|
Posted by David A. Lessnau on April 19, 2007, 9:35 am
Please log in for more thread options
RC,
Good point about the versions. I forgot to include that information in my
other messages. For the record, I'm running on an x86 architecture using
Vista Ultimate (32-bit) and Quicken 2005 Premier.
> Hi, John.
>
> Margaret and David have given you some excellent answers. Maybe I can add
> a
> little and fill in a couple of gaps.
>
> First, I've used only Vista Ultimate x64 since Vista "went Gold" about
> November 1, except for a few excursions into Vista Ultimate x86 (the
> 32-bit
> version) when trying to troubleshoot some problems (like my infamous
> problem
> of trying to install R3 back in January). Since I have only one computer,
> I
> don't get a chance to experiment much with different varieties of Vista -
> or
> of Quicken: I've used only the Basic version of Quicken 2007.
|
|
Posted by Margaret on April 19, 2007, 11:14 am
Please log in for more thread options
Thx RC, particularly re your x64 comments. As I do have x64 hardware,
I'd like to make sure all my peripherals and apps are compatible with
the x64 version before I move to it. Are you using Vista x64 as your
main Windows installation?
Regards,
Margaret
R. C. White wrote:
> First, I've used only Vista Ultimate x64 since Vista "went Gold" about
> November 1, except for a few excursions into Vista Ultimate x86 (the 32-bit
> version) when trying to troubleshoot some problems (like my infamous
> problem
> of trying to install R3 back in January). Since I have only one
> computer, I
> don't get a chance to experiment much with different varieties of Vista
> - or
> of Quicken: I've used only the Basic version of Quicken 2007. Also, since
> there's just me here, I haven't had to learn much about User accounts,
> permissions, networking, and several other topics. But Vista's UAC has
> forced me to learn more about permissions than I ever had to know before.
>
> To me, Vista feels very much like WinXP Pro. Some differences between x86
> and x64 are more significant than those between WinXP and Vista. Rather
> than confuse the "Vista" issue, I'll try to put some thoughts about
> 64-bit into a second Reply to your message.
|
|
Posted by R. C. White on April 19, 2007, 4:41 pm
Please log in for more thread options Hi, Margaret.
See my latest tome. It goes on and on about problems of mixing x64 and x86.
Yes, I'm using Vista Ultimate x64 as my main operating system and seldom
boot to anything else since Vista "went Gold". Since focusing on x64, I've
had no significant headaches.
A year ago, in the midst of the Vista beta, there were lots of complaints
about missing hardware drivers and incompatible software. By last fall,
though, most of those complaints had disappeared. The RTM version of Vista
x64 has not given me any problems with either hardware or software (except
for the problem I reported here with updating Quicken to R3, but even that
has now been solved) since I reinstalled it on my upgraded motherboard in
December.
Of course, a couple of the earlier problems were solved the drastic way. I
got tired of waiting for Creative to produce drivers for my old Sound
Blaster, so I retired that and used the Realtek audio on my EPoX
motherboard. I'm not a gamer or audiophile, so 6-channel sound (on my 2.1
minimal speakers) is fine for me. The Realtek drivers are not on the Vista
DVD, so there was no sound immediately after Vista Setup finished. But on
my first visit to Windows Update, the drivers were automatically downloaded
and installed; I had sound within 5 minutes of finishing the Vista install.
My All-In-Wonder 9600 video card had native drivers; so does my newer ATI
Radeon X1600 Pro, a PCI-express card. The TV tuner function on the AIW
never worked with either Vista or with WinXP x64 - and AMD hasn't promised
that they ever will. I've added a couple of non-ATI tuners; neither
Hauppauge nor Pinnacle software works with Vista x64 yet, but I can see TV
on several channels (on my antenna) by using the Media Center built into
Vista Ultimate
Adobe Photoshop Elements 4.0 did not work with Vista until the final betas.
Nero didn't work until just about RTM, and later versions work better; get
at least version 7 Enhanced. Quicken and TurboTax gave me no trouble(except
for that R3).
As you can see, the success of peripherals and apps with Vista is
hit-or-miss. Most stuff works very well; some works with glitches; some
doesn't work at all. Whether YOU will have problems depends largely on
WHICH stuff YOU want to use with it. I expect though, that well before
2008, all these initial obstacles will be behind us.
RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
(Retired. No longer licensed to practice public accounting.)
rc@grandecom.net
Microsoft Windows MVP
(Currently running Vista Ultimate x64)
> Thx RC, particularly re your x64 comments. As I do have x64 hardware, I'd
> like to make sure all my peripherals and apps are compatible with the x64
> version before I move to it. Are you using Vista x64 as your main Windows
> installation?
>
> Regards,
>
> Margaret
>
> R. C. White wrote:
>
>> First, I've used only Vista Ultimate x64 since Vista "went Gold" about
>> November 1, except for a few excursions into Vista Ultimate x86 (the
>> 32-bit
>> version) when trying to troubleshoot some problems (like my infamous
>> problem
>> of trying to install R3 back in January). Since I have only one
>> computer, I
>> don't get a chance to experiment much with different varieties of Vista -
>> or
>> of Quicken: I've used only the Basic version of Quicken 2007. Also,
>> since
>> there's just me here, I haven't had to learn much about User accounts,
>> permissions, networking, and several other topics. But Vista's UAC has
>> forced me to learn more about permissions than I ever had to know before.
>>
>> To me, Vista feels very much like WinXP Pro. Some differences between
>> x86
>> and x64 are more significant than those between WinXP and Vista. Rather
>> than confuse the "Vista" issue, I'll try to put some thoughts about
>> 64-bit into a second Reply to your message.
|
|
Posted by R. C. White on April 19, 2007, 12:19 pm
Please log in for more thread options Hi again, John.
As I said in my other Reply, some of my experiences with Vista have more to
do with the fact that I'm running a 64-bit version of Vista. In many ways,
the differences between 32-bit and 64-bit are more significant than those
between WinXP and Vista. (To cut down on typing, I will often refer to the
64-bit versions of both WinXP and Vista as "Win64".)
Now, about 64-bit. As you probably know, 64-bit hardware will run 32-bit
Windows/Vista just fine; you probably won't even notice any difference.
Also, 64-bit WinXP or Vista will run all 32-bit software - again, you're not
likely to notice any difference. (But 16-bit software, like my beloved
20-year-old WordPerfect Office Calendar, won't run at all in 64-bit Windows.
That old software will run in 32-bit Windows, thanks to some built-in
translation, which someone else will have to explain. And, of course,
64-bit operating systems or software cannot be installed on 32-bit
hardware.) So, if you are running only WinXP Pro or Vista x86, even on a
64-bit computer, none of this discussion applies to you. And if you started
fresh with WinXP x64 or Vista x64 on a new 64-bit computer and accepted all
the defaults when you installed Quicken and other software, then you should
not even notice the following complications.
But if you installed WinXP x64 or Vista x64 onto your 64-bit computer that
had already been running 32-bit Windows, you probably carried over existing
applications and data files from your 32-bit days. And if you chose (as
many of us did) to add 64-bit Windows to dual-boot with your 32-bit OS, then
you likely share my discoveries and frustrations.
When I first installed WinXP Pro x64 a couple of years ago, I noticed that
the "C:Program Files" folder was still here, as always, but there was also
a new folder: "C:Program Files (x86)". Since that new folder, with
"(x86)" appended to the name, never appeared in 32-bit Windows, I assumed
that this was where 64-bit programs would be installed. After installing
several applications in my new x64 Windows, I was confused because they kept
going into PF86. (Let me refer to those two folders as PF and PF86.)
Often, I wound up with programs such Office in BOTH PF and PF86. :>(
Several months later in a Microsoft newsgroup, I learned that my assumption
was wrong - by 180 degrees!
When running 64-bit Windows - whether WinXP x64 or Vista x64 - all
installations of 64-bit applications should go into Program Files. But
32-bit apps should go into the new Program Files (x86) folder! The term
"x86" is meant to refer to the 80x86 family of Intel microprocessors, which
means practically every PC we've used up until now. Since those PCs have
all been 32-bit, the term "x86" translates to "32-bit". They could have
used "x32", but they didn't. And "x64", naturally, means 64-bit operating
systems and the apps written for 64-bits. So far, there are practically NO
64-bit apps, so the Program Files folder in Vista x64 should probably still
be empty. ALL the software installed in Win64 so far should be in Program
Files (x86).
