BTW: What are you running that needs so much RAM? (Are you responsible for issuing Launch Codes? tellme)
IMHO: Using 64-bit Linux for anything other than a very specialized high-performance singleton server doesn't make much sense. And to really gain the benefit, you'd also need to code your application up in native 64-bit, along with whatever libraries it would call.
The problem with 64-bit Linux is that it is not full 64-bit binary from front to back. Most of the applications, and virtually all of the libraries included in a "64-bit" distro are still 32-bit.-40hz (February 03, 2009, 02:26 PM)
In the beginning only certain Linux distributions were capable of properly using 64-bit systems,http://www.start64.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=100&Itemid=61&limit=1&limitstart=4
-start64
However, there seems to be some Linux versions running 64-bits fine:-Curt (February 03, 2009, 06:05 PM)
Silly question: why wouldn't you want to use a 64-bit OS with 64-bit CPU? Been running both Fedora and openSUSE 64-bit for months, without a hitch.If you don't have >3GB RAM and you don't have any apps that can take advantage of x64 (just having x64 version != taking advantage of x64) then there might not be much reason to go 64bit, especially if you risk driver problems or whatever.-zridling (February 04, 2009, 09:59 AM)
The primary reason was that Visual Studio is unstable on 64-bit, and this is a killer for developers. Worse, running VS.Net and SQL Server Management Studio simultaneously (which is how I spend most of my day) is guaranteed to crash within several minutes.Weird, I run Visual Studio 2008, SQL Server 2005 Express and the SQL management tool under Vista64 without any problems :)-CWuestefeld (February 04, 2009, 12:53 PM)
Fools :)-f0dder (February 05, 2009, 10:07 AM)
I've given up trying to give advice. People have their habits and emotions locked in.-MilesAhead (February 05, 2009, 12:43 PM)
[... but I am an eternal optimist and thought that years of my having generally been proven right where disagreements over computer issues had "sunk in"-Darwin (February 05, 2009, 01:32 PM)
at least I tried...
urlwolf - live with 64-bit Vista is just fine, in my experience. My two-bits is go with either Vista or with XP - who knows what Windows 7 will wind up looking like?-Darwin (February 06, 2009, 07:23 AM)
Draconian DRM Revealed In Windows 7
Posted by kdawson on Monday February 16, @09:18PM
from the just-who-did-you-think-owns-your-machine dept.
TechForensics writes "A few days' testing of Windows 7 has already disclosed some draconian DRM, some of it unrelated to media files.
We have a sysadmin at work and he's leaning towards Win 7.
He would have to deal with printer driver problems if there are any.
Other than that, I don't have high requirements for hardware.
I'm thinking win 7 could be the best solution here too.-urlwolf (February 16, 2009, 03:51 PM)
I do have concerns with Win 7's DRM policies; starting to hear some horror stories in forums. YMMVYeah, those rumors are pretty discomforting.
(That's assuming I can dual boot with 7: more horror stories, I'm afraid. Don't get get me wrong; this post isn't about FUD. I look forward to a new OS. I wait for the time when Redmond decides to build what Longhorn was supposed to be.)As far as I understand, the Win7 beta disables the other installed OSes in it's bootloader by default to minimize the risk (however small) of corruption other OS'es partitions... afaik it's fixable, and I highly doubt there will be problems with the final version.
I do have concerns with Win 7's DRM policies; starting to hear some horror stories in forums. YMMVYeah, those rumors are pretty discomforting.(That's assuming I can dual boot with 7: more horror stories, I'm afraid. Don't get get me wrong; this post isn't about FUD. I look forward to a new OS. I wait for the time when Redmond decides to build what Longhorn was supposed to be.)As far as I understand, the Win7 beta disables the other installed OSes in it's bootloader by default to minimize the risk (however small) of corruption other OS'es partitions... afaik it's fixable, and I highly doubt there will be problems with the final version.
I hope the DRM situation is either FUDdy rumors or something that's going to be rectified, since Win7 otherwise seems like a pretty nice OS, and I wouldn't mind upgrading from XP64 when it's released. But if the "all your files are belong to us" rumors are true, I really don't know.-f0dder (February 22, 2009, 07:28 PM)
What a partition maps to while Windows is running has nothing to do with the partition itself. The issue is that the Win7 installer of course overwrites your MBR bootcode (like all new Windows versions does), and that it doesn't included previous versions in it's boot manager - but you should be able to add those by hand with the bcdedit program.-f0dder (February 24, 2009, 12:36 AM)
The DRM issues are still a little unclear, but, for instance, a user may no longer be able to record off the sound card unless Win 7 recognizes an identifiable tag of some sort.That's not correct this seems to be a driver issue for a few users, nothing regarding W7.-OldElmerFudd (February 23, 2009, 08:23 PM)
UPDATE: As noted by Ars Technica and many commenters, sound capture capabilities will vary from card to card, system to system, so one user's findings may not bear out for others. Apologies for confusion or disbelief—I tried to word it more as a water-testing thought than the Gospel Truth.-http://lifehacker.com/5154968/windows-7-seemingly-blocks-audio-capture
I hope the DRM situation is either FUDdy rumors or something that's going to be rectified,-f0dder (February 22, 2009, 07:28 PM)
Fedora project plans to use 64-bit and PAE kernels
The Fedora team plans to optimise the Linux distribution's versions for various system architectures. The 32-bit version for the x86 platform is to be built for i586 instead of i386 as it is currently. Given compatible hardware, an x86-64 kernel is to be used as standard, even when installing the distribution's 32-bit version. Wherever possible on 32-bit x86 systems, the developers intend to use a default PAE kernel. They will continue to use a 32-bit kernel for the 32-bit live CD.
The main advantage of using a x86-64 kernel in a 32-bit operating system is the considerably larger memory address range the kernel can make use of, allowing for systems with over 4GB of RAM. Due to the 32-bit userland, users won't need special 64-bit versions of their programs. 32-bit plug-ins for programs like Firefox run without the tricks that the users of the 64-bit version have to resort to, for example nspluginwrapper. The Fedora Engineering Steering Committee, which decides on the integration of new features into the distribution, has accepted the changes proposed for the forthcoming Fedora 11.
Interesting move, 40hz!
This should probably work just fine. It's been my experience, though, that trying to run a full 64bit version of linux (ie., including userland) can be more trouble than it's worth.-f0dder (February 26, 2009, 12:20 AM)
I wonder if really win 64 is a wise decision.It is :)-urlwolf (April 06, 2009, 09:00 AM)
there's a lot of closed-source libraries that aren't available in x64 form... but then again, there's a lot of opensource code that doesn't compile cleanly for x64 as well.-f0dder (April 06, 2009, 09:05 AM)
But really, if your applications don't need 64-bit, why port them? Most applications gain zero advantages whatsoever from a recompile, they only become (slightly) bigger and consume (slightly) more memory.-f0dder (April 06, 2009, 09:05 AM)