Is Vista x86 a Trojan Horse for Windows7 (Vienna) after-all?

OK so here's the question "what does it take to kill the 32bit platform and Microsoft's Windows Vista OS, not even a year out of its beta code"?

Answer: 4GB ram + GPU with on board memory

I take an alternative and purely speculative look at the Vista 32bit 4GB Memory limit. And why it may become the most compelling reason to upgrade to Windows 7 (Vienna) and an answer to why Microsoft allowed Vista to take 5 years of development to get to RTM

View: Is Vista x86 a Trojan Horse after-all?

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

The Gimp 2.3.19 Beta

Next Story

Mozilla Thunderbird 2.0.0.6

53 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Excellent? He doesn't even get his facts straight.

Perhaps he should have submitted it to Valleywag instead, they post just about anything.

Typical neocrap news, honestly if you take this story seriously... your stupid. Whats even more sad is the guy calls it a trojan horse.

They should add a drop down link on the "Main" link called "Inaccurate News"

Despite those of us who use it, x64 is still a niche market on the desktop. I was under the impression Vista was the last niche release, and any followups would be native x64 with backwards compatibility for 32bit software without having the shotgun scatter release schedule of 32bit, 64bit, office, home, media edition that we have with Vista AND xp.

Totally clueless article. Certainly shouldn't have been posted as news as it's neither news or technically accurate.

This article is complete and total trash considering most of the information provided is pure speculation. If I were the author I would be ashamed to of written it much less have it posted as news...

Everyone knows you need 2GB to run Vista smoothly

this is completely untrue! I'm running Vista x86 and x64 on two machines that only have 1GB of DDR 400 memory, and it runs perfectly fine. No stutters or hitches...

they require GB's of fast memory for their multi-threaded, multi-core processors.

Once again, another untrue statement. I also have a machine with an intel Quad core 6600 with 4 GB of RAM, but while building and installing it I limited myself to 1GB for safety purposes. Guess what, the system ran just as smooth and I almost forgot about the other 3GB of RAM sitting on the side.

An easy rule of thumb is about 1GB per core. 4 cores need 4GB

Are you nuts? what is your source / where are your performance graphs to support this?

"Why would MS release an OS that within 12months of its life cycle, won't be able to fully utilise all its onboard memory resource's

Quite simple really... not everyone is capable of running x64. Take my laptop for instance... without Vista x86, I'd be stuck on XP.

I say someone make a poll in the forums on whether Daniel Fleshbourne should be allowed to create front page articles anymore. Show the admins what the members think about this.

This was nothing more than a rant. A very pathetic rant to be honest. It also showed an abuse of his position to post a rant on something that he obviously doesn't understand and tried to hide it as an "editorial".

Anyway, that article "looks" right. But not everyone will be able to buy ... what? Quad cores CPUs and the near feature 12 to 16 cores? Along with 12 to 16GB of DDR/3? Not to mentionned his addiction to SLI and Crossfire. Come on, please slap him.

Pip'

Pippin666 said,
Anyway, that article "looks" right. But not everyone will be able to buy ... what? Quad cores CPUs and the near feature 12 to 16 cores? Along with 12 to 16GB of DDR/3? Not to mentionned his addiction to SLI and Crossfire. Come on, please slap him.

Pip'

I think the most obvious thing is this; the market is moving to laptops and I doubt we'll see machines with 16 cores, 12gb of memory and a super-duper graphics cards given the space constraint, power concerns and cooling that come with it.

Like I said previously, Windows Vista provides all the frameworks for Windows 7 to be build on; don't be surprised to see slight increase in memory usage as more manage code is used, but at the same time, I doubt it'll be hitting the heights the original author said.

I getting pretty damn sick of all these Anti-Vista FUD articles showing up on Neowin.

There is nothing ****ing wrong with Vista. Deal with it.

Most people that bitch about it haven't even used it.

As for the writer of this "news story", the guy is just a moron.

ahhell said,
I getting pretty damn sick of all these Anti-Vista FUD articles showing up on Neowin.

There is nothing ****ing wrong with Vista. Deal with it.

Most people that bitch about it haven't even used it.

As for the writer of this "news story", the guy is just a moron.

Tycpical crap. You are probably the one who never tryed it long therm.

Pip'

Did you even read what I wrote?

FYI I've been running Vista since January and am now running x64.
I have never seen a single BSOD or experienced system instability with Vista. Sure, there are minor annoyances with the OS but XP is no different.

As I said before, there is nothing wrong with Vista.

Pippin666 said,
Tycpical crap. You are probably the one who never tryed it long therm.

Pip'

Read it again because you have no clue what you're saying and the next time you want to try talking trash over the internet, remember how immature it makes you look in the first place. If you still go on to talk trash, learn how to spell.

