The 64 bit question

[Rhoel]

Last week I had enough of Vista (contractual obligation for a project), and following the discovery Win7 still is not XP backward compatible, I reverted to XP:

Currently happy as a pig in poo, everything is working again, I am seeing significant speed increases and my productivity is back up. No idea why it took me so long to make the decision.

Rhoel

[GCharb]

See, you went back to XP because you are an unhealty, underweight person who cannot eat enough of the good stuff!

Heheh, I went windows 7 64 since my new hardware sort of requires it, runs like a charm on it, but XP Pro still rocks solid.

Happy you are happy

G

[SpaceBoy64]

Win7 still is not XP backward compatible

What do you mean? What is not compatible with?

If I get a new 64 bit computer I will want a 64 bit operating system.

[GCharb]

What do you mean? What is not compatible with?

Some applications developed for xp or earlier are not 100% win7 compatible, which does not mean they cannot be run in win7 but could experience some problems with win7.

AS Pro is not listed as win7 compatible, at least not acording to win7 tools, but, win7 has a compatibility mode for these applications, making the envornment 100% compatible.

I personaly never actually had any problems with any of the so called not compatible software, including AS Pro 5.6 or 6.x

G

[Rhoel]

Win7 still is not XP backward compatible

What do you mean? What is not compatible with?

I have at least three critical programs which didn't run on Vista and two which are not running on Win 7. With on I could pay another $150 and go tot he latest version which will run Win7: But since there is no added gain in functionality, why upgrade?

For me, XP is doing everything I need it to do, its significantly faster than Vista and ASP 5.6 cannot make use of the dual processors. I have no advantage in migrating to Win 7, only disadvantages.

Not a Ludite, just being practical.

[Austrailian_dogs]

Well, since getting maya 2009 I really have no choice but Vista right now.
Looks like I need a nice new shiny machine with a Quadro and V64, .....pity I'm broke.
Dale you might have to have a look at your system specs or build quality, really. I have had totally the opposite from Vista on my tablet pc, it makes XP look like a poorly thought out test run... think of all the RAM, man.....
If I could switch up my workstation tomorrow I would...
Ubuntu will run maya 2009 but I read the instructions and posts on the ubuntu forums, and if you have to type that much code to install something, well, it's a no brainer for this no brainer.

Playing with the fire.........

[jwlane]

I just thought I'd mention my recent experience with Mac, and it's relative. After 2 and 1/2 years, Apple made my EXPENSIVE desktop obsolete. I cannot upgrade it any longer, to the best of my knowledge. This is a hardware implementation. It looks like a Windows machine will have a lot longer life as far as upgrades go.

This is a shame in a way. The Mac OS is very, very easy to maintain and is super stable. The 'just under the surface' BSD Unix platform is an environment that you are never stuck in, regarding file management. Too bad. Apple is fully concentrated on what I call the PISS initiative: Portable Internet Shopping Subscriptions. All the old guard graphics pros that supported Apple when their stock price was 2000 percent below what it is now, well, we hardly matter now.

I wish more apps ported to Linux. I may get a Linux machine in the future, just to run open source tools. Waiting for poor volunteers to compile something like a Mac or Windows 7 version seems to be a burdensome request.

One last note: Open GL on a Mac seems to also be chronically behind the curve.