New Laptop or Portable PC

[Guest Yachtsman1]

My back up laptop, is showing its age, (2004), for the last 12 months I have been looking at options between a replacement laptop or a portable desktop. I have also been waiting for W7 & PTE to be stabalised The pending demise of the spare laptop has brought the buying decision forward. I would be grateful to receive any advise on members experiences replacing redundant equipment, I have an idea of specification, and a budget of around £750, excluding monitor if I go portable PC.

Regards Eric

Yachtsman1

[Ken Cox]

ERIC

the future:)

ken

If your thinking of buying a new computer.. Get a load of this!

Below is the link to a 1 min-31 sec

video of a new laptop computer

designed in Israel. Please turn on your

speakers and prepare to be amazed!

http://manneli.com/movies/Laptop.html

[jfa]

Ken

Had a look at the video and all I can say is---

"I want one and I want it now!!!!"

Wow very very nice!

[Ken Cox]

the MAC boys will be just droooolin'

ken

[Guest Yachtsman1]

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMH

Regards Eric

Yachtsman1

[Bruss444]

Hello Ken, I am now after many years one of those Mac Boys! Really enjoying my new MacPro and MacBook Pro BUT that is some new laptop. WOW Wishing you well! Bill

[Guest Yachtsman1]

I am finalising the spec for my new cube PC, can anyone please explain in easily understandable terms the difference between 32bit & 64bit in context with Windows 7 & the effect on PTE of one against the other?

Regards Eric

Yachtsman1

[fh1805]

Eric,

32-bit operating systems use 32 bits (binary digits - zeros or ones) to address the RAM and so can address 2³²-1 bytes of RAM. 64-bit operating systems use 64 bits to do that job and so can access 2⁶⁴-1 bytes of RAM. Obviously this latter is a massively bigger number. As I understand it, the entire hardware needs to be built differently, using different components, in order fully to exploit the benefits of the 64-bit operating system. Which also leads me to wonder whether some of the problems encountered by early users of Windows7 64-bit might be happening because their hardware is not fully 64-bit capable.

You asked for layman terms: a 64-bit machine is wanted when the application needs to hold a vast amount of data in memory and process it all (e.g. weather forecasting, seismological analysis for oil and mineral exploration). Speaking purely personally I cannot envisage any application I might want to run ever needing 64-bit architecture.

I'll be interested to hear the thoughts of some of our real technical gurus (e.g. Conflow, nobeefstu, etc) on this subject.

regards,

Peter

[Guest Yachtsman1]

Thanks Peter.

I suppose I should have had a look on MS site before asking on here, so I have just spent a few minutes looking at their FAQ's on Windows 7 and found the following, which leads be to wonder if some of my hardware won't operate if I upgrade to 64bit.

Regards Eric

Yachtsman1

From the MS site.

To install a 64-bit version of Windows 7, you need a CPU that's capable of running a 64-bit version of Windows. The benefits of using a 64-bit operating system are most apparent when you have a large amount of random access memory (RAM) installed on your computer, typically 4 GB of RAM or more. In such cases, because a 64-bit operating system can handle large amounts of memory more efficiently than a 32-bit operating system, a 64-bit system can be more responsive when running several programs at the same time and switching between them frequently. For more information, see Installing and reinstalling Windows 7‍.

Yes. All hardware devices need 64-bit drivers to work on a 64-bit version of Windows. Drivers designed for 32-bit versions of Windows don't work on computers running 64-bit versions of Windows.

To learn how to check for drivers, see Update a driver for hardware that isn't working properly or go to the device manufacturer's website. You can also get information about drivers by going to the Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor webpage.

To find programs and devices that work with Windows 7, look for products that display the "Compatible with Windows 7" logo. They've been tested to be compatible with both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions of Windows 7.

You can also go online to the Windows 7 Compatibility Center and check to see whether the program or device is compatible with the 64-bit version of Windows 7. Hardware and software manufacturers continue to update this information, so check back often.

Most programs designed for the 32-bit version of Windows will work on the 64-bit version of Windows. Notable exceptions are many antivirus programs.

Device drivers designed for the 32-bit version of Windows don't work on computers running a 64-bit version of Windows. If you're trying to install a printer or other device that only has 32-bit drivers available, it won't work correctly on a 64-bit version of Windows. To learn how to check for drivers, see Update a driver for hardware that isn't working properly or go to the device manufacturer's website. You can also get information about drivers by going to the Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor webpage.

You can use the Upgrade option during Windows 7 installation, which preserves your files, settings, and programs, only if you're currently running a 32-bit version of Windows Vista and you want to upgrade to the 32-bit version of Windows 7. Similarly, if you are running a 64-bit version of Windows Vista, you can only perform an upgrade to a 64-bit version of Windows 7. For more information, go to Upgrading to Windows 7: frequently asked questions on the Windows website.

If you want to move from a 32-bit version of Windows to a 64-bit version of Windows 7 or vice versa, you'll need to back up your files and choose the Custom option during Windows 7 installation. Then, you'll need to restore your files and reinstall your programs. For more information about performing a custom installation, see Installing and reinstalling Windows 7‍.

[Ken Cox]

see

http://windowssecrets.com/paid/100128/

The long wait for 64-bit PC software continues

ken

[jfa]

,,,,,,,,,a 64-bit machine is wanted when the application needs to hold a vast amount of data in memory........Speaking purely personally I cannot envisage any application I might want to run ever needing 64-bit architecture.

Peter

I would have thought the answer was staring us in the face -- Photoshop!

Some of the rumours about the forthcoming CS5, due out in April-May, are about a fully fledged 64bit version. Now that would be something as the biggest source of problems with Photoshop is the amount of memory available for it to use.

Several versions of Windows 7, (professional and Premium), have a "XP mode" which I believe will run programs that will not run under windows 7 32 or 64bit.

[nobeefstu]

Peter,

Actually, Ive never read much or studied enough about 64bit to offer any new insight or information on the subject.

Im somewhat like you in the respect where converting to 64bit does little to benefit my current needs and uses. I dont do high volume image editing or video processing on a regular basis to warrant the change anytime soon. I usually upgrade system, hardware, and software as my needs require ... 64bit processing may benefit some users current needs but its not a top priority for me.

[fh1805]

I would have thought the answer was staring us in the face -- Photoshop!

John,

There's no way I would spend nearly £1000 for Photoshop CS when I have all the features that I need in Photoshop Elements at less than a tenth of that price. My desktop PC is running adequately fast enough for me. There is sufficient memory (2GB) for the file sizes that I process using Elements (6MB JPEG images from my Nikon D70). And, as I know well from previous experience, if I want to give the PC a "go faster" stripe , the cheapest and most effective way is to add more memory.

So, as I said, I can see no need for 64-bit architecture in what I do or envisage doing. I'll face up to the future when I have to. A thing I learned many, many years ago is that, in the world of computers, there is no such thing as "future-proofing". Anything bought before you need it will turn out to be not what you need when you do get to the point of actually needing it. And that just equals "wasted spend".

regards,

Peter

[Guest Yachtsman1]

One point about Peter's reply. Nothing lasts forever, in my case I've owned or had charge of 7 laptops in the last 10 years and they do not last forever, 2 years is good, 3 years is miraculous, mine is beyond miraculous. So the change is being forced on me. I fought shy of Vista & don't regret it, XP has served me well, but is getting harder to obtain, particularly in a laptop. Which is why I thought I would go for a small form desktop, which would be up-rateable to a certain extent. I have been planning the move since last June & am still uncertain how to proceed particulary from what I have learned from this thread & the forum in general. The fact that I could have trouble with my current peripheral hardware and software has made me put the brakes on again, however I can't delay much longer.

Regards Eric

Yachtsman1

[fh1805]

...however I can't delay much longer.

Eric,

There comes a point in time when you just have to "bite on the bullet". Perhaps in your budgetting for this new PC you should include a contingency for unexpected spend on replacement peripheral devices and/or replacement software products. I've no idea how much to suggest, perhaps 25-50% (depending upon your best estimate of which items might be troublesome and what it might cost to replace those).

regards,

Peter

[goddi]

I am finalising the spec for my new cube PC, can anyone please explain in easily understandable terms the difference between 32bit & 64bit in context with Windows 7 & the effect on PTE of one against the other?

Regards Eric

Yachtsman1

====================

Yachtsman1...

While looking around for info on the 64 bit OS, I came across this information. Probably stuff you have already learned but it seems to be a nice brief on the difference. I stuck with Win7 32bit in my new PC. One thing that a tech guy told me is that saving data with a 64bit OS will require a large hard drive because it is saving the data in larger 'chunks', therefore, more wasted space. I have yet to find any discussion about this so I am wonder if this is really true.

http://lifehacker.com/5431284/the-lifehacker-guide-to-64+bit-vs-32+bit-operating-systems

Gary

[Guest Yachtsman1]

Thanks for the link Gary, the scales are gradually lifting from my eyes, one interesting point was the statement " Windows 7 or Vista users will be able to check the System type in the list, while the few XP users with 64-bit will see it on the dialog." I didn't realise XP was available in 64bit? Apparantly the various versions of Windows are linited to the amount of Ram they can use due to licensing, XP 32bit 4GB, W7 Home 16GB, Professional & Ultimate 192GB, the mind boggles. My first PC back in 19 hundred & frozen to death only had 512MB hard drive, if my memory serves me correctly, let alone Ram. Any 64bit XP users out there?

