Jump to content

My reason for Microsoft to exclude a 32-Bit verson of Vista.

Das Capitolin

Recommended Posts

As everyone knows by now, Microsoft plans on releasing it's new Operating System in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions. I disagree with their decision, and will lend insight to why it should only be a 64-bit O/S.

To begin with, the new release of an Operating System is at its core meant to accomplish one single thing: Improvement. You can change the look and feel of an O/S, but that cannot be called an improvement to the O/S. A true improvement will reduce problematic features, and introduce new features. While Vista may introduce new features, it will do so on two seperate foundations.

The mansion that is Windows Vista can be built with a nice solid foundation based on the technology developed in this current market (64-bit), or it can built on a ten year old technology (32-bit). Just in those terms alone, 32-bit seems like it would be a step back for the Operating System. But just what exactly does it limit you to? Well, the new bigger and better Windows Vista will be limited to functioning on less then 4GB or RAM. Your CPU will more then likely support 64-bit architecture, but it will be forced to operate the less efficient 32-bit code. In addition, hardware manufacturers will be more apt to resist 64-bit development if the majority of users remain on a 32-bit platform.

In conclusion, a 64-bit Windows Vista will give the users what they really need: room to grow. Users can add up to 8GB or RAM, have larger hard disks available to the O/S, and directories can hold more files. A 64-bit Windows Vista also gives the hardware industry what it needs: reason to progress forward, and a demographic to build technology around. How can a user be happy with an Operating System that yearns for more power then a 32-bit system can happily offer? It can't. A 32-bit Windows Vista does only one thing: dissappoints the user with a slow system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Microsoft is making a good decision by offering both. There are plenty of "legacy" computers out there, and plenty of people that would want the latest and greatest software without having to shell out tons of money on new hardware.

Perfect scenario: I have a pentium 4 2.4GHZ system and a mobo that has been around for years. Not 64 bit, but still fast enought to handle what it is inteded for (NOT GAMING!) and to eliminate my chances of running the latest OS because it isn't 64 bit hardware is rediculous.

Moving forward is a wonderful thing, but when it FORCES a consumer to do something, it isn't progress. Progress is options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but how many legacy computors are going to have the heatware to run vista? (or atleast good enough heatware to run it efficiently?)

Edited by dougekewl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vista actually doesn't require too much to run...:

"A Windows Vista Capable PC includes at least:

* A modern processor (at least 800MHz1).

* 512 MB of system memory.

* A graphics processor that is DirectX 9 capable."

from the vista site: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/getready/capable.mspx

Windows Vista Premium Ready PCs

To get an even better Windows Vista experience, including the Windows Aero user experience, ask for a Windows Vista Capable PC that is designated Premium Ready, or choose a PC that meets or exceeds the Premium Ready requirements described below. Features available in specific premium editions of Windows Vista, such as the ability to watch and record live TV, may require additional hardware.

A Windows Vista Premium Ready PC includes at least:

* 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor1.

* 1 GB of system memory.

* Support for DirectX 9 graphics with a WDDM driver, 128 MB of graphics memory (minimum)2, Pixel Shader 2.0 and 32 bits per pixel.

* 40 GB of hard drive capacity with 15 GB free space.

* DVD-ROM Drive3.

* Audio output capability.

* Internet access capability.

Hardly incredible hardware needed for the OS...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok i just wasn't too sure....

but really then, what would having vista released as only 64bit limit? who's building computores now using pre-EMT64/athlon64 proccessors?

i just argue this because i myself would want to put vista on a older comp. and possible not even my mail/newest rig... i may look into it after they release a secong service pack for vista and work out the many buggies that MS always seems to have.... and by then i will prolly have an even newer main rig....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...