

32-bit applications that are large memory aware (mostly memory intensive
applications) can benefit from running on XP x64, since they immediately
gain access to a larger virtual memory space than they would on 32-bit XP.

>>- Will I find all the necessary drivers when I use 64-bit? Or is this a
>>pain in the *ss?
>
>For a laptop, I would consider this very doubtful. You may end up in many
>different environments using lots of devices. Having drivers for all of
>them seems like a win in the lottery. My hit rate was about 80%.

Depends on the laptop manufacturer, and whether the machine is certified
for Windows XP x64. For example, the Acer Ferrari 4005 (a firm favourite
among MVPs) is certified and all the drivers are available (as well as x64
being a pre-loaded option).

--
Steve Foster [SBS MVP]
---------------------------------------
MVPs do not work for Microsoft. Please reply only to the newsgroups.

Thomas
Sat Mar 18 02:50:44 CST 2006

Mike wrote:
> If you are in development, I'd recommend getting onto the x64 platform.
> There is where you will find out what it is about in leaps and bounds by
> experience.

That is a good argument. If you ever intend to develop for x64,
obviously having Windows x64 installed is very helpful. That's the main
reason I installed Ubuntu/amd64, because I wanted to see 64bit long
variables in action :-) (and you don't get that even on Windows x64).

> If you are on MSDN then a solution that is working for my setup is to boot
> to Pro x64 and then run Virtual Server R2 with an x86 guest system.

VMware has two free offerings, and as far as I understand they even work
the other way round (x64 in the box). That would be my choice.

> Am also realizing the Client-side ActiveX controls of our app need
> some attention too to offer an IE-64 solution as well.

Does that mean that there is a 64bit plugin for IE now? Because I have
not seen any in the wild yet.

Thomas

Mike
Sat Mar 18 06:38:30 CST 2006


Thomas wrote:

> VMware has two free offerings, and as far as I understand they even work
> the other way round (x64 in the box). That would be my choice.

I not quite understanding the reluctance of loading a brand new dual core
AMD x64 laptop with XP x64?

I personally have had zero issues with sitting on x64 and I am enjoying the
full throttle in my day-to-day activities. The manufacturers had all of
their Audio, Video, Network, DVD, etc.. drivers in order. The Office, Visual
Studio, Roxio, pcAnywhere, Antivirus (64), everything I've thrown at it
works terrific.

VMWare and Virtual Server are great but really are not the same, they are
good for testing but not for living on.

> reason I installed Ubuntu/amd64, because I wanted to see 64bit long
> variables in action :-) (and you don't get that even on Windows x64).

Right, well then...

> Does that mean that there is a 64bit plugin for IE now? Because I have not
> seen any in the wild yet.

Can't make out the question here. With the Windows x64 editions comes IE
x64, additionally the same build only in x86. After recompiling our C/C++
ActiveX controls to x64 they loaded-up, however some of them are still
remaining in VB6 code and will need revisiting in order to used by IE x64.
On this I guess I'll expand and say, we still pretty much feel the modules
offer benefits as ActiveX controls in that the controls require a small
footprint, yet are able to offer a good bit of processing by the client, and
will likely continue with the model for a stretch to come.

- Mike

Thomas
Sat Mar 18 08:15:32 CST 2006

Mike wrote:
> I not quite understanding the reluctance of loading a brand new dual core
> AMD x64 laptop with XP x64?

I don't have a brand new dual core laptop, so my reluctance is rather
hypothetical so far. But anyway: in my experience, laptops have much
more problems with drivers than desktops. This is a) because of the
unusual hardware involved and b) because it is mobile and thus possibly
has to communicate with more different devices.

My desktop experience with x64 was nearly complete driver wise, but in
the end still not convincing (for lack of tangible advantages). I would
expect more problems and less benefits on a laptop, so even more than on
a desktop I would not use x64 unless there is a reason for it.

