Visit MPB Visit MPB Visit MPB

Vista 64 bit

pschlute
Posted 13/01/2009 - 16:50 Link
Hi gang

I am thinking of changing my OS from XP to Vista.

Can anyone tell me if Silkypix will work in Vista 64-bit ?
Darkmunk
Posted 13/01/2009 - 16:54 Link
I do the exact opposite to all my machines! I can't bare Vista - it's everything a OS shouldn't be.
Isn't vista about to be discontinued?

Is the 64 bit processing actually supported by enough software to warrant the change? I've lost touch.
Gwyn
Posted 13/01/2009 - 18:17 Link
I can't answer your question I'm afraid Peter, but I have no problems with Vista. Now I'm used to it I actually prefer it to XP.
Windows 7 is in beta testing at the moment and will be released who know when?
shim
Posted 13/01/2009 - 18:35 Link
Vista is hardly ever mentioned nowadays..... all the talk is how good Windows 7 will be.... but we hear that about every OS from MS.

Personally I still prefer W98SE because it's light and fast, runs without a swapfile etc. but, I have to have another computer with XP Pro on it for Video and photographs so I have two desktops. I bought a Toshiba laptop as well that had a free upgrade to Vista, but the upgrade site was very buggy and I never got the upgrade and am I glad. Takes up something like 1.5gb for a basic install.

shim
Greytop
Posted 13/01/2009 - 18:49 Link
I don't have a problem with Vista, particularly since SP1, I run the 64bit version (have done for over a year). 32 bit applications run fine on my machine.
One point I would mention is that it benefits from as much memory as you can throw at it (within reason). My system currently has 4GB and that in combination with a quad core (or dual) I find the performance easily exceeds XP.... it's a much slicker experience. I can't comment on Silkypix as such as I don't use it in anger although I did try and evaluation version for a short time and didn't have any issues. My preference is CaptureOne4 which I find is an excellent PP tool.
Regards Huw

flickr
Edited by Greytop: 13/01/2009 - 18:52
Anvh
Posted 13/01/2009 - 19:27 Link
I don't have Vista but I've my pc running on XP 64bit version and it runs slikypix as a 32bit program with no problems, never had with any 32bit software only drivers are hard to find sometimes. The plusside of the 64bit version is that you can use more RAM and more and more programs are supporting 64bit. I just have installed Photoshop CS4 64bit here and it runs great also Ligthroom 2 is 64bit so they will work better then the 32bit, they are just a bit more "powerfull".
Stefan
Comment Image

K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Hyram
Posted 13/01/2009 - 20:54 Link
I will not be upgrading any of my computers until Vista is consigned to the history books.

Windows 7 is supposed to be Vista with all the problems removed, but they obviously have changed the name because of the awful reputation of Vista.

The only 64bit machine we had in the office was changed to 32bit because of the compatibility problems.
Hyram

Bodies: K20D (2), K10D, Super A, ME Super, Auto 110 SLR, X70, Optio P70
Pentax Glass: DA* 300, DA* 60-250, DA* 50-135, DA* 16-50, DA 70 Ltd, FA 31 Ltd, DA 35 Ltd, DA 18-55 (2), DA 12-24, DA 10-17, M 200, A 35-70, M 40, M 28, Converter-A 2X-S, 1.4X-S, AF 1.7, Pentax-110 50, Pentax-110 24
Other Glass: Sigma 105 macro, Sigma-A APO 75-300
Flash: Metz 58 AF-1 P, Pentax AF160FC ringflash, Pentax AF280T
Posted 13/01/2009 - 22:55 Link
silkypix would work with 64bit Vista/Xp ,although on website they recommend not to use it on 64 bit machines.
Windows 7 is under beta testing till August 2009 after that Microsoft would decide new name/lauch date.
I like Vista but for better speed and compatibility with older applications I prefer to use XP professional.
Unlocker
Posted 13/01/2009 - 23:52 Link
We do actually have Vista Ultimate 64 on our Mac Pro, more as a backup for when windows compatibility is needed at home. I'm not a big fan of windows, but do have to admit that it does seem to run flawlessly on those occasions I've used it, mainly for gaming, ran Bioshock perfectly as an example.

Having run Vista on a less powerful machine, it is obvious that bigger is better! Runs perfectly fine with 8 cores & 10GB RAM with all the pretty features running! As for applications, almost everything that has been run on it would have been 32 bit native apps, but they all worked with no problems, main problems would probably be drivers.

Being able to run it with more memory is an obvious advantage, especially as apps / file sizes increase all the time. All the previous attempts I've had putting 4GB RAM into a 32bit windows machine has resulted in random crashing and errors, so if you do need the extra memory, then I would say go for it.
pschlute
Posted 14/01/2009 - 10:36 Link
Ok thanks for all the replies. It is a bit of a minefield changing computer !
amoringello
Posted 14/01/2009 - 13:01 Link
If your PC had Vista when you bought it, it seems few people have major issues. It appears to be that installing Vista on any machine on which it wasn't already installed, is a cause for major headaches.

