Windows 8 won't support 32bit

[Coco]

aparantly Windows 8 won't be sold in 32bit version's, only 64bit but what's gonna happen to people when windows 8 comes out and no 32bit OS sold?
64bit isn't backward compatible with 32bit processors is it.

I don't think many people will have a 32bit computer as AMD and Intel have stopped making 32 bit proceesors but there will be some that will have kept a 32bit computer till then.

I woudn't think windows 8 would run on any thing older than pentium 4 and 1GB RAM
but there's Atom and pentium 4 32bit processors.

That's what microsoft said for windows 7 that it would only come in 64bit, but it came in both 32bit and 64bit.So would they do it for windows 8. Is this to ("Weed out 32bit processors") for 128 bit ones. and it's silly to do 128 bit for windows 8 and 9 as there is no 128bit processors and 128 compatible hardware.:burnout:

 

[davehc]

My own opinion is that by then (4years+?) anyone who is still using 32Bit computing, should seriously consider if they need a new OS. (Or a new computer)

 

[Coco]

Microsoft is already working on windows 8 which is going to be released at the end of 2012. So I think some 32 bit michenes will be still around.

But how long has 32bit been around? Too long and it's time to look at 64bit and 128 bit in the next 2-5 years. But not right now.

So if it's going to be 64bit only well the only way to get around it is to buy a new computer.

 

[Veedaz]

I can only say for the UK but Computer Stores are full of new PCs with Windows 7 32 and 64-bit loaded so 32-bit will be around for some time yet .... there are people still running Windows 95 etc.

 

[Coco]

Here's the Windows market share

Windows XP: 63%
Windows Vista: 25%
Windows 7: 6 %
Others Windows: 10%

 

[davehc]

Staisitics such as those can be misleading. The biggest flaw is, of course, how long XP has actually been on the sales shelves. Also, how many XP users have converted to Vista/7 etc. A better indication of the future of Windows 7 might be in a consumer report such as this
"
"Windows 7 software unit sales in the U.S. were 234 percent higher than Vista’s first few days of sales," NPD reported earlier this month. "Revenue growth wasn’t as strong though. A combination of early discounts on pre-sales and a lack of promotional activity for the Ultimate version resulted in dollar sales that were 82 percent higher than Vista."
But comparisons to Vista aren't a great indicator of Window 7's overall success. Vista sold 59 percent fewer copies than Windows XP, when comparing each OS's first week, according to NPD.
So, it seems the big story here is that Windows 7 outsold XP by two times, over the same period.."

 

[catilley1092]

Here's the Windows market share

Windows XP: 63%
Windows Vista: 25%
Windows 7: 6 %
Others Windows: 10%

Sure, XP still holds the lead, but for how long? A lot of these systems are old, and computers are cheaper than ever. I said it before, I'll say it again: Within two years, mabye 18 months, XP will be like the final play of an unmeaningful football game. They will take a knee. It was just in November that XP had a 69% share of the market, and within two months have fallen 6%. They will have no other choice but to take a knee. By the time it's no longer supported, XP will have lived 13 long years, longer than any OS that Microsoft has produced. For eight years, I enjoyed XP Pro. But technology doesn't stand still. Windows 7 just looked too good not to try it out, and I haven't regretted it. I never felt the same towards XP Pro since. I picked Win 2K over XP as a dual boot option on a 8 year old laptop. But I do have one final option for XP. Those poor countries where Linux thrives, Microsoft could show some compassion (which would in turn place them in an even better situation) and freely distribute XP to these nations. This would indeed crush the very backbone of Linux. And Microsoft would be the bull of the woods forever!

 

[davehc]

What a splendid suggestion!

It would certainly promoite the world's, at present, jaundiced view of Microsoft. However, I think from the practical application, that those less fortunate people in slowly developing countries, who have a use for computers, have , in this time, already acquired all the software, free, they need from other sources. But, nevertheless, a really excellent promotion idea for Microsoft to consider. At worst, it would allow all users to feel free with totally legal software.

 

[Coco]

Well I had XP Home Edition up untill christmas and it was great.but when Vista came out I didn't bother going there and held on but when windows 7 came out. Something just cought me and I decided to try it.

So I got windows 7 Pro 64 bit becuase I recently bought a new computer (see my computer specs for all details) in march 2009 because my old one died and have had nothing but a great time with windows 7 no problems with the progarm. But small memory problem with my Mobo. but I do miss some parts of XP but overal Windows 7 is the same if not a bit better.

 

[Coco]

What's the big deal with 32 bit some people out there don't want to spend big by buying 64 bit processors so why have they stopped making and selling 32 bit processors.

 

[catilley1092]

32 bit processors are going the way of the dinosaurs, and fast. The main reason? To get software developers off of the 32 bit kick and get the lead out of their asses to provide support for our 64 bit systems. Sure, we can run them, but there's so many people who have bought these systems for their jobs and school. They desperately need apps and support for their investment. As far as me, I'm getting by fine. But at the same time, I feel for and appreciate the needs of others. 64 bit systems are being crammed down our throats without the necessities for all people to do their work with. That's a concern to me. 128 bit should not even be discussed until 64 bit has been fine tuned and all popular (or needed) apps are in place and running.

