AMD 64 X2 5000+ and 64 Bit OS

#11

"Wes Newell" <w.newell (AT) TAKEOUTverizon (DOT) net> wrote

Quote:

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 12:32:40 -1000, Hertz_Donut wrote:

While I will agree that some variants of Linux are very stable, even the
best Linux OS is not that much more advanced than Vista.

You're right, Vista has advanced DRM features in it that will lug down
your use.

I have 5 computers in my home; 3 desktops and 2 laptops. The three desktops
run Vista Ultimate. One laptop runs Vista Ultimate, the other Vista
Business. I have yet to have the performance of any of these machines
affected by DRM 4 of the computers were uprgraded from XP; they all run
faster and more efficiently with Vista.

And Vista is much more advanced when it comes to getting into

Quote:

your wallet.

I recieved 4 of the Vista disks that I am using for free; one was for being
an official beta tester; one was from a MS program where you had to watch 3
Webcasts; one was given as a reward for completing training and quizes on a
website, one was given as a gratis for attending a MS Rollout seminar, and
one was won as part of a prize package.

Only one cost me anything, and it was an upgraded for one of the laotps, and
I only had to pay S/H.

So, for 5 seperate licenses and discs, I paid about $12. Not bad, and nor
expensive.

I wonder why even the MS technology people are warning about

Quote:

Vista use. Something to consider if you plan on using it.

The warnings are for those who have older equipment and/or software that are

not compatible with Vista. Chances are the smae hardware would not be
compatible with Linux, and the software would also not likely have a linux
counterpart.

Honu

#12

"Wes Newell" <w.newell (AT) TAKEOUTverizon (DOT) net> wrote

Quote:

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 12:32:40 -1000, Hertz_Donut wrote:

While I will agree that some variants of Linux are very stable, even the
best Linux OS is not that much more advanced than Vista.

You're right, Vista has advanced DRM features in it that will lug down
your use. And Vista is much more advanced when it comes to getting into
your wallet. I wonder why even the MS technology people are warning about
Vista use. Something to consider if you plan on using it.

The people these 'warning' are addressed to are the same people that were
'warned' about XP as well as Win2K ... at some point you are going to have
to stop using that 486 or pentium II and buy a new system. As long as people
insist on clinging to old hardward and the free applications that were
bundled with either system or Win95b or Win98; then yes, byu all means do
not attempt to install Vista on those machines, you will be disappointed if
you try to run Vista on a 33/66/100 bus m/b. The same as you would if you
try to run any modern, fully functional OS, Browser or Mail reader.

Just as a 500 mb IDE harddrive is too small and too slow... the same is true
in Operating systems. Much of the value in web sites and downloads now
require SSL/TLS, encryption, authorization, security protocols, integrity
checking etc. If your sole concern is accessing Usenet, or bare bones
computing - then by all means be comfortable in your cocoon wrapped in
Unix/Linux or Mac. PCs and Vista in general are made for users that actually
want to communicate and take advantage of Unity/Unification of services,
without having to roll-your-own.

How many times does the same truth have to be drummed into these asinine
arguments - most users do not want to learn how to program, just so they can
access their mail, shop on line, play games or download media, transfer
media from one format to another.

Funny, how PC users generally, are accepting of Mac and "nix users - live
and let live. Yet, every time a reasonable disccus begins, one or more of
these Luddites has some negative comment to drone on and on about, like that
really is going to make anyone convert to an unwieldy geek oriented
platform?

In simple Chavanistic terms - it's a classic case of Blonds vs. Brunetts or
better yet drama queen vs. help mate.

Quote:

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm

#13

"64bit Windows is mature and stable," i have only this to say WTF windows is
not stable and hasnt been since 3.11 although i do thank you for the laugh.

"Benjamin Gawert" <bgawert (AT) gmx (DOT) de> wrote

Quote:

* Mark Pryor:

The Windows 64 bit driver model is archaic and awkward.

In exactly what way is the Windows64 driver model (which driver model
btw?) "archaic and awkward"?

The Linux 64 bit desktop OS is already here (for at least 4 years) and is
mature and easy to use.

I use open SuSE 10.2 x86_64 on
abit kn8 Pro SLI
Opteron 175 (Denmark) x2 2.2 Ghz
the above chip is similar to an Athlon64 x2 4400+

All the major Apps are 64 bit, including firefox and various multimedia.
When needed, 32 bit versions are easily available and can co-exist with
64
bit versions.

http://www.opensuse.org

Vitually any Linux distro you encounter has a version for x86_64 and will
leave any version of Windows in the dust.

