"- it seems Windows 7 will be more of a refined version of Vista than anything else."

yeah... I kind of noted this before in another thread. Everybody seems to think that this Windows seven will be "the one" but IMO.... it'll be vista with a few small changes.

As far as vista 64 goes... I love it. Been using it for quite some time now and have ALMOST no complaints. One nagging thing... sometimes a few of the folders seem to forget their view setting, but other than that it's been stable as a rock.

Well, based on my experience with Vista 64 for the past 2 weeks...I would have to say YES. Go for it.

I use Vista 32 on my newer laptop, as that's what came on the machine. It's Pre-SP1, and I do not like the OS. It's a resource hog, cumbersome, slow, buggy and just plain takes a lot of work to use. So when I made the decision to install a 64-bit OS and run Vegas 8.1 on an empty hard drive in my machine, I chose XP 64-bit. In fact I had basically placed the order for the OS--but then saw posts in this forum about how SCS wasn't going to provide tech support for 8.1 if you didn't use Vista 64. So I changed the order and went with Vista...begrudgingly.

Boy, was I wrong! Vista 64 is screaming on my machine. You can look at my specs, but I have an Intel Q9450 quad core with an Abit IP35 Pro mobo and 8GB of Corsair DDR2 800MHz RAM. Vista loves Ram...period. But, it performs very well and quite honestly I don't even boot the machine into XP anymore. I am somewhat embarrassed to say it though, because I have been so vocal about Vista 32-bit on my other machine. I did run Vista 64 with 4GB RAM, and it ran just fine--so I do not think this is about the extra RAM I installed. I really do think that SP1 has made a huge difference. I have tried to install it in my laptop though, and it just hasn't worked. In fact it crashed my machine twice, lol.

But it's not all rosy with Vista 64 though, as several others here will tell you. The availability of the 64-bit drivers is very limited--and this is an issue. And Vegas 8.1 still has several issues, as you can see in several threads here, including http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=612947&Replies=35this one[/link]. But Vegas 8c runs on Vista 64, and folks tell me that all the plug-ins work well. I run both and although 8.1 is faster than 8c, version 8c is indeed less buggy. But both handle my AVCHD files without any difficulty whatsoever, so that alone is worth the price of admission.

So others will say various things about Vista 64, but for me it's been a surprisingly pleasant experience; thus far, that is!

Knocking on wood...

TB

The key here is to make sure you have plenty of resources. Also, make sure you run all of the Windows Updates (except drivers, never do those from WU). Once you do that you will enjoy the experience.

I former MS. I run both Vista & XP. Vista when optimized runs just fine. HP is very good about helping you get the best from Vista if you call them or use online support.

Of the two new refurb HP laptops I got yesterday. My daughters is Vista. Mine is Vista Ultimate Everything (XPP, V32 & V64). My choice is to run it as XP Pro because from a pure performance standpoint XP Pro benchmarks better than Vista 32. Vista 64 can handle more memory and newer CPU's but my laptop has max of 4GB of RAM so for me best performance is XP.

Although both my laptop and desktop have 4GB RAM, I have found that memory handling seems to be better with the 64 bit version of XP Pro and I would imagine the same thing for Vista 64 bit as well.

I found out that my motherboard for my desktop was designed for Vista specifically and I had to kludge my install by slipstreaming drivers into my 64 bit XP Pro install disk - and it still doesn't run all that great. I'm thinking it's time to get with the program with Vista 64bit (I'm already doing data backup to other drives as I type this)

Anything else I should be aware of in this move?

Cliff Etzel - Solo Video Journalist
bluprojekt | solo video journalism blog

Anything else I should be aware of in this move?

As long as your drivers (ALL your drivers) are available in native 64 bit and you have the resources (modern mobo, graphics, CPU etc etc) then there is really no reason not to make the move.

I was super-staunch XP up until this July when I finally decided to make the move (slowly - like a box at a time).

Now the entire infrastructure is moved over - my main DAW and my wife's editing workstation are running Vista 64 (use Business Edition as a tip) and two Standard office type workstations are Vista 32 Business. Servers are still Windows 2003...but they don't need a transition just yet.