 

[Coco]

But why have processors been taking so long to change 32 bit has been around for 10-15 years and 64 bit have been around 5 or 6 years so far. Because Ram went from 32MB to 2 GB in a single module in the same time and hardrives from 4GB to 2 TB in the same time of about 17-20 years. so its time for some changes in processors. also get a move on.

 

[catilley1092]

True, processors should be included in the move on. But what good are they when there's not enough adequate software to run on it. They both are important. It's the big wigs at the top who are holding everyone back. I'm not against 128 bit processors in any way, shape or form. But get the full software suite for 64 bit before we move forward with anything more. In order to do that, 32 bit development must come to an end, and soon. Simply support what's out there and scrap new plans for 32 bit programs. I see where you're coming from, but you must see where all of these new 64 bit computer owners are coming from as well. Just look at all of the posts where people want to step down to a 32 bit OS, just for their computer to function. Why does it need to be that way? I'm no computer expert, I do a few installs for people to help with my high medical expenses and have done a few RAM upgrades (Dell only). Being that you work in a computer shop, you know that's easy money. But I do agree with you, under the conditions that I've stated. Get 64 bit right, then move on.

 

[Thrax]

Windows 8 won't be 128-bit. That was a hoax.

However, anyone who doesn't have a 64-bit CPU by 2013--Windows 8's expected release date--needs to kick their antique to the curb. A 64-bit Windows operating environment has been perfectly viable since the introduction of XP 64 in 2005. Believe me, I ran XP 64 from launch all the way to Win7 x64 beta 7000, and I've never once encountered a driver issue or software problem.

By the time Windows 8 hits the streets, it will have been nearly a decade since Microsoft began pushing 64-bit hard. Windows 7 retail copies shipping with x64 media should be sign enough.

If you have problems with x64, you're running old or obscure hardware, or you're doing something wrong. It's pretty much that simple.

 

[Coco]

I've heard that 89 % I of people know have had trouble with Windows windows 7 64bit and I haven't why would that be?

Is it 64bit not compatibe with hardware and 32bit is?

 

[draceena]

For the same reason that they stopped selling Commidore 64's, the technology moves onward and the companies want to support backward compatibility only so far and beyond a point it becomes useless/pointless

 

[Nibiru2012]

Just look at all of the posts where people want to step down to a 32 bit OS, just for their computer to function

This is because I feel that most folks are doing upgrade installs instead of clean installs. Also they're probably not getting the latest drivers.
I have had NO ISSUES with Windows 7 x64 at all.

If you have problems with x64, you're running old or obscure hardware, or you're doing something wrong. It's pretty much that simple.

Basically what Thrax says hits the nail on the head. It is amazing how many "Windows 7 Freeze" issues there are on this forum website. It convinces me that the vast majority of those with issues on Windows 7 really don't have any idea of what they're doing.

They just buy the discs and then expect miracles to occur upon install. You HAVE to do the homework and research and make sure all hardware is 64 bit compatible.
It is not like buying a new car and turning the ignition key on, a little more complicated than that. Why do you think that there are so many computer repair shops?

 

[xplicit503]

I think most processors past the 2005 mark are 64 bit able. if not I stand corrected. But you don't fix what works! Until it breaks that is, or proves to be a dominate victor in a blood cage match.

 

[Veedaz]

This is because I feel that most folks are doing upgrade installs instead of clean installs. Also they're probably not getting the latest drivers.
I have had NO ISSUES with Windows 7 x64 at all.

Basically what Thrax says hits the nail on the head. It is amazing how many "Windows 7 Freeze" issues there are on this forum website. It convinces me that the vast majority of those with issues on Windows 7 really don't have any idea of what they're doing.

They just buy the discs and then expect miracles to occur upon install. You HAVE to do the homework and research and make sure all hardware is 64 bit compatible.
It is not like buying a new car and turning the ignition key on, a little more complicated than that. Why do you think that there are so many computer repair shops?

Yep its good for my new business

 

[Core]

I'm sure once 8 comes out there will be people on 32-bit machines complaining about not being able to run it. Much like there were people whose PCs could barely handle XP that were up in arms because Vista brought their machines on their knees. I think we are, and justifiably so, past the point where each new Windows version should run on antiquated hardware.

Sure, software houses and hardware manufacturers have been slow to adopt x64. That's hardly unusual when it comes to new technology; a year after Vista's release, Creative still didn't have drivers for my Audigy 2.

Vista wasn't fantastic, and yes, it was quite bloated... But as far as I am concerned, it was vastly superior to XP in terms of features, security, and ease of use. It's just that running new software oftentimes means you need new hardware, too.

I would much rather see a software house produce an operating system that takes advantage of the capabilities of new technology, rather than trying to dumb down their product by catering to users who desperately want to believe that XP is all that and a bag of chips.