32 or 64 bit windows xp/vista on mac?

[rakester]

Which should use and which is the fastest? Which one works the best?

[jerryrock]

Vista Ultimate 64 bit.

[Eidorian]

I'm going to recommend any 64-bit version of Vista.

[Stridder44]

Vista Ultimate 64 bit.

Indeed, Vista 64. If you don't want Vista, then stick with XP 32-bit but whatever you do stay away from XP 64.

[rakester]

I installed 65bit vista and a few features seemed not to work on my mac book pro like...

volume buttons on laptop didn't work

illuminated keyboard didn't work

Also does the isight work in vista 64bit?

[Eidorian]

I installed 65bit vista and a few features seemed not to work on my mac book pro like...

volume buttons on laptop didn't work

illuminated keyboard didn't work

Also does the isight work in vista 64bit?Did you install the Boot Camp drivers off of the Leopard DVD?

[srl7741]

Another vote for 64. Works great for me.

[rakester]

Did you install the Boot Camp drivers off of the Leopard DVD?

Eeek! Nope, how do go about doing this? Stick in the Leopard DVD and go to optional installs?

[allan.nyholm]

Eeek! Nope, how do go about doing this? Stick in the Leopard DVD and go to optional installs?

The installation should start by itself when you insert the Leopard DVD.

[rakester]

I think I might be doing something wrong,

My mac book pro is exactly how it from when i got it from apple a few days ago new.

I tried putting in the cd's tha came with it but there is no option for bootcamp drivers on either disk.

Are they already installed? I'm confused as 64bit vista didn't allow me to use some of the macs features so i removed it (as in illuminated keyboard etc wouldn't work)

Am i doing something wrong?

[QuantumLo0p]

As for Vista 64 bit, watch out for application support. Corporate adoption of Vista 32 or 64 has been very, very slow. A large part of that is due to application support.

Many power users, I know personally, are still building software and hardware environments for XP 32 and 64 because of this. They don't want to but their hands are tied.

Hey Microsoft: Thanks for the Turds known as Vista 32/64!

[Eidorian]

I think I might be doing something wrong,

My mac book pro is exactly how it from when i got it from apple a few days ago new.

I tried putting in the cd's tha came with it but there is no option for bootcamp drivers on either disk.

Are they already installed? I'm confused as 64bit vista didn't allow me to use some of the macs features so i removed it (as in illuminated keyboard etc wouldn't work)

Am i doing something wrong?The Boot Camp drivers are on the first gray Mac OS X Installer DVD. None of the special features are going to work in Windows without the drivers.

[rakester]

The Boot Camp drivers are on the first gray Mac OS X Installer DVD. None of the special features are going to work in Windows without the drivers.

I put the CD in and there are no options for drivers?

[rakester]

Or will the drivers only show once I've installed Vista then put the Leopard DVD under a windows environment?

[Eidorian]

Or will the drivers only show once I've installed Vista then put the Leopard DVD under a windows environment?This is the behavior.

[rakester]

This is the behavior.

I'll take that as a yes lol

[Stridder44]

I put the CD in and there are no options for drivers?

Yeah, for some reason it won't automatically pop up. Right click on the Leopard disc in My Computer and goto "Explore". Open the Boot Camp folder and there should be Bootcamp.exe or something along those lines. Afterwards, make sure to run Apple Software Update (should be installed with the Boot Camp drivers, it'll be under the Start menu) and update it to Boot Camp 2.1.

As for Vista 64 bit, watch out for application support. Corporate adoption of Vista 32 or 64 has been very, very slow. A large part of that is due to application support.

Many power users, I know personally, are still building software and hardware environments for XP 32 and 64 because of this. They don't want to but their hands are tied.

Hey Microsoft: Thanks for the Turds known as Vista 32/64!

A hate for Vista with claims to back it up. What a surprise. Have you even tried Vista 64 for more than 5 minutes on a modern computer? Pretty much every application runs perfectly (even Oregon Trail). It's very fast and stable. And what retarded "power users" would continue supporting XP 64, a dead OS that sucked from day 1? Even Microsoft fanboys know XP 64 is a bad joke.

[VoR]

I've used xp64 since release and think it's a great os

[QuantumLo0p]

A hate for Vista with claims to back it up. What a surprise. Have you even tried Vista 64 for more than 5 minutes on a modern computer? Pretty much every application runs perfectly (even Oregon Trail). It's very fast and stable. And what retarded "power users" would continue supporting XP 64, a dead OS that sucked from day 1? Even Microsoft fanboys know XP 64 is a bad joke.

