Windows 7 64-bit versus Vista Business - 64 bit

[jdhurst]

Last September, after much effort, I brought my T61p Vista Business 64-bit into production. At the hands of 64-bit and an OS that can exploit 64-bit, it is much, much faster than my prior XP machines, and that single fact has made me glad to turn the corner. Scalable resolution in Vista also pleases me.

That said, I had to upgrade very nearly every piece of software I own to take advantage of 64-bit. Office 2007, Adobe Acrobat 9, SafeNet SoftRemote 11.1, and CommView Enterprise 6.1 were the big ticket items. My other software had to be upgraded as well, but they were the less costly items.

And, as I reported elsewhere, I tamed Vista by removing most everything it stands for, and making it work, look and feel like Windows XP Pro Classic and Windows 2000 before that.
____________________________________

So: For those of you using Windows 7 (64-bit only), what does it do that Windows XP and Windows Vista do not do?

I am assuming that all my 64-bit software will work in Windows 7 and I am planning to replace my IBM NetVista A30 desktop with a Lenovo Windows 7 64-bit desktop. I will keep my T61p for a while unless I convince myself or you convince me that Windows 7 is truly an advancement.

..... JDH

[Marin85]

I believe the folder view issue was fixed, at least I don´t have any problems with that anymore in my Windows 7 test setup Also, the OS look has been polished overall and most things are in the right places (not that chaotic like Vista at first glance). I haven´t tried out the capabilities of the search function yet.

Offtopic: Why did you upgrade right to Office 2007 and Acrobat 9? Which versions have you been running before?

[jdhurst]

<snip>
Offtopic: Why did you upgrade right to Office 2007 and Acrobat 9? Which versions have you been running before?

I was using Office 2003 in XP Pro and Adobe Acrobat 7 in XP Pro. Office 2003 is a 32-bit program (although I think it might run in Vista 64-bit). Adobe 8 out of the box won't even install in 64-bit - one really needs Adobe 9 to run in 64-bit. Adobe has not yet got Flash Player working natively in 64-bit to the best of my knowledge.

I don't want to beat a dead horse in every thread, but to me, it makes no sense whatever to upgrade from XP Pro unless the new computer AND the OS are both 64-bit. Therein lies the future.
.... JDH

[Marin85]

Office 2007 is also 32bit (except for some beta Server programs which are also available in 64bit). Office 2003 runs just fine under Vista both x64 and x86. I have recently tried out Acrobat 7 in my Vista setup (in my signature) and most of it also works without problems except for some issue with the pdf printer, but I believe there is a workaround for that and it is actually common for Vista and not specific to x64. Adobe 8 also runs just fine under Vista x64, I was using it before I upgraded to Adobe 9 (primary because of Photoshop CS4 and some bugs and security issues with Acrobat 8 ). But I agree the Flash Player is just a headache at the current state.

[marvel]

My W7 needs > 1 gb ram to start. I´ve got a T60p with 3gb ram. Win XP pro needed no more than half of that. Considering the statements on CES recently I was hoping for more leener resource consumtion.

[jdhurst]

Office 2007 has both 32-bit and 64-bit components. The other reason I got it was because I was buying a new computer and wanted everything new.

Adobe 8: When I purchased it, it would NOT run in 64-bit. I went to the Adobe web site and there was a special patch to accommodate 64-bit. You may have had that upgrade already. Directly after the patch was issued, V9 was issued. I called Adobe and complained, and they gave me a free upgrade to V9. That is how I got to V9.

... JDH

[Marin85]

Office 2007 has both 32-bit and 64-bit components.

Could you specify some of the 64-bit components (I´m aware only of two server applications of Office 2007 that are currently available in 64-bit additional to their 32-bit versions)? Thanks in advance!

Adobe 8: When I purchased it, it would NOT run in 64-bit. I went to the Adobe web site and there was a special patch to accommodate 64-bit.

True. I must have forgotten about this...

I wish Acrobat 9 and Office 2007 had versions entirely in 64-bit. I guess that would speed up some things a bit.

[jdhurst]

Office 2007 has both 32-bit and 64-bit components.

Could you specify some of the 64-bit components (I´m aware only of two server applications of Office 2007 that are currently available in 64-bit additional to their 32-bit versions)? Thanks in advance!<snip>

Vista 64-bit has 3 "Programs" folders: Program Files (for 64-bit apps); Program Files (x86) (for 32-bit apps) and ProgramData (for data files). I see a Microsoft Office folder in Program Files with DLL's in the Office 12 folder. I make the assumption that these DLL's are 64-bit components that work with 64-bit Vista. That could be very wrong, of course. But pure 32-bit applications don't wind up in Program Files.