> VMWare and Virtual Server are great but really are not the same, they are
> good for testing but not for living on.

VMware is actually pretty good. It may not be the tool of choice for
memory hungry applications or 3D/video, but otherwise I have absolutely
no problems with it.

> Can't make out the question here. With the Windows x64 editions comes IE
> x64, additionally the same build only in x86. After recompiling our C/C++
> ActiveX controls to x64 they loaded-up, however some of them are still
> remaining in VB6 code and will need revisiting in order to used by IE x64.

Yes, that seems to be the theory. However, I was sceptical because I
have not seen a single ActiveX control for IE x64. So I was curious to
see confirmation that it actually works :-)

Thomas

Charlie
Sat Mar 18 10:10:39 CST 2006

Well, the driver situation with laptops has gotten pretty good lately.
Certainly those that are shipping with x64 Edition on it already have the
drivers sorted. And the MVP favourite 64-bit laptop (not dual core yet) is
the Acer Ferrari. It has full driver support. The problems come with the
stuff you want to plug in to the laptop - there are still some gaps there,
but so far none I haven't found a workaround for.

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

Thomas Steffen wrote:
> Mike wrote:
>> I not quite understanding the reluctance of loading a brand new dual core
>> AMD x64 laptop with XP x64?
>
> I don't have a brand new dual core laptop, so my reluctance is rather
> hypothetical so far. But anyway: in my experience, laptops have much
> more problems with drivers than desktops. This is a) because of the
> unusual hardware involved and b) because it is mobile and thus possibly
> has to communicate with more different devices.
>
> My desktop experience with x64 was nearly complete driver wise, but in
> the end still not convincing (for lack of tangible advantages). I would
> expect more problems and less benefits on a laptop, so even more than on
> a desktop I would not use x64 unless there is a reason for it.
>
>> VMWare and Virtual Server are great but really are not the same, they are
>> good for testing but not for living on.
>
> VMware is actually pretty good. It may not be the tool of choice for
> memory hungry applications or 3D/video, but otherwise I have absolutely
> no problems with it.
>
>> Can't make out the question here. With the Windows x64 editions comes IE
>> x64, additionally the same build only in x86. After recompiling our C/C++
>> ActiveX controls to x64 they loaded-up, however some of them are still
>> remaining in VB6 code and will need revisiting in order to used by IE
>> x64.
>
> Yes, that seems to be the theory. However, I was sceptical because I
> have not seen a single ActiveX control for IE x64. So I was curious to
> see confirmation that it actually works :-)
>
> Thomas

James
Sat Mar 18 10:38:04 CST 2006

No, it's only the express editions which don't support x64 as a target
platform.

I'm using VS2005 on an x64 machine and it's not noticably faster than any
other version I've seen running. It *is* noticably slower than VS2003, but
that's progress (and .Net) for you. ;o)



"Rob Perkins" <rperkins@usa.net> wrote in message
news:480q9eFhl092U1@individual.net...
> Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:
>> I think only the Professional Edition and up can compile native 64-bit
>> applications.
>
> Maybe, though one of the promises of the .NET Framework was object code
> which could be optimized to any Windows platform, mobile, IA32, IA64, or
> x64.
>
> Stands to reason that unless the .NET assemblies are decorated only for
> 32-bit, that they'll compile for 64-bit when the 64-bit runtime JITs them.
>
> And of course, 32-bit programs will run anyway under x64, so perhaps this
> is something which doesn't matter very much for a bytecode-based
> environment like .NET.
>
> Rob

Andre
Sat Mar 18 12:55:09 CST 2006

Hey Charlie, come across any 64-bit Tablet PC's yet? :-) I am interested in
purchasing a Tablet PC, to run both the Tablet PC Windows XP and XP x64
(dual boot configurations of course). :)
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

"Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message
news:um6FMbqSGHA.5080@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Well, the driver situation with laptops has gotten pretty good lately.
> Certainly those that are shipping with x64 Edition on it already have the
> drivers sorted. And the MVP favourite 64-bit laptop (not dual core yet) is
> the Acer Ferrari. It has full driver support. The problems come with the
> stuff you want to plug in to the laptop - there are still some gaps there,
> but so far none I haven't found a workaround for.
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
>
> Thomas Steffen wrote:
>> Mike wrote:
>>> I not quite understanding the reluctance of loading a brand new dual
>>> core
>>> AMD x64 laptop with XP x64?
>>
>> I don't have a brand new dual core laptop, so my reluctance is rather
>> hypothetical so far. But anyway: in my experience, laptops have much
>> more problems with drivers than desktops. This is a) because of the
>> unusual hardware involved and b) because it is mobile and thus possibly
>> has to communicate with more different devices.
>>
>> My desktop experience with x64 was nearly complete driver wise, but in
>> the end still not convincing (for lack of tangible advantages). I would
>> expect more problems and less benefits on a laptop, so even more than on
>> a desktop I would not use x64 unless there is a reason for it.
>>
>>> VMWare and Virtual Server are great but really are not the same, they
>>> are
>>> good for testing but not for living on.
>>
>> VMware is actually pretty good. It may not be the tool of choice for
>> memory hungry applications or 3D/video, but otherwise I have absolutely
>> no problems with it.
>>
>>> Can't make out the question here. With the Windows x64 editions comes IE
>>> x64, additionally the same build only in x86. After recompiling our
>>> C/C++
>>> ActiveX controls to x64 they loaded-up, however some of them are still
>>> remaining in VB6 code and will need revisiting in order to used by IE
>>> x64.
>>
>> Yes, that seems to be the theory. However, I was sceptical because I
>> have not seen a single ActiveX control for IE x64. So I was curious to
>> see confirmation that it actually works :-)
>>
>> Thomas
>
>

Charlie
Sat Mar 18 16:09:40 CST 2006

No, sadly, I haven't. And I haven't heard of one in the works, either. Given
that I'm a Tablet MVP (as well as Server), needless to say I've been looking
for one. Hopefully post Vista release, given that the Tablet bits have to be
64-bit by then.

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

Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:
> Hey Charlie, come across any 64-bit Tablet PC's yet? :-) I am interested
> in purchasing a Tablet PC, to run both the Tablet PC Windows XP and XP x64
> (dual boot configurations of course). :)
>
> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message
> news:um6FMbqSGHA.5080@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> Well, the driver situation with laptops has gotten pretty good lately.
>> Certainly those that are shipping with x64 Edition on it already have the
>> drivers sorted. And the MVP favourite 64-bit laptop (not dual core yet)
>> is the Acer Ferrari. It has full driver support. The problems come with
>> the stuff you want to plug in to the laptop - there are still some gaps
>> there, but so far none I haven't found a workaround for.
>>
>> --
>> Charlie.
>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
>>
>> Thomas Steffen wrote:
>>> Mike wrote:
>>>> I not quite understanding the reluctance of loading a brand new dual
>>>> core
>>>> AMD x64 laptop with XP x64?
>>>
>>> I don't have a brand new dual core laptop, so my reluctance is rather
>>> hypothetical so far. But anyway: in my experience, laptops have much
>>> more problems with drivers than desktops. This is a) because of the
>>> unusual hardware involved and b) because it is mobile and thus possibly
>>> has to communicate with more different devices.
>>>
>>> My desktop experience with x64 was nearly complete driver wise, but in
>>> the end still not convincing (for lack of tangible advantages). I would
>>> expect more problems and less benefits on a laptop, so even more than on
>>> a desktop I would not use x64 unless there is a reason for it.
>>>
>>>> VMWare and Virtual Server are great but really are not the same, they
>>>> are
>>>> good for testing but not for living on.
>>>
>>> VMware is actually pretty good. It may not be the tool of choice for
>>> memory hungry applications or 3D/video, but otherwise I have absolutely
>>> no problems with it.
>>>
>>>> Can't make out the question here. With the Windows x64 editions comes
>>>> IE x64, additionally the same build only in x86. After recompiling our
>>>> C/C++
>>>> ActiveX controls to x64 they loaded-up, however some of them are still
>>>> remaining in VB6 code and will need revisiting in order to used by IE
>>>> x64.
>>>
>>> Yes, that seems to be the theory. However, I was sceptical because I
>>> have not seen a single ActiveX control for IE x64. So I was curious to
>>> see confirmation that it actually works :-)
>>>
>>> Thomas

