Xenomorph

No. 32-bit applications are limited to just 2 Gigs RAM. Like, when testing my system with 4 gigs, I'd have to load two copies of the 32-bit Prime95 to check the memory, as each 32-bit has a 2 gig limit. Or, I can just load up 1 copy of the 64-bit version, and it will test it all. Even a system with 3 Gigs RAM can take advantage of 64-bit Windows. You're going to be hitting ceilings with 32-bit software at 2, 3, 3.5, 4 gigs, etc. If you're running 4 Gigs or more (ie, LESS THAN 8), 64-bit is a must.

I was kinda the opposite with regards to TV. I always watch TV on my computer. It's been my primary TV for 12 years now. Having a TV card that worked great under Vista (and Vista x64) was a must. I'm using a KWorld HD 120 PCI something or other. HDTV is awesome with it. The program "Easy HDTV" is the best HDTV viewer I've ever used (and more than worth the $20 it costs). They all work together great in Vista 32-bit or 64-bit. Newegg has several TV cards from just $19.99 and up that should have WHQL Vista 64-bit drivers. My 1996 STB TV PCI has some home-made 64-bit drivers, but after the August 2007 update, you have to boot in the special F8 mode since they aren't signed. They may not all be signed drivers, but most TV cards can be made to work in Vista x64 using 3rd party drivers.

But not everyone has 4GB or more. If you have less than 4GB, then the biggest benefit of 64-bit goes straight out the window. No not really: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/912923 Not really? My Microsoft link, http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946765 says this: (direct copy and paste) "32-bit versions of Windows Vista use a software-based version of DEP." "64-bit versions of Windows Vista support hardware-backed DEP. " I think my Microsoft link and your Microsoft link should get in a fight to see who wins.

What do you mean, other than being able to use more RAM? That is the biggest issue. A very big one. The biggest one people are running into every single day. And the problem will only become more of an issue as time goes on. Video cards have hundreds of megs of RAM. Some are coming out with a Gig of RAM, and you can use multiple ones of those. Many systems in use have 4 or 8 Gigs of RAM. Some are even using more. Games have already came out that recommend having at least 2 Gigs RAM. Using anything 32-bit will limit you severely. You could have 8 Gigs installed in your system and be able to use less than half of it if you stick with 32-bit. Other features of 64-bit Windows (from Microsoft) are mainly security-related * 32-bit uses some software DEP, 64-bit uses full hardware DEP (Data Execution Prevention). This prevents some buffer overflow exploits. * 64-bit features "Kernel Patch Protection", which prevents bad programs from patching any part of the kernel to take over functions. 32-bit has nothing like this. * 64-bit requires Signed drivers unless you boot in a special F8 developer mode on every boot. For many users this may prevent crap drivers or rootkits from being installed. And of course, many native 64-bit applications may run faster. Memory intensive programs will be able to work with bigger chunks of RAM and do what they do quicker. Something like Zipping/Unzipping, installing programs, decompressing game data (and level loads) will all be faster with 64-bit applications. So, there you go. That's the difference. More RAM, more speed, more security. That's Vista 64-bit. And the trade off? A few applications may not work. So far, only Cisco VPN has been something that bothered me, and I doubt most people would need that. There is a work around. I run XP in a VM, and use CiscoVPN in that, and then route local traffic through the VM.

XdN Tweaker can tell Vista to treat most folders the same, allowing you to apply a view to all folders. http://xenomorph.net/xdntweaker/

...and why would someone want to do this again??? I don't understand why people are trying to shoehorn Vista on FAT32 partitions and 256 meg systems. Is this some science experiment?

32bit icons are nice. but when can we see some ClearType in Windows 2000? if Win2k did ClearType and 32-bit icons, i bet some people would move to it from XP.

well, yes, \Users is a real folder and \Documents and Settings is a junction to \Users. but that doesnt have anything to do with the users' personal folder. its a real location, but what is displayed in that folder may be folders (and files?) from multiple locations - even on different physical drives. Explorer doesn't list the files/folders in the the personal folder, it lists a dynamically generated listing - and i dont know where that listing is stored or where the settings are that control Windows display the personal folder that way.