If your motherboard etc is designed for Vista - then give it a shot. Just image your old install and stash it. If it doesn't work out - you can always go back.

For me - I won't be looking back to XP now....

Cheers!

VP

Windows Seven is a little over a year away at best, even then its going to have issues untill the first SP, go with Vista64, its stable and heads and shoulders above XP...

VP,

Just curious about the recommendation for Business Edition. What are the advantages? The reason I'm asking is I'm considering upgrading my main video system to Vista and was looking at Ultimate which is only $20 more (though I think they are all overpriced). Thanks.

Windows Seven is a little over a year away at best, even then its going to have issues untill the first SP, go with Vista64, its stable and heads and shoulders above XP...
Excellent point. So often we tend to either say, wait till the next version or the next SP, or the next... Vista will meet your needs if properly configured, as already mentioned.

> As long as your drivers (ALL your drivers) are available in native 64 bit and you have the resources (modern mobo, graphics, CPU etc etc) then there is really no reason not to make the move.

That is really the bottom line. For example, there are no Vista 64 drivers for my M-Audio Firewire 410 or my Presonus FireStudio Project audio interfaces so Vista 64 is a non-starter for me. Do your homework and make sure your hardware is fully supported. If it's not, either buy new hardware or wait for drivers.

~jr

Johnny, not sure when the last time you checked on the M-Audio driver section
http://www.m-audio.com/index.php?do=support&tab=driver

But there are drivers for Vista 32 bit and they also have a Vista 64 bit Beta for your M-Audio Firewire 410

Check them out..

Ted

"That is really the bottom line. For example, there are no Vista 64 drivers for my M-Audio Firewire 410 or my Presonus FireStudio Project audio interfaces so Vista 64 is a non-starter for me. Do your homework and make sure your hardware is fully supported. If it's not, either buy new hardware or wait for drivers."


Yep. M-Audio is getting on my never buy list and I own a FW410, AP2496, AP192. So I'll stick with XP for a while. I don't want to go thru the hassles right now of tweaking a new OS.

Results:

Vista 64 in Classic theme mode: 1.4 GB Memory utilized
Xp Pro x64 in Classic Theme mode: 616MB memory utilized

Umm - almost 3 times the amount of memory used just sitting there - both OS tweaked

That's a large discrepancy in my book. Double checked my settings, indexing turned off, the whole she-bang - XP Pro 64 bit still performs better for me on my hardware compared to Vista 64 bit.

Thank God for Acronis backup images.

Cliff Etzel - Solo Video Journalist
bluprojekt | solo video journalism blog

Not now, not ever.

Wow Cliff, you sure did not give that much of a try did you...

CorTed - I've been doing computer tech work among other things since 1996 (including Tech support for Software companies like Symantec back in the day trouble shooting hardware/software for Winfax Pro when it was their product).

I ran a series of tests with Vista since I had the whole day to do this - when all was said and done - my personal conclusions showed that Vista - albeit, a pretty OS, is bloated. I researched all the info I could to tweak the OS to be as fast as possible - and I still found it to be sluggish - If an OS is idling and using 1.4 GB of memory without doing a thing - something is wrong in my opinion. On x64 XP Pro - I use on average 1.2GB memory rendering out my timeline with Vegas Pro 8 AND surfing the net at the same time.

Even though I didn't give it an exhaustive length of time, I do feel first impressions are indicative of the overall experience.

Cliff Etzel - Solo Video Journalist
bluprojekt | solo video journalism blog

I actually like Vista 64 better than XP Pro because it is more stable. I also can make it into a "XP PRO" operation by shuting off all the Goooy stuff. There are some nice things that I like better---better updates, turn automatic on/off for CD's and DVD's, 8 gig of ram, warnings saying you can't install this old crappy software unless you go to plan "B", improved task manager if I can ever figure it out, memory checking for leakage, computer speed check, hugely improved video driver auto update install, improved networking, and it seems to have a bit of "AI" in finding things. All the Sony 32 bit applications work slicker than camel snot on a doorknob in Vista 64. Well, to the limited extent that I have used them.
JJK

And now you know why I initially chose XP 64-bit Cliff... But when I found out that SCS doesn't support you once you tell them you're *aren't* using Vista as your 64-bit application, what other choice is there?