Sorry if I upset you. Check it out for yourself, the fact is the corporate adoption rate of Vista is very low. Many IT managers are on record stating they are waiting for Windows 7.

Big app power users of x64 are only concerned with 64 bit memory address space for crunching huge projects which x32 will choke at 2-3GB. They are not concerned with kiddie issues like DirectX 10 support, FPS frame rates, stealing music and whether or not Steam works right.

I run a class leading CAD/CAM/CAE app on XP64 and can load huge assemblies. I could probably do the same thing on Vista 64 except that Vista is not certified to run everything in that environment. If it did work then what would would it take? More time and money. Let's just say I am not concerned with a multimedia experience. I'm going to wait for Windows 7 before I upgrade. Maybe Micro$oft will have their new file system ready by then.

The truth is there is not anything groundbreaking in Windows 6 (Vista). From a power user standpoint there just isn't much difference between XP64 and Vista64 and XP64 seems to work great.

I think upgrading to Vista is just a useless contribution to a revenue stream for Micro$oft.

[VoR]

Enterprise hasn't jumped on vista because there is no need - fiddling with anything that works is pointless and bound to be expensive, it's certainly not because it's a bad os. How long did it take most businesses to switch from 2k to xp?
Vista offers very little over xp, pretty much nothing that couldn't have been added in a service pack - of course it's a revenue stream. It doesn't really matter though, it's not like everyone runs out and buys a new version - it just comes installed on your machine, their newest version is the 'standard' for 99% of users.

[jamesi]

i say for most ppl it really comes down to ram. will you be having more or less than 3gigs of memory in your system? if you want to go past 3 gigs, you need 64 bit support. id say the average person would be fine with 32 bit, but i know id fight to get that 64 bit b/c my obsession with being a power user

[Markov]

XP 32-bit --> Just about every application/ game will run on this...
XP 64-bit --> I only installed this on VMWare Fusion, and it ran very well, and ran everything that I needed to run (games [Steam games including HL 1], CAD, 3D modeling programs...).
Vista 32-bit --> You only have the hassle of making sure everything you want runs on Vista... by this time MOST- not all applications, have some kind of patch to work properly on Vista.
Vista 64-bit --> Never tried it- only heard good things. Use it only if you know what you're going to run will run on 64-bit and Vista!!

I use XP 32-bit on my MBP, and it runs very well. I have had Vista 32-bit, which also ran well (minus the vista experience meter...). XP 64-bit, as I mentioned before, I have ran only on VMWare Fusion with great success.

[Stridder44]

Vista offers very little over xp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_features_new_to_Windows_Vista

Yeah, no new features at all :rolleyes: (notice the box on the right with different categories). I do agree with what you said about Enterprise users not jumping on board, but when do Enterprise users ever move to a new OS? They'll probably jump on Vista before they even move to Windows 7. But this isn't about Enterprise users.

Sorry if I upset you. Check it out for yourself, the fact is the corporate adoption rate of Vista is very low. Many IT managers are on record stating they are waiting for Windows 7.

Big app power users of x64 are only concerned with 64 bit memory address space for crunching huge projects which x32 will choke at 2-3GB. They are not concerned with kiddie issues like DirectX 10 support, FPS frame rates, stealing music and whether or not Steam works right.

I run a class leading CAD/CAM/CAE app on XP64 and can load huge assemblies. I could probably do the same thing on Vista 64 except that Vista is not certified to run everything in that environment. If it did work then what would would it take? More time and money. Let's just say I am not concerned with a multimedia experience. I'm going to wait for Windows 7 before I upgrade. Maybe Micro$oft will have their new file system ready by then.

The truth is there is not anything groundbreaking in Windows 6 (Vista). From a power user standpoint there just isn't much difference between XP64 and Vista64 and XP64 seems to work great.

I think upgrading to Vista is just a useless contribution to a revenue stream for Micro$oft.

This coming from someone who spells Microsoft with a $ sign. And again, this has nothing to do with Enterprise users. I'm surprised you moved to XP at all and didn't just stick with 2000. After all, XP is just 2000 with more eye candy, right?

[VoR]

I'm a big fan of generalizations, your list is boring and not really what I meant :)

[XianPalin]

If your mac doesn't come with 64-bit drivers (doesn't only the Mac Pro come with 64-bit drivers right now?) I'd go 32-bit XP

For 64-bit, definitely Vista. I run Vista Ultimate 64-bit on my Mac Pro and haven't run into any issues that I can recall.