But only if you keep your eyes closed and say "Linux is better than
Windows" at least a hundred times, because in real life 64bit Windows is
mature and stable, too (especially the server versions). And when talking
about awkward just think about the lack of real standards and
standardization in Linux.

BTW: usually the way is to first choose the application and after that the
OS. The best OS is just plain useless if the application you need does not
run on it. Period.

Benjamin

#14

When was the last time you were sober?

Windows has been very stable since Windows 98SE...

Honu

"wasdrogan" <wasdroganau (AT) yahoo (DOT) com.au> wrote

Quote:

"64bit Windows is mature and stable," i have only this to say WTF windows
is not stable and hasnt been since 3.11 although i do thank you for the
laugh.

"Benjamin Gawert" <bgawert (AT) gmx (DOT) de> wrote in message
news:569viaF27is0uU1 (AT) mid (DOT) individual.net...
* Mark Pryor:

The Windows 64 bit driver model is archaic and awkward.

In exactly what way is the Windows64 driver model (which driver model
btw?) "archaic and awkward"?

The Linux 64 bit desktop OS is already here (for at least 4 years) and
is
mature and easy to use.

I use open SuSE 10.2 x86_64 on
abit kn8 Pro SLI
Opteron 175 (Denmark) x2 2.2 Ghz
the above chip is similar to an Athlon64 x2 4400+

All the major Apps are 64 bit, including firefox and various multimedia.
When needed, 32 bit versions are easily available and can co-exist with
64
bit versions.

http://www.opensuse.org

Vitually any Linux distro you encounter has a version for x86_64 and
will
leave any version of Windows in the dust.

But only if you keep your eyes closed and say "Linux is better than
Windows" at least a hundred times, because in real life 64bit Windows is
mature and stable, too (especially the server versions). And when talking
about awkward just think about the lack of real standards and
standardization in Linux.

BTW: usually the way is to first choose the application and after that
the OS. The best OS is just plain useless if the application you need
does not run on it. Period.

Benjamin

#15

* wasdrogan:

Quote:

"64bit Windows is mature and stable," i have only this to say WTF windows is
not stable and hasnt been since 3.11 although i do thank you for the laugh.

Yeah, whatever you say. Come back when you are grown up and have some
clues about it.

Benjamin

#16

Hertz_Donut wrote:

Quote:

When was the last time you were sober?

Windows has been very stable since Windows 98SE...

May I produce exhibit A, Windows ME

#17

"wasdrogan" <wasdroganau (AT) yahoo (DOT) com.au> wrote

Quote:

"64bit Windows is mature and stable," i have only this to say WTF windows
is not stable and hasnt been since 3.11 although i do thank you for the
laugh.

Windows NT Core is currently rock solid and best of all, the surrounding OS
is significantly more bug free than "GNU / Linux"... The Kernal is solid in
Linux, everything else is a mess.

Carlo

#18

WOW .. so microsoft gouges the rest of the world to give free software
to yanks ...
and your right .. vista is a vast improvement on what went before ..
which is not really such a great wrap
linus leaves windows for dead .. now if only we could get companies to
port their software over
and yes .. I run xp x64 .. the best windows by far .. now if i could
find a decent firewall, i'd settle for x64

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 15:20:06 -1000, "Hertz_Donut" <noone (AT) nowhere (DOT) com>
wrote:

Quote:

"Wes Newell" <w.newell (AT) TAKEOUTverizon (DOT) net> wrote in message
news:NS_Lh.8163$EA.483 (AT) trnddc07 (DOT) ..
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 12:32:40 -1000, Hertz_Donut wrote:

While I will agree that some variants of Linux are very stable, even the
best Linux OS is not that much more advanced than Vista.

You're right, Vista has advanced DRM features in it that will lug down
your use.

I have 5 computers in my home; 3 desktops and 2 laptops. The three desktops
run Vista Ultimate. One laptop runs Vista Ultimate, the other Vista
Business. I have yet to have the performance of any of these machines
affected by DRM 4 of the computers were uprgraded from XP; they all run
faster and more efficiently with Vista.

And Vista is much more advanced when it comes to getting into
your wallet.