TB

Just curious about the recommendation for Business Edition. What are the advantages? The reason I'm asking is I'm considering upgrading my main video system to Vista and was looking at Ultimate which is only $20 more (though I think they are all overpriced).

While I cannot put my finger on every specific advantage - let me say that during several months of testing Vista 64 in it's various incarnations - for some reason Business seems to be the snappiest of the bunch - and the one that seems to have the least amount of overhead. And the least amount of "tweaking".

Ultimate was the slowest by far and fired up gobs of services etc that a DAW/AVEdit station just would not need.

I couldn't see MS doing anything special for Vista Business in terms of ensuring a "business" user gets a better experience or different code running - but "something" is definitely different in terms of performance and stability.

I also found Ultimate all over the place with glitches and blue screens vs Business. Some days were fine and others were not so good.

Also - please remember that as part of my MS agreement - I have access to all these different versions with no cost associated - take my "data" as a "report: from the field". You may want to chose Ultimate for other reasons besides recording/editing like Media Center type stuff or whatever.

I wanted the version with the least amount of extras - but with some enterprise features (Backup for one)

Cheers!

VP

Vista 64 in Classic theme mode: 1.4 GB Memory utilized

Cliff,

I know the numbers you are seeing make you think that x64 is the better option - but trust me - Vista's memory management is light years beyond that of x64.

Do not let the "memory utilized" imply or tell you anything about "performance". What you are really seeing is that Vista does not let memory "just sit around" like x64 does. Yes - it will load it all up (and it's a good thing) - and yes it will allocate it all to key processes (even better) but most importantly - it will educate itself over a couple of days on what you run the most and preload memory for those processes. (very very cool)

After a few days - your key apps will spring to life instantly as they are preloaded into memory and yes - Vista will instantly reallocate memory on the fly to accommodate anything else you care to load that is not used regularly.

So this is a case of "efficient" memory usage (actually using the memory you bought for some purpose) vs "inefficient" usage (only allocating when a program is loaded - while the rest of the RAM sits there doing nothing).

And I totally understand where you are coming from - I was exactly the same for the first few weeks - driving myself mental trying to justify this memory usage and flipping back and forth between OS installs - thinking that I was somehow ahead of the game by having 3.5gb of RAM in reserve - but in reserve for what?

Now that I am on Vista full time - and have 4GB-8GB on board - I stopped looking at Task Manager all the time and started just using my stuff. Vista 64's memory management is outstanding and every single app is running full tilt since they are all in RAM right away.

My machine has never run so well - even in the XP heyday.

Cheers!

VP

I believe MS calls it "Superfetch," the technology that manages memory more efficiently in Vista. It was an interesting read--and I was very interested to see that Vista hits the page file well before the available RAM is used up. It caches many things like VP just pointed out; but it still hits the PF.

I have 8GB of RAM in my machine, and there is still PF activity.

TB

VP - I thought maybe I was losing my mind on this. So it takes Vista few days to "learn" how my particular system works. That I didn't realize - Today is another slow day - guess I'll take the Vista challenge again - and give it some time to learn which apps I use most.

Thanks for your insights on this :)

Cliff Etzel - Solo Video Journalist
bluprojekt | solo video journalism blog

"I also found Ultimate all over the place with glitches and blue screens vs Business. Some days were fine and others were not so good."

Strange. I have not found that at all. Been running Vista Ultimate for more than a year now and have not had so much as one blue screen. The only glitch I have seen in ultimate is that some of the folders forget their view settings on occasion, and that's been documented quite a few times now... but overall it's far more stable than XP ever was.

I do agree that ultimate does come with some extra services running but it's not really an issue since they can be turned off by the user any time.