Adobe 9 is still a 32-bit application, but it works nicely in my Vista box.
... JDH

[Marin85]

Thanks!

[Temetka]

My W7 needs > 1 gb ram to start. I´ve got a T60p with 3gb ram. Win XP pro needed no more than half of that. Considering the statements on CES recently I was hoping for more leener resource consumtion.

Considering that W7 does everything Vista and XP can, and can do it in a reasonable amount RAM this is a good thing. Of course it's not going to be XP like in terms of RAM usage, but keep in mind that XP does NOT report RAM usage correctly.

I am totally happy with W7 using around 700MB out of the 3GB in my T60. It's about half of what visa was using and about 256MB or so more than XP was reporting being in use. Not too shabby for a new OS.

[Marin85]

It´s good to hear that W7 will also bring improved memory management (I hear about people installing it on older machines like T42 or X41). mattbiernat has recently started a thread about the memory numbers in Vista Task Manager and I have to admit I haven´t looked at the details before. But now I have found out that even if memory usage is far from being maxed out in the memory bar, performance can be affected from side of the memory, namely when reaching 0 MB of free memory (the third number under physical memory). The system may become less responsive and even slow. I have 4 GB of RAM installed in my ThinkPad of which only 3 GB are available due to hardware limitations and without any special heavy use I can by far make Vista get at zeropoint free memory (I consider having two browsers with 3-4 tabs, 3-4 word instances and 3-4 Acrobat Pro instances opened as not very heavy use ).

[agarza]

It's kinda odd to the see Windows utilizing almost a full 1GIG of RAM just by having Firefox (5 tabs), IE8 and Flashget running.
I stuck to XP the moment it came out until approx 3 days ago when I got fed up high CPU usage.

Sure W7 is a big step forward but I don't know what will happen to RAM usage if I install of my repertoire of software originally loaded on XP.
Thing is, when I installed Vista it ran fast with only 1GB, then swapped to 4GB and still it feels the same as quick.
A HD replacement is coming (a 7200rpm beast) and hope to see a dramatic improvement. The last 7200rpm 2.5" drive I used was a PATA 7K100 on my T42p. It would be great if MS could make the OS to require massive memory, even though performance is there.

[archer6]

<snip> Last September, after much effort, I brought my T61p Vista Business 64-bit into production. At the hands of 64-bit and an OS that can exploit 64-bit, it is much, much faster than my prior XP machines, and that single fact has made me glad to turn the corner. ..... JDH

From your perspective during daily usage, with the various apps you run and work you do, how would you define your comment above "much, much faster than prior XP machines" ? Is it 10% faster? or 20% ? or ? Just a rough idea (as opposed to benchmarking) from your personal experience would be appreciated.

My interest in 64-bit computing is growing rapidly.

Cheers...

[jdhurst]

I would say it is easily 20% faster. It starts faster and runs smoothly. I attribute that to the combination of 64-bits, 3Gb of memory and soon to be 4Gb, and a 7200-rm hard drive. There is no turning back from such a combination at this point.

What do I run daily? Office 2007 including Outlook 2007 plus Internet Explorer 7. Next in line, I use Adobe V9 Standard and QuickBooks.

Several things I did that were forced on me by Vista:
1. I replaced Windows Explorer with xPlorer2 Pro
2. I replaced Windows Briefcase/Offline Files with SyncBack Pro
3. I found Foxit PDF filter to augment Vista Search. There is a freeware version of this.

.... JDH

[archer6]

20%... Brilliant ! That seals the deal, I'm going to setup my soon to arrive W500 (2.8GHz - 4GB - 7200 rpm hdd) this way and give it a try. Thanks for the excellent feedback !

Cheers...

[jdhurst]

Remember other things that affect XP as well as Vista:

1. I get rid of the Aero and like interfaces. They steal cycles and slow things down. Plain classic all the way. Use the Performance tab in My Computer Properties to clear out most things.
2. Minimize the use of auto updating. I set System Update not to check at all. I set Windows Update to inform me only. I turn off auto updating Acrobat and everthing like it.

Happy to assist and best of luck with yours. .... JD

[archer6]

Yes, very sage advice. I have begun a file to document all setup suggestions you have offered as well as others as I research this to insure a successful transition. I share your desire to strip Vista of it's resource draining "features" and streamline it for speed and effectiveness. We are on the exact same page when it comes to mind-set in terms of functionality. The more like XP the better, as the "eye candy" and auto this and that, has no appeal whatsoever. Thanks again.

Cheers...