Regards Eric

Yachtsman1

[Guest Yachtsman1]

Hi All

Just had another look ay the MS W7 site again, checked my Canon & Nikon hardware/ software and the result came back OK 32bit. My Elements 6 said no get E8, & my separate HD didn't get a comparison. For anyone who wants to check their h/ware/s/ware compatability the link is http://www.microsoft.com/windows/compatibility/windows-7/en-us/Search.aspx?type=Software&s=adobe%20elements%206

Just type your own info in. I would imagine my MS Office 1998 is long dead but there are now so many freebies such as OOOrg that wouldn't be a hardship. It would be interesting to hear what Igor has to say on 64bit.

Regards Eric

Yachtsman1

[goddi]

Hi All

Just had another look ay the MS W7 site again, checked my Canon & Nikon hardware/ software and the result came back OK 32bit. My Elements 6 said no get E8, & my separate HD didn't get a comparison. ...

Regards Eric

Yachtsman1

======================

Yachtsman1...

I just got the following info from a computer club's Listserv. More info to digest. This is one of the reasons I did not go with 64bit now. I can always do it in the future.

Gary

--

"I don't know if you subscribe to Windows Secrets, but there's an article in

the most recent (paid) edition by Michael Lasky, which you should read, but

in part, here's what he said:"

"General-purpose PCs using 64-bit processors emerged in 2003. To this day,

however, 64-bit versions of such major applications as MS Office, Adobe

Photoshop, Web browsers, and security suites have been vaporware. Also,

finding 64-bit drivers for your PC's peripherals has been like playing the

digital equivalent of "Where's Waldo?" — and in many cases, Waldo is nowhere

to be found."

Lasky said that the biggest reason for 64 bitness is to use large amounts of

RAM. If your datasets aren't large (over 2GB), then it really doesn't make

much sense. I think we'd all be pressed to create word docs that are in

that size range. Not the same, perhaps for databases, but I think that

you'd be pressed pretty hard to even create spreadsheets that are that

big--but WTF do I know? ;-))

At the end of his article, Lasky basically says that 64 bit computing is not

yet ready for prime time, and until such time that there are the software

and drivers available, it won't be."

[JRR]

I am not a techie in any of this, but just a question.

Win 7 64 bit allows for 32 bit software and drivers, (there two separate PROGRAM FILES folders one for 32bit and one for 64bit) so even if you do get the 64 bit version is there an issue running 32 bit software etc

I might easily be missing something here

[goddi]

I am not a techie in any of this, but just a question.

Win 7 64 bit allows for 32 bit software and drivers, (there two separate PROGRAM FILES folders one for 32bit and one for 64bit) so even if you do get the 64 bit version is there an issue running 32 bit software etc

I might easily be missing something here

=============

JRR,

That is interesting because I had never heard about the two different folders. I just saw a response from the same Listserv I had posted above. He backs up your statment. But the sticky part seems to be the availability of drivers for peripherals.

Gary

---

"The caution I raised was with drivers. If you're going to use a peripheral

that doesn't provide an updated 64-bit driver you may run into problems. On

the other hand, HP (and presumably other vendors) are making 64-bit drivers

available for most of their more recent printers, officejets, etc. I had no

problems finding a 64-bit driver for an HP all-in-one printer that was a

couple of years old.

All 32-bit (x86) based software runs flawlessly under the 64-bit OS.

Actually, on 64-bit systems windows creates two Program Files folders, one

named "Program Files" where all 64-bit software installs and another named

"Program Files (x86)" where all 32-bit software gets installed. As far as

the user is concerned, whether he's running a 32 or 64 bit software is

indistinguishable.

You're correct that the only reason to switch to a 64-bit system is to

address larger chunks of RAM. The x86 systems can only address barely above

3 GB of RAM. But more and more systems come with 4 GB of RAM today and the

trend will continue upwards. A lot of systems sold by OEMs and retailers

already come with Win7 64-bit. These systems are basically advertised as

Windows 7; in other words, the consumers are unaware that they're buying a

64-bit system. You'll only see this trend multiply."

[jfa]

Peter

...there is no such thing as "future-proofing".

Sorry but I have to disagree with you on "future-proofing". Just this week I have upgraded my desktop system, this is the third PC I have owned over 23 years. The first running Windows 3.1 was replaced in 2001 running XP Pro and it has now been replaced with a high-end system running Windows 7 64bit which I expect to get at least 8-10 good working years from.

I have had 2 laptops as well since 1997 and will continue to run XP on my current one.

It does take a lot of research and a good understanding of your current and expected computing needs but it can be done if one resists the need to have the latest & greatest just for the sake of it.

An old saying in the industry "Your computer still dose well what it did the day you purchased it no matter how old it is, so what is new that you need to do?" Baring hardware failure of course.

At the moment the Australian $ is very high and a high-end system is remarkably cheap here this was part of what made me move now I had intended to upgrade later this year.

Can I ask, (this is not meant to be a criticism but a genuine question) given your philosophy why you went from XP to Vista?

Everyone

Win 7 64 bit allows for 32 bit software and drivers, (there two separate PROGRAM FILES folders one for 32bit and one for 64bit) so even if you do get the 64 bit version is there an issue running 32 bit software etc

I can verify from my system that there are 2 program folders that work this way, so far all software I have moved to my new system works fine, (only had 2 days testing though).

Had to look around for drivers but so far my lazar printer, desk-top scanner and 2 external hard drives work fine.

Also if you buy your own OS you get both the 32bit and 64bit version of win7 in the box as opposed to getting it preloaded on your new PC where you only get the disk of the loaded OS, 32bit or 64bit version. This means you can start with the 32bit OS and upgrade to 64bit when you feel confident.

Eric

My version of Office is 8 years old and loaded and ran fine on my 64bit OS!

Garry

...saving data with a 64bit OS will require a large hard drive because it is saving the data in larger 'chunks', therefore, more wasted space. I have yet to find any discussion about this so I am wonder if this is really true.

True.

My new system has 2 1Tb internal hard drives which currently sell for A$99 each the cost of storage is very very small and if you practise good housekeeping not a problem.

[fh1805]

Can I ask, (this is not meant to be a criticism but a genuine question) given your philosophy why you went from XP to Vista?

John,

I switched to Vista because that was the only operating system being offered by my nearest PC retailer on new laptops. I needed a new laptop because my old one had proven incapable of running PTE v5 animations smoothly due to its low spec of graphics. I wanted to be able to include PTE v5 animations into my sequences. Had I, at the time, been able to obtain via my local retailer a suitably spec'd laptop that came with XP on it, I would probably still be running XP.

I agree with you on another point that you make. Like you, I have never been one to acquire the latest technology simply because it is the latest technology. My desktop PC is three years old, my laptop is 4 years old. My old laptop is six years old. My Nikon D70 is five years old and was second-hand when I got it. My Dell projector is five years old and was second hand when I got it. My TV is four years old and is CRT technology. My mobile phone is coming up 10 years old. I don't own an MP3 player, iPod, or any other "hand-held" gizmo. I don't have a Facebook, YouTube or Twitter account. I don't have a website.

More than once on this forum I have said: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". I stand by that. As I write this, the fuse covering all my lights in the house IS broke. That I will have to get fixed - tomorrow.

regards,

Peter

[jfa]

Peter

A good reason to change to Vista.

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

But when it is broke "future proofing" is a good practical idea.

Yes we have similar attitudes to technology, my camera is 6 years old and still gives good results, CRT 16:9 TV is 8 years old and when it breaks I will get a 16:9 LED big one, but not until then. Stereo sound system 16 years old and still sounds great. Car is 20 years old and still going well. No digital projector, don't need one. Mobile phone 3 years old they turned off the old network so was forced to get a new one. Like you I don't own an MP3 player, iPod, or any other "hand-held" gizmo. I don't have a Facebook, YouTube or Twitter account. I don't have a website either.

We are the sort of people the markets hate.

There's no way I would spend nearly £1000 for Photoshop CS

Costs nothing like that here if you shop around it is about A$870, I think about £350. Upgrades are about half that. Still dear but if you keep a version for many years and don't chase the latest it is worth it.

Good luck with the fuse, remember safety first we would all miss you here.

[Ken Cox]

Peter

A good reason to change to Vista.

But when it is broke "future proofing" is a good practical idea.

Yes we have similar attitudes to technology, my camera is 6 years old and still gives good results, CRT 16:9 TV is 8 years old and when it breaks I will get a 16:9 LED big one, but not until then. Stereo sound system 16 years old and still sounds great. Car is 20 years old and still going well. No digital projector, don't need one. Mobile phone 3 years old they turned off the old network so was forced to get a new one. Like you I don't own an MP3 player, iPod, or any other "hand-held" gizmo. I don't have a Facebook, YouTube or Twitter account. I don't have a website either.

We are the sort of people the markets hate.

Costs nothing like that here if you shop around it is about A$870, I think about £350. Upgrades are about half that. Still dear but if you keep a version for many years and don't chase the latest it is worth it.

Good luck with the fuse, remember safety first we would all miss you here.

Gloves and safety glasses are the rules

ken