On Fri, 3 Nov 2006 19:37:36 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch
<erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Fri, 03 Nov 2006 15:08:54 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> Support for Microsoft Windows XP x64 Not Worth Anything
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>| Almost no one is supporting Microsoft Windows XP x64, the 64-bit
>>| version of Windows XP.
>>|
>>| There are no Antivirus programs that work with x64 and most
>>| applications won't work with x64 (unless they run the crippled
>>| 32-bit equivalent).
>>|
>>| Programs won't install printer drivers because, apparently, no one
>>| can figure out how to write a 64-bit printer driver.
>>|
>>| If Windows XP x64 has this much trouble with basic elements such
>>| as printer drivers, how can anyone expect the much maligned Windows
>>| Vista to be of any value?
>>|
>>| Frankly, my high opinion of Microsoft is quickly fading away, and
>>| my shop used to be a staunch Microsoft shop.
>>|
>>| Open Source alternatives are looking better and better every
>>| day.
>> `----
>>
>> http://roacm.blogspot.com/
>>
>> IIRC, there will be some 64-bit options for Flash 9, but there's no schedule
>> or a clear plan. IOW, drop proprietary software however, wherever and
>> whenever possible. You cannot convert the cheese (blob) into cream, but
>> given milk (source code), everything can be produced.
>
>Umm.. actually, there are 64 bit anti-virus:
>
>http://www.avast.com/eng/x64.html
>
>Also, 32 bit apps aren't "crippled", they work just as well as they always
>did (in some cases, better).
...and there full 64-bit support for "only" 1317 different printer
models to date:
http://testedproducts.windowsmarketplace.com/results.aspx?&bCatID=865&cpID=0&ocID=105&OR=1
..424 motherboards:
http://testedproducts.windowsmarketplace.com/results.aspx?&bCatID=748&cpID=0&ocID=105&OR=1
..178 display adapters:
http://testedproducts.windowsmarketplace.com/results.aspx?&bCatID=752&cpID=0&ocID=105&OR=1
..150 NICs:
http://testedproducts.windowsmarketplace.com/results.aspx?&bCatID=842&cpID=0&ocID=105&OR=1
..146 disk controllers:
http://testedproducts.windowsmarketplace.com/results.aspx?&bCatID=921&cpID=0&ocID=105&OR=1
..97 scanners
http://testedproducts.windowsmarketplace.com/results.aspx?&bCatID=880&cpID=0&ocID=105&OR=1
..38 TV tuner cards:
http://testedproducts.windowsmarketplace.com/results.aspx?&bCatID=751&cpID=0&ocID=105&OR=1
(there is many more) and thats *ONLY* from the Microsoft list of
*certified* drivers.
Looks like "nobody can write a 64-bit drivers", uh? As a matter of
fact if you conunt everything on the Microsoft list you end up with
more than 3000 peripherals for which a certified 64-bit XP driver
exists and is available today.
Small OEMs don't bother to have their drivers certified, e.g.
LynxStudio, makers of the best sound card available for PC and Mac:
http://www.lynxstudio.com/download.html. XP 64 is fully supported but,
curiously, they don't bother to support Linux at all...
Looks like the idea of 64-bit Linux being somehow "in advance"
compared to Windows is just another myth...
|
|