I recieved 4 of the Vista disks that I am using for free; one was for being
an official beta tester; one was from a MS program where you had to watch 3
Webcasts; one was given as a reward for completing training and quizes on a
website, one was given as a gratis for attending a MS Rollout seminar, and
one was won as part of a prize package.

Only one cost me anything, and it was an upgraded for one of the laotps, and
I only had to pay S/H.

So, for 5 seperate licenses and discs, I paid about $12. Not bad, and nor
expensive.

I wonder why even the MS technology people are warning about
Vista use. Something to consider if you plan on using it.

The warnings are for those who have older equipment and/or software that are
not compatible with Vista. Chances are the smae hardware would not be
compatible with Linux, and the software would also not likely have a linux
counterpart.

Honu

#19

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 15:20:06 -1000, Hertz_Donut wrote:

Quote:

The warnings are for those who have older equipment and/or software that are
not compatible with Vista. Chances are the smae hardware would not be
compatible with Linux, and the software would also not likely have a linux
counterpart.

And the chances are about 100% that you are more full of crap than a
Christmas turkey. Here's the hardware config from one of the latest linux
kernels (2.6.20). As you can see, there's still support for the old 386.

# CONFIG_M386 is not set
# CONFIG_M486 is not set
# CONFIG_M586 is not set
# CONFIG_M586TSC is not set
# CONFIG_M586MMX is not set
# CONFIG_M686 is not set
# CONFIG_MPENTIUMII is not set
# CONFIG_MPENTIUMIII is not set
# CONFIG_MPENTIUMM is not set
# CONFIG_MCORE2 is not set
# CONFIG_MPENTIUM4 is not set
# CONFIG_MK6 is not set
# CONFIG_MK7 is not set
CONFIG_MK8=y
# CONFIG_MCRUSOE is not set
# CONFIG_MEFFICEON is not set
# CONFIG_MWINCHIPC6 is not set
# CONFIG_MWINCHIP2 is not set
# CONFIG_MWINCHIP3D is not set
# CONFIG_MGEODEGX1 is not set
# CONFIG_MGEODE_LX is not set
# CONFIG_MCYRIXIII is not set
# CONFIG_MVIAC3_2 is not set
# CONFIG_X86_GENERIC is not set

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm

#20

Benjamin Gawert <bgawert (AT) gmx (DOT) de> wrote:

Quote:

* Harold A Climer:

I am not an expert on computer architecture by any means. I have
installed a new hard drive or graphics card several times.
What the difference between the 64 on my AMD 64 X2 5000+ CPU in my
HP computer and XP64 or Vista64( If there is such a thing).

It's easy. The AMD Athlon64 (the CPU you refer as "AMD64") is a 64bit
processor, Windowsxp x64 and Vista x64 are operating systems. Hardware
and software. Apples and oranges.

How do I
tell if I have a 32 bit OS or a 64Bit OS?

Look at the system properties, if it says "x64" its 64bit, otherwise 32bit.

Benjamin

If you are comfortable with using a debugger, run debugger with a program.
Then examine the registers. If you see 16 general registers or 16 xmm registers,
then you are running in 64-bit mode. If you see only 8 of either set, then you
are running in 32-bit mode.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

AMD 64 X2 5000+ and 64 Bit OS

AMD x86/64bits Processors alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64

Re: AMD 64 X2 5000+ and 64 Bit OS - 03-20-2007 , 08:20 PM

Re: AMD 64 X2 5000+ and 64 Bit OS - 03-20-2007 , 10:58 PM

Re: AMD 64 X2 5000+ and 64 Bit OS - 03-21-2007 , 02:45 AM

Re: AMD 64 X2 5000+ and 64 Bit OS - 03-21-2007 , 03:29 AM

Re: AMD 64 X2 5000+ and 64 Bit OS - 03-21-2007 , 06:10 AM

Re: AMD 64 X2 5000+ and 64 Bit OS - 03-21-2007 , 03:07 PM

Re: AMD 64 X2 5000+ and 64 Bit OS - 03-21-2007 , 09:18 PM

Re: AMD 64 X2 5000+ and 64 Bit OS - 03-25-2007 , 07:58 AM

Re: AMD 64 X2 5000+ and 64 Bit OS - 03-25-2007 , 10:13 AM

Re: AMD 64 X2 5000+ and 64 Bit OS - 03-31-2007 , 11:48 AM