Andre
Sun Mar 19 15:21:33 CST 2006

Might as well, I wouldn't mind one of those notebooks I see at the
conferences with the Slide Show feature on the lid, I think that is just
awesome. So, its probably best if we just wait. :)
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

"Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message
news:uojEzjtSGHA.5496@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> No, sadly, I haven't. And I haven't heard of one in the works, either.
> Given that I'm a Tablet MVP (as well as Server), needless to say I've been
> looking for one. Hopefully post Vista release, given that the Tablet bits
> have to be 64-bit by then.
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
>
> Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:
>> Hey Charlie, come across any 64-bit Tablet PC's yet? :-) I am interested
>> in purchasing a Tablet PC, to run both the Tablet PC Windows XP and XP
>> x64
>> (dual boot configurations of course). :)
>>
>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message
>> news:um6FMbqSGHA.5080@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>> Well, the driver situation with laptops has gotten pretty good lately.
>>> Certainly those that are shipping with x64 Edition on it already have
>>> the
>>> drivers sorted. And the MVP favourite 64-bit laptop (not dual core yet)
>>> is the Acer Ferrari. It has full driver support. The problems come with
>>> the stuff you want to plug in to the laptop - there are still some gaps
>>> there, but so far none I haven't found a workaround for.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Charlie.
>>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
>>>
>>> Thomas Steffen wrote:
>>>> Mike wrote:
>>>>> I not quite understanding the reluctance of loading a brand new dual
>>>>> core
>>>>> AMD x64 laptop with XP x64?
>>>>
>>>> I don't have a brand new dual core laptop, so my reluctance is rather
>>>> hypothetical so far. But anyway: in my experience, laptops have much
>>>> more problems with drivers than desktops. This is a) because of the
>>>> unusual hardware involved and b) because it is mobile and thus possibly
>>>> has to communicate with more different devices.
>>>>
>>>> My desktop experience with x64 was nearly complete driver wise, but in
>>>> the end still not convincing (for lack of tangible advantages). I would
>>>> expect more problems and less benefits on a laptop, so even more than
>>>> on
>>>> a desktop I would not use x64 unless there is a reason for it.
>>>>
>>>>> VMWare and Virtual Server are great but really are not the same, they
>>>>> are
>>>>> good for testing but not for living on.
>>>>
>>>> VMware is actually pretty good. It may not be the tool of choice for
>>>> memory hungry applications or 3D/video, but otherwise I have absolutely
>>>> no problems with it.
>>>>
>>>>> Can't make out the question here. With the Windows x64 editions comes
>>>>> IE x64, additionally the same build only in x86. After recompiling our
>>>>> C/C++
>>>>> ActiveX controls to x64 they loaded-up, however some of them are still
>>>>> remaining in VB6 code and will need revisiting in order to used by IE
>>>>> x64.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, that seems to be the theory. However, I was sceptical because I
>>>> have not seen a single ActiveX control for IE x64. So I was curious to
>>>> see confirmation that it actually works :-)
>>>>
>>>> Thomas
>
>

Charlie
Sun Mar 19 16:31:59 CST 2006

Well, I'm not likely to be in the market any time soon. My Ferrari is still
well ahead of the pack, and my old Fujitsu Tablet PC does just fine for a
mobile slate. Though I wouldn't mind getting my hands on an Origami (aka,
U-MPC) machine. They're a form factor that I find quite intriguing. My
biggest complaint about many of the tablets I've seen of late is that they
are just too big to be interesting.