My laptop is Vista compliant, but still had XP pre-installed. When my Vista was released a month later and installed, it was a nightmare. Three days trying to get it to actually install! I spent another week hunting down information on how to get the internal USB card reader to work. Then another week getting the K10D to be detected for tethered shooting.

Whenever it wakes up from hibernate mode, the RETURN key gets "turned off".

I don't know who finds Vista to be faster, but it sucks up so much memory and resources for background tasks (4G machine) that everything is slower than it should be. (and I've stripped all optional add-ons that come with PC these days).

Unless you NEED Vista, I would say hold off for Windows 7. It sounds promising. Even the current beta is getting decent reviews, including its stability. (Could Microsoft actually have learned from NT4 Sp2&SP4, Windows ME, and finally Vista?? doubt it, but will be fun seeing what happens)
Snootchies
Posted 14/01/2009 - 13:06 Link
I'd like to agree with others here; I'm currently a pilot user of Windows 7 Ultimate, and I've been using Vista Ultimate for about 2 years now - Windows 7 is worthy of waiting for, trust me. Stick with XP a little longer, you wont regret it.

Furthermore...now this is in theory and a bit of jargon from Micorsoft..but , Windows 7 was designed from the grounds up to sit on top of vista's current compatability(so to speak) as in, anything that worked with Vista will automatically work with Windows 7. BUT I bet there will be exceptions out there - but the point I'm tring to make is that I think there wont be as many headaches moving to Windows 7 as there was from 98 to XP or XP to Vista for example.
Bob

My website (Hadfield Photography)

Pentax Gallery Artist page:link

Flickr Photostream: link
Edited by Snootchies: 14/01/2009 - 13:10
Keen2Learn
Posted 14/01/2009 - 13:44 Link
I would not recommend Vista to anyone.
I have had to fix many computers that Vista was installed on and most had Vista installed when purchased new.
The major problem has been a lack of memory (RAM), too many manufacturers have added too little memory to cope with the demands of Vista.
The minimum requirements as specified my Microsoft are:
Vista Home Basic; 1 GHz processor, 512MB memory, 20GB hard drive, DVD Rom drive etc...
Vista Home Premium / Business / Ultimate; 1 GHz processor, 1024MB (1GB) memory, 40GB hard drive, DVD Rom drive etc...
In reality the memory is not enough, I would suggest a minimum of 2048MB (2GB) of memory, more if your system supports more.
32bit systems only recognise 3GB of memory so anything over this is a total waste. 64bit systems can utilise much more memory and I would suggest 4096MB (4GB) as a good starting point on 64bit systems.

It is well documented that existing XP users who have upgraded to Vista have quickly switched back to their previous O/S.
People generally have not welcomed Vista with the same enthusiasm as previous versions of Windows. Most Vista users have had Vista forced upon them by the computer manufacturers.
I'm using Windows XP with SP3 intergrated (customised) without any problems.
Comment Image


Computer buff
Music videos
Massive music collection
- Stephen -
Pentax K-7, DA 16-50mm F2.8, DA 50-135mm F2.8, DA 200mm F2.8, DA 300mm f/4.0, AF-540 FGZ TTL Flash, Sigma 120-400mm F4.5-5.6 APO DG, Manfrotto 190XProB tripod, Manfrotto 679B Monopod, Tripod Head 804RC2, Monopod Head 234RC,
hefty1
Posted 14/01/2009 - 14:26 Link
I think Vista is a massive improvement over XP.

I build / repair PCs for customers from time-to-time (only as a sideline so maybe 4/5 machines a year) and have been doing so since around the time Windows 95 came out.

In my experience I've had (read: my customers have had) far fewer problems with Vista enabled PCs than I ever experienced with previous versions of Windows. I actually skipped XP altogether for my own PC (went from 98SE to Vista 64bit) as I truly believed XP to be the spawn of Satan...

People complain that Vista is memory hungry but then *every* new OS places significantly higher demands on hardware (including memory) than the one it replaces. The moral of the story is that unless you're prepared to upgrade your hardware then stick with the OS you've got - if you want the latest OS then be prepared for a full overhaul to make it run properly.

Just my $0.02
Joining the Q
RR
Posted 14/01/2009 - 14:46 Link
Snootchies, I was thinking of the Win 7 Beta but was concerned about what happens when times up ? Will reverting back to Vista cock everything up ? In which case you'd have to pay Microsoft Full Price for a licence to continue with Win 7, I was planning on waiting for the price to be discounted a little.

Any views on this ?

Edit: also what's your experience of installing the beta ? Did you have to re-install programmes ? Did you lose any data at all ?
Edited by RR: 14/01/2009 - 14:48

Add Comment

To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.