When Merom MBP's come out, Do I need windows xp 64?

[Collin973]

Since the merom chips are 64-bit, does that mean i need to have a copy of xp 64-bit to install it? Or can a 64-bit chip run a 32 bit version of xp?

I'm not up on all the bit stuff, so if some one could fill in the blanks i'd appreciate it!

--CP

 

[FragTek]

It's backwards compatible with 32 bit windows, which I do recommend. The x64 winxp has pretty bad support and actually runs pretty poorly compared to the 32 bit version. Stick wth the 32 bit Windows and you'll be happy you did.

 

[Collin973]

It's backwards compatible with 32 bit windows, which I do recommend. The x64 winxp has pretty bad support and actually runs pretty poorly compared to the 32 bit version. Stick wth the 32 bit Windows and you'll be happy you did.

Very nice thanks. I was just thinking about it because i've saved this copy of xp for my mbp when i get it...and i just realize it might not work.

Thanks!!
--CP

 

[tominated]

or you could wait till vista and get the 64bit version of it

 

[Killyp]

or you could wait till vista and get the 64bit version of it

and see most of the OP's old PC apps stop working.

If you really want to bootcamp it, then go with XP, which works well (for a PC) and is tried and tested. Vista is (at the moment) rubbish and doesn't look like it's going to be that great. Unless you have a good reason to Boot Camp your MBP when you get it, I'd stick with OS X for a bit, and see if you really can survive without Windows! I was planning on boot camping my MBP, but OS X is just perfect 😱 😱 😱

 

[stefan15]

The x64 winxp has pretty bad support and actually runs pretty poorly compared to the 32 bit version

So I take you actually have never used x64?

My recommendation is to definitely get x64 if you have the capability. It's built off of Windows Server 2003, and is a lot more solid overall. I have been using it since it came out. Oh and yes, I suppose now you will have to actually READ what you are about install to ensure it works on 64-bit systems (although most of the time it isn't a problem anyways). Or, as tominated mentioned, wait for Vista x64.

 

[FragTek]

So I take you actually have never used x64?

My recommendation is to definitely get x64 if you have the capability. It's built off of Windows Server 2003, and is a lot more solid overall. I have been using it since it came out. Oh and yes, I suppose now you will have to actually READ what you are about install to ensure it works on 64-bit systems (although most of the time it isn't a problem anyways). Or, as tominated mentioned, wait for Vista x64.

No, in fact I've probably used it longer than you 🙂 Considering I beta tested it nearly from day one. Just because of the fact that it was "built off of 2k3" doesn't mean ****... Software support is terrible, I find that it crashes more often than it's 32 bit counter-part, and if you're a gamer some games can suffer as much as a 10fps drop.

Stear clear of x64 if you know what's good for ya.

 

[iCeQuBe]

No, in fact I've probably used it longer than you 🙂 Considering I beta tested it nearly from day one. Just because of the fact that it was "built off of 2k3" doesn't mean ****... Software support is terrible, I find that it crashes more often than it's 32 bit counter-part, and if you're a gamer some games can suffer as much as a 10fps drop.

Stear clear of x64 if you know what's good for ya.

I have to agree with that one. We got 3 new PC's with x64 and they were terrible for us. Driver support for third party hardware was non existent, support stunk and the OS crashed all the time. It may be better now but about a year ago it was horrible!