64-bit is the way to go.

[-Jv-]

I'm running Vista 64-bit and I'm really glad I am after reading this article

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem :thumbup:

 

[Stevontoast]

wow, Millennium bug all over again -_-

 

[Bane]

64-bit XP woot woot!

 

[Cut Chem!st]

If we aren't all running a 64bit OS by 2038, i'll be sad.

 

[Passerby]

well it would of had no affect on me anyway cause my main operating system has been a 64bit one since 2004. and even windows which i olny use for games and nothing importaint had seven 64bit.

 

[FreakingHell]

I'm thinking all or most of us will be on 128 bit by then.

 

[Passerby]

I'm thinking all or most of us will be on 128 bit by then.

maybe not 64bit cpu's originally came around in 2004 but back then the only 64bit os's were Linux, and BSD and solaris based systems. and only now 5 years after has there been a big switch over to 64 bit for windows and mac and the transition still isn't complete if you compared how it is now when you a got a 64bit windows with mostly 32bit apps running on it to a Linux distro where absolutely everything is 64 bit and has been that way for years.

 

[Frank Booth]

64 bit is nice. Once they actually write applications that make good use of the extra bits it will be great. Also, hardware is pushing it with ddr3 ram and a lot more ram. But we need OSs that will make use of all the ram. 64 bits supports more ram than god, 17.2 billion gigabytes or 16 exabytes of RAM.

But, the next step in computing is quantum computing. At this time 128 bits seems to offer no tangible advantages, since we have not exhausted 64 completely.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit

The emergence of the 64-bit architecture effectively increases the memory ceiling to 264 addresses, equivalent to approximately 17.2 billion gigabytes, 16.8 million terabytes, or 16 exabytes of RAM. To put this in perspective, in the days when 4 MB of main memory was commonplace, the maximum memory ceiling of 232 addresses was about 1,000 times larger than typical memory configurations. Today, when over 2 GB of main memory is common, the ceiling of 264 addresses is about ten trillion times larger, i.e., ten billion times more headroom than the 232 case.

 

[Miiikey]

i also run 64 bit. is nice.

 

[Frank Booth]

I should add that Windows 7 64bit >> Vista 64bit.

So grab a key and download and install it. It is free until next October.

 

[HaZal2d0uS]

The only thing I hate about my 64bit Vista Ultimate is that my $150 Turtle Beach headset doesn't work anymore!
** It's for sale in the Trade/Sell subforum! **

But that's not even Microsoft's problem ... it's Turtle Beach.

 

[OrangeShot]

Uh oh. LOL TO WINDOWS 7!

 

[ColonelMcMeow]

I am currently running Windows XP 32-bit, but due to the operating system being 32-bit, in a couple weeks, I will be upgrading to Windows 7 RC 64-Bit, and purchasing it when it comes out.

WINDOWS 7!!!

 

[blizbiggy]

lol
by this time we will have 256bit operating systems and 32 bit will be a thing of the past (the far past)

 

[Passerby]

lol
by this time we will have 256bit operating systems and 32 bit will be a thing of the past (the far past)

not likely that we would ever hit 256bit during this century going to 64bit from 32 or something higher from 64 bit mainley helps memory addressing and with 64bit in concept allows 16.8 million TB of physical memory which there aren't even any current setups that use 1tb of physical memory yet. and they aren't even normal storage mediums that can carry 16.8tb so there is no point because there is not enough data to fill it.

 

[blizbiggy]

was a figure of speech lol. But you never know. Every 2 years technology has been doubing in speed and size, so eventually we will get to it.

 

[DragonD]

not likely that we would ever hit 256bit during this century going to 64bit from 32 or something higher from 64 bit mainley helps memory addressing and with 64bit in concept allows 16.8 million TB of physical memory which there aren't even any current setups that use 1tb of physical memory yet. and they aren't even normal storage mediums that can carry 16.8tb so there is no point because there is not enough data to fill it.

12 or 13 years ago, I had a 486DX4, had 100 meg of ram. It was THE machine. i was king of the block! Look how far we have come in the past 10 years...

where will we be in 50 years???

 

[Frank Booth]

There will not bits anymore. There will be qubits. Quantum computers are the future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer

I give you a qubit.

Note that although recording a classical state of n bits, a 2n-dimensional probability distribution, requires an exponential number of real numbers, practically we can always think of the system as being exactly one of the n-bit strings?we just don't know which one. Quantum mechanically, this is not the case, and all 2n complex coefficients need to be kept track of to see how the quantum system evolves. For example, a 300-qubit quantum computer has a state described by 2^300 (approximately 10^90) complex numbers, more than the number of atoms in the observable universe.

12 or 13 years ago, I had a 486DX4, had 100 meg of ram. It was THE machine. i was king of the block! Look how far we have come in the past 10 years...

where will we be in 50 years???

 

[blizbiggy]

except... its very unstable and unreliable that I don't see it happening. Although the idea of storing an "infinite" number in 1 qubit sounds awesome, it sounds like BS to me almost.

I found this article:
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Cont...n-Quantum-Computers-Now-Possible-116162.shtml

“If a working quantum computer is ever to be built, these problems need to be addressed, and we think we've made a good case for how to do it,” he adds. In their innovation, the NIST team created a qubit made of two atoms, in which one was the “memory” and the other the instrument for “processing.” What is truly revolutionary is that the qubit in itself is not disrupted by magnetic fields, but that the flow of information between the atoms is susceptible to some of those that are used by the scientists. And the most amazing thing is that the fields can now be created locally, without harming other qubits.

Basically the qubit has to be in TOTAL isolation away from any magnetic interference... and in this day and age, GOOD LUCK! Lol

 

[DragonD]

Basically the qubit has to be in TOTAL isolation away from any magnetic interference... and in this day and age, GOOD LUCK! Lol

50 years ago...people probably said that same thing about going to the moon.