Typical NOT Tycpical

Tried NOT tryed

Term NOT therm

I don't talk trash on the internet. I just point out the ignorance and immaturity of others.

Have A Nice Day

Worst. Article. Ever.
Not only does the author not have any clue about how computers work (The 4Gb limit is because of 32bit addressing, as many people have pointed out), but he pulls random "facts" out of nowhere, such as the one about where you should have 1Gb of RAM per CPU Core - where the hell did that come from? x86 CPU's don't steal ram from other CPU's, nor do they require their own chunk, they all use the same memory.

What's more, he claims that Microsoft's solution to this is to upgrade to the NEXT windows OS....uhhh...well, what about Vista x64? It's available RIGHT NOW to ALL vista owners at the measly cost of shipping, I'd say that's damn nice of Microsoft.

Seriously, I'm actually surprised that this kind of article can get on the front page, there are far better ways of bringing up issues to do with the uptake of x64 OS's.

Well maybe Vista is a bridge to bring people to Windows 7 technology wise... and to get some people using the WPF in there apps and AXML etc. etc. so that by the time Windows 7 arrives there may actualy be some developers using this these new technologies. I still find it odd that even Vista does not utilize it's own technologies or very very small amounts of it.

The writer of the article is speaking utter garbage and this has absolutely no business being on the front page of Neowin.. The 4gb limit is a result of 32-bit architecture and has nothing to do with any individual operating system.

Also as others have mentioned, this problem only affects a VERY small minority of computer users anyway. I mean anyone with a requirement for 4gb of ram cannot be considered mainstream and will likely have need for the 64bit version of Vista for other reasons.

Technically, you can wiggle out of that 4GB barrier, but you don't gain a real advantage from it. Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition 32-bit supports 32GB of memory.

wow whats up with all this Windows v7 speculation... its over 3 years off yet... we really didn't speculate about longhorn this much until we saw the alpha builds... we talked about longhorn and blackcomb, but not like this

OK so here's the question "what does it take to kill the 32bit platform and Microsoft's Windows Vista OS, not even a year out of its beta code"?

Answer: 4GB ram + GPU with on board memory

I take an alternative and purely speculative look at the Vista 32bit 4GB Memory limit. And why it may become the most compelling reason to upgrade to Windows 7 (Vienna) and an answer to why Microsoft allowed Vista to take 5 years of development to get to RTM

is any body else offended by this?
just read it again... is this reporting??
"the most compelling reason to upgrade to Windows 7 " ?? are you some sort of retard?? how the hell do you know that windows 7 is gunna be any better
how can you be compelled to upgrade to a non existent product
"cheap shoes the most compelling reason to upgrade to rocket boots" (does that make any less sense?)

NOB try doing some proper journalism this is a joke

Bleak:ponder:

The crux of the matter is Intel decided long ago to use the addresses between 3GB and 4GB as video memory addresses in 32-bit mode.
As a result most of a 3 to 4 GB RAM stick will not be addressable at all.

The newer Intel/AMD chipsets uses higher addresses for video memory in 64-bit mode
As a result 3 to 4 GB RAM stick will become addressable.

I don't see what this has to do with Vista or Vienna or any OS for that matter.

What a lame article, how did this make the front page???

"So clearly Vista x86 is already at its memory limits" - what % computers have 4gb plus?

"Quad SLI/Crossfire is around the block, 4 1GB cards" - how many people will have this?

"Vista not seeing more than 3.X GB is real today" - for who exactly?

"If the 4GB limit is so obvious why bother with making Vista x86 then?" - because most people don't need 4GB ram? because compatibility is important? because many pc's are not 64bit capable?

The only people who will struggle with the memory limits of x86 vista are a very small minority for whom the problem has already been answered in the shape of x64 vista.

x86 vista is for the vast majority who have a fairly standard PC which is not going to struggle with the x86 limits for many years.

"Vienna/ Windows 2010" "Its Gonna be 64bit" - Wrong, Microsoft now says it will be the final Windows version to ship in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions. PT's windows 7 faq


I was just thinking the same thing... your average end user won't have more than 2gb of memory. They can't possibly use more than that. Hell, pegging my desktop that has 2gb of memory is pretty difficult to do unless I'm running multiple VM sessions or something like that.

Anyone who needs the latest hardware is going to go with the OS that can support it. Right now that's the 64bit version of XP, Vista, etc. Sticking with x86 XP and Vista is foolish if you have more than 4gb of total memory but your average end user - MS's biggest audience - doesn't care, will never know and doesn't need all of that.

Besides, some people install Vista on 32bit hardware. That's why you need an x86 version.

The main problem here is lack of driver support from hardware manufacturers who are cranking out hardware faster than their dev teams can support it. This is creating a bottleneck in the industry, but that is a whole seperate issue.

microsoft needs to simply drop x86 support with windows 7.
i wish they had done so for vista. It's the better platform and who better than Microsoft to push people into using it :D

No one ever tell the writer about x64 Vista?

I mean hello living under a rock much.

Also I just want to note that all my equipment has x64 Vista drivers including my Bluetooth dongle, and TV Capture Card. It's seriously viable to be using x64 now. The only issue I have with it is the lack of stable video codecs that work under x64. And many peopla are already working on that right now!

Why did this even make front page? It written by someone who obviously doesn't know much about computer architecture or even realize that EVERY 32 bit OS has the same issue (windows, linux, unix, bsd, apple, get the point already). There is no point in ranting or asking for a workaround for something that can't happen and isn't anyone's fault.

CCRATA said,
Why did this even make front page? It written by someone who obviously doesn't know much about computer architecture or even realize that EVERY 32 bit OS has the same issue (windows, linux, unix, bsd, apple, get the point already). There is no point in ranting or asking for a workaround for something that can't happen and isn't anyone's fault.

While i agree this is the common limit for all 32bit OS you miss the point of the item -

The workaround/patch is Windows 7 and the willingness and ability of MS to get developers and manufacturers focused and serious on Vista 64bit driver support.

If MS came out today and said Vienna will be x64 only then everyone has 3 years to prepare in full knowledge that 32bit apps & drivers ant gonna kick it no more.

And while we wait for 64bit what of the computer world.

Performance doubles every 24months - so in 2 years BEFORE Vienna arrives we will have 8 cores & 8-16GB RAM & MultiTB HDD

Which leaves no option but to go Vista 64bit. What confidence does that give to us?

Would you bother to upgrade if you couldn't use it fully with your shiny top end hardware or software you brought a few weeks back - That's one reason a lot of people have jumped ship back to XP :S

And the big one. What should we consumers do in the mean time stick to 3GB ram and not upgrade for 3 years? or maybe go DDR3 but never go past the magic 4GB limit or risk the hit and miss nature of Vista x64 support

That just seems like a backwards step. MS need to think about what they are gonna do with Vista x64and if Vienna is going to sort out the current quagmire that is the 64bit world

Daniel said,
The workaround/patch is Windows 7 and the willingness and ability of MS to get developers and manufacturers focused and serious on Vista 64bit driver support.

no, the "workaround" for your imaginary problem is installing vista x64 ...

Daniel said,
Which leaves no option but to go Vista 64bit. What confidence does that give to us?

Why don't you try asking the thousands of happy users of Vista x64 who have successfully taken the time to do a 10 minute Google search/call their hardware manufacturers and find their drivers?

Yet another speculative post regarding Windows 7? Is it just me or is all the front page news regarding Windows 7 lately nothing but speculation?

Cryingcure said,
Well seeing how no work has been done on Windows 7 yet, anything said about it would be speculation.

It has been in development since XP was released. Google: "Blackcomb".

Vista is MS's way of raking in a few more billion $$$ in the meantime. Bill Gates thanks you all for your contributions to the Church of the BSOD.

So true. The guy ignores vista x64 and the fact that x64 SKUS are offered free (shipping only) in the retail boxes of vista. IF you bought a retail box its 32bit only and has a little card directing you to a website to 'trade up' from the 32bit sku you bought to the same sku in its 64bit flavor. There is no gimick getting people into windows 7. The author is looking for trouble were there is none.

Out of interest is it possible to call MS and get an OEM version of Vista upgraded to x64? I don't know if I'd have much use in doing it, but none the less my laptop did come with Xp and the upgrade redemption only allowed for the x86 version.

That said, since I wouldnt really be upgrading components in my laptop it's probably best for the time being to sit on the 32 bit version.

billyea said,
The writer completely ignores Vista x64.
And why would Vienna be any different? It's in x86 and x64 too.

Vienna is only going to be for x64 as far as I'm aware, hence the writer missing out x64 intentionally for this article.

XP x64 was never intended as a consumer OS it was business workstation all the way. Vista & Vienna will both be tageted at end users.

Hope that makes sense?

Sounds like Daniel brought vista x32bit and then went and brought 4gb of ram and a 8800gts/gtx. Sigh.. I wonder why x64bit came out for....

Lame article and has no real reasoning for the rant against windows7. The rant against win7 will be the fact it will lag behind multi core designs and designs like fusion. The other rant against win7 will be, that its the same old windows and thats partly due to no competition!.

Sad

Daniel said,
XP x64 was never intended as a consumer OS it was business workstation all the way. Vista & Vienna will both be tageted at end users.

Hope that makes sense?


Assuming you're talking to me, please mention in my post where I talk about XP x64.