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

Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:
> Might as well, I wouldn't mind one of those notebooks I see at the
> conferences with the Slide Show feature on the lid, I think that is just
> awesome. So, its probably best if we just wait. :)
>
> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message
> news:uojEzjtSGHA.5496@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>> No, sadly, I haven't. And I haven't heard of one in the works, either.
>> Given that I'm a Tablet MVP (as well as Server), needless to say I've
>> been looking for one. Hopefully post Vista release, given that the
>> Tablet bits have to be 64-bit by then.
>>
>> --
>> Charlie.
>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
>>
>> Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:
>>> Hey Charlie, come across any 64-bit Tablet PC's yet? :-) I am interested
>>> in purchasing a Tablet PC, to run both the Tablet PC Windows XP and XP
>>> x64
>>> (dual boot configurations of course). :)
>>>
>>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in
>>> message news:um6FMbqSGHA.5080@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>> Well, the driver situation with laptops has gotten pretty good lately.
>>>> Certainly those that are shipping with x64 Edition on it already have
>>>> the
>>>> drivers sorted. And the MVP favourite 64-bit laptop (not dual core yet)
>>>> is the Acer Ferrari. It has full driver support. The problems come with
>>>> the stuff you want to plug in to the laptop - there are still some gaps
>>>> there, but so far none I haven't found a workaround for.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Charlie.
>>>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
>>>>
>>>> Thomas Steffen wrote:
>>>>> Mike wrote:
>>>>>> I not quite understanding the reluctance of loading a brand new dual
>>>>>> core
>>>>>> AMD x64 laptop with XP x64?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't have a brand new dual core laptop, so my reluctance is rather
>>>>> hypothetical so far. But anyway: in my experience, laptops have much
>>>>> more problems with drivers than desktops. This is a) because of the
>>>>> unusual hardware involved and b) because it is mobile and thus
>>>>> possibly has to communicate with more different devices.
>>>>>
>>>>> My desktop experience with x64 was nearly complete driver wise, but in
>>>>> the end still not convincing (for lack of tangible advantages). I
>>>>> would expect more problems and less benefits on a laptop, so even
>>>>> more than on
>>>>> a desktop I would not use x64 unless there is a reason for it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> VMWare and Virtual Server are great but really are not the same, they
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> good for testing but not for living on.
>>>>>
>>>>> VMware is actually pretty good. It may not be the tool of choice for
>>>>> memory hungry applications or 3D/video, but otherwise I have
>>>>> absolutely no problems with it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Can't make out the question here. With the Windows x64 editions comes
>>>>>> IE x64, additionally the same build only in x86. After recompiling
>>>>>> our C/C++
>>>>>> ActiveX controls to x64 they loaded-up, however some of them are
>>>>>> still remaining in VB6 code and will need revisiting in order to
>>>>>> used by IE x64.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, that seems to be the theory. However, I was sceptical because I
>>>>> have not seen a single ActiveX control for IE x64. So I was curious to
>>>>> see confirmation that it actually works :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Thomas

Steve
Sun Mar 19 20:35:06 CST 2006

Charlie Russel - MVP wrote:

>No, sadly, I haven't. And I haven't heard of one in the works, either.
>Given that I'm a Tablet MVP (as well as Server), needless to say I've been
>looking for one. Hopefully post Vista release, given that the Tablet bits
>have to be 64-bit by then.

I did wonder about the new Lenovo ThinkPad tablet.

But looking at its' specs, I am distinctly underwhelmed. It doesn't even
appear to be 64-bit capable.

--
Steve Foster [SBS MVP]
---------------------------------------
MVPs do not work for Microsoft. Please reply only to the newsgroups.