There is not yet a 64-bit version of Quicken. There may never be one. If
you are running Vista x86, it expects to find qw.exe in C:Program
FilesQuicken. But if you are running Win64 when you install Quicken, it
will, by default, go into C:Program Files (x86)Quicken.
All that's OK if you are running only one version of Vista. But if you are
dual-booting both x86 and x64 versions, and running Quicken from both of
them, then you must either (a) install Quicken twice into two different
locations and try to keep all your tweaks and data files synchronized
between them, or (b) install Quicken twice into a single location. I've
followed my already-establish practice of (b), installing Quicken into
E:QuickenW, rather than into a subfolder in Program Files; I can access
this single installation from either Vista x86 or Vista x64. (But I've not
yet rationalized my several installations of MS Office 2007; its
half-gigabyte of files are duplicated in several locations on my hard drives
and I haven't come up with a good solution to sharing a single
installation.)
This new PF86 folder can also be a problem for users upgrading from 32-bit
to 64-bit Windows. The operating system itself cannot be "upgraded".
Hardware and drivers differences are so great that we can't install any
64-bit OS while booted into a 32-bit OS - and vice versa. So we can't just
upgrade from WinXP Pro SP2 to WinXP x64 or to Vista x64; we must do a clean
install. That takes care of the OS transition, but then all the apps must
be installed again in Win64. If our old hard drive has survived the
transition to Win64, then it will still hold the PF folder - with all those
32-bit programs that should now be migrated to PF86. They will still run as
before from the PF folder. There will be no problem until Win64 needs to
load special drivers to handle 32-bit programs but, because the files are
not in the special PF86 folder, the special handlers won't be loaded. I've
not encountered such a situation, so I don't know what problems might be
lurking, but we must be aware of the potential for future conflicts.
For myself, I have been using a "generic" folder (E:QuickenW) for Quicken
for many years, since before the PF folder was introduced (in Win95?). For
years, I've been dual-booting multiple versions of Windows. The 32-bit
versions and 64-bit versions of Windows and Vista are happy to install
Quicken (again!) into that same E:QuickenW folder. (Dozens of times, as
I've updated Quicken most years, and as I've re-installed Q2005, 06 and 07
several times during the Vista beta.) Now I can start Quicken, no matter
which version of Windows or Vista I'm running and work on my single Quicken
"file".
But I don't use such top-level folders for most of my applications, such as
Microsoft Office. I typically direct those to my Drive E:, but let them
install into their default subfolders (E:Program FilesMicrosoft
OfficeOffice12, for example). When I install them from Win86, they go into
PF; when I install them again from Win64, they go into PF86. Of course, I
can "guide" them into PF instead, where they will override the existing
copies of the same files, thus saving a half-gigabyte or so of space and
allowing me to "tweak" them to my preferences just once. But then Win64
thinks they are 64-bit applications. This has not created a problem yet -
but I don't know what the future might bring.
Most of these problems will occur only during a transition from Win86 to
Win64. For computers that dual-boot both 32-bit and 64-bit systems, the
problems will continue, at least for a while.
Microsoft could have avoided much of this confusion by letting Win64
continue to use PF for 32-bit applications and create a new "Program Files
(x64)" folder for 64-bit apps. But they went the other direction. The
wrong way, in my opinion. Too bad they didn't ask me first. :>(
Sorry for running on and on, John This is a 64-bit question, not a Vista
question. Most Quicken and Vista users will never see any of these
problems. ;<)
RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
(Retired. No longer licensed to practice public accounting.)
rc@grandecom.net
Microsoft Windows MVP
(Currently running Vista Ultimate x64)
<SNIP>
>
> 7.) Do any of the answers to the questions above differ if you
> are using different flavors of Vista: are the answers different
> for users of Vista Home Basic, Vista Home Premium, or Vista
> Ultimate?
>
> Thank you in advance.
>
> --
> John Pollard
|
|
Posted by Margaret on April 20, 2007, 1:11 pm
Please log in for more thread options R. C. White wrote about differences between Vista x86 & x64 plus hw
drivers, software, etc.....
Thanks for all this info, RