|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
09-10-2009, 05:11 PM | #11 (permalink) | |
Nae wains, Great Danes.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Where how means why.
Posts: 3,621
|
yeah.. what does that even mean?
__________________
Quote:
|
|
09-10-2009, 05:17 PM | #12 (permalink) |
Partying on the inside
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,584
|
XXbit basically refers to the way your specific operating system works with the computer processor and vice versa. Without getting too deep with it, Vista 64bit is capable of handling a lot more than 32bit versions, but it's pretty exclusive when it comes to which 32 bit programs are capable of being run in a 64bit environment.
That means that most of the software you put on your computer will have to be 64bit compatible. It will say that on the computer requirements when you buy the software or download it. Just try to remember that part and you'll be alright.
__________________
|
09-10-2009, 05:24 PM | #13 (permalink) |
Partying on the inside
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,584
|
Boring Info for the Post!
We usually never had a problem with running 16bit software (software made for like, windows 95 etc..) in a 32bit OS like XP because of backward compatibility. It's not really feasible though, because the processor has to make two passes for every one line of 16bit code, effectively slowing the processing speed down by half its ability. Now Vista is basically cutting out backward compatibility in that sense, eliminating compatibility with 16bit all together, and providing virtual environments for running legacy programs.
__________________
|
09-10-2009, 06:28 PM | #16 (permalink) | |
Partying on the inside
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,584
|
Quote:
Word is, it's supposed to be the antithesis of how poorly designed Vista was in regards to compatibility and core functionality. At this point, I would be happy without additional bells and whistles just to see the advantage of an operating system that's capable of meeting any demand and also being structurally sound and compatible with at least a majority of what us consumers have come to trust. Vista was a rushed, poorly constructed marketing strategy that failed, and Windows 7 is supposed to be the rectifying solution. As far as I'm concerned, I'm sticking with XP until W7 proves to be what it should be.
__________________
|
|
09-10-2009, 06:49 PM | #18 (permalink) | |
Partying on the inside
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,584
|
Quote:
It might be hit or miss with some programs, depending, but I think you may be at the mercy of the functionality of such an interpreting/processing proxy like Wine as to what it's capable of delivering in terms of operable ability. You have to realize that there are certain aspects of OS-based programs that are completely dependent on the resources and interactions provided by the OS it was made for, so short of rewriting the program itself, sometimes it's just not possible for the interpreting layer (ie., Wine) to provide the kind of environment a program needs.
__________________
|
|
|