Hey guys, I made a tweaker too! http://xenomorph.net/xdntweaker/ It has some tweaks specific to Vista, XP, and 2k3.

Tell me. What kind of folder is your Home folder? (C:\Users\YourName) Is it a Virtual folder? a Search folder? Vista does not treat it like a normal folder. I want to know why, and how to change it. I have information / questions on it here: http://xenomorph.net/?page_id=491 While doing searches on the subject, I found this page, which has similar questions: http://darkknight.thinkers-inc.com/blogs/c...ders_3F00_.aspx Again, Vista doesn't treat it like a normal folder. It doesn't even treat it like the usual other File/Image/Music/etc folder types it handles. It's it own virtual folder/normal folder type hybrid. When you open it, it does not display it's actual contents. It displayed an indexed listing (even with indexing turned off). Supposedly, in beta, you could make your own virtual folders. They would display contents as specified in an XML file. In detail view, it even has a "Folder path" column that shows the real location of some of the files / folders. Again, I want to know what kind of folder it is, and how to change it to a normal folder so that no indexing/XML is required to display the contents. I'm hoping its a registry key I could toggle or something else really simply I may have overlooked. Edit: To try and see where the paths are stored, I moved a folder "Game Saves" to D:\Crap. The folder still shows up in my Home folder though. The "Folder path" column shows the actual location of D:\Crap for the "Games Saves" folder. Doing a search in the registry for "\Crap" gives me this location: HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\User Shell Folders I want to know where the contents of the home folder / "Personal files" folder are actually stored, if its an XML file somewhere or what. I also want to know how to make it a normal folder. Thoughts?

1. The Start Menu. Why can't we have an XP-like Start Menu? Why was it dropped? I'd like to see an XP style Start Menu. 2. The ability to remove file associations. This was in everything from Windows 95 to XP, but removed for Vista. Why? People may accidentally associate the wrong program with a file type, but there is no way to un-do it without opening up the Registry Editor. 3. A truly "classic" Explorer look. The folder view on the left doesn't have the lines showing how the folders are connected, and the Toolbar was removed. Why? 4. Power settings are too hidden / confusing. I have to dig through window after window to stop my hard drives from powering off, or make the Shut Down button on the Start Menu actually shut the computer down! Even then, I still have to run Disk Cleanup to remove the Hibernation file. Too many steps and too many things hidden all over! 5. The new Display Properties window. Instead of the single window with tabs, we now have multiple windows that aren't attached to each other, and some that are hidden within links in other windows. Edit: 6. Just like the poster above me said. The double UAC prompt when making folders. I'm prompted when the New Folder is made, then prompted again when I name it.

this is another thing that Vista that really puts me off to it. Explorer has been butchered so badly. they removed the toolbar, changed the interface, and i get the weird "Green bar filling up" at the top of the Window every time i open my Home folder. it takes almost a minute for my Home folder to open because of that green bar. my Home folder is the only one that does this. it's like its scanning all the files or something. no other folder does this. i can open \Windows\System32 a lot faster, when it has 10 times as many files as my home folder.

but thats the equivalent of saying "every version of Windows sold in the last half decade uses ClearType". most people dont use any version of Windows that doesnt have ClearType. anything pre-XP is irrelevant for most people. i dont know the extent of how much control over it you have, but Vista, 2k3, and XP all have the same control over ClearType. you can select "None", "Standard", or "ClearType" in each version of Windows. if you select "None", and there are still cases of it being turned on in Vista, that is simply an issue of poor interface design, which can been seen in XP in many areas as well.

doesnt Opera have something in it to make it check to see if it is the default browser? with Firefox, all i did was have it check, and then i clicked the button to make it the default. i never messed with Vista's built in default program selector.

i'm lost... you want to load music, that is already on your computer, into a virtual CD, to listen to it?? why not just play the music that is on your computer as-is? i know in iTunes that you need to make a playlist to burn to disc. just make a playlist and play from it. why does it have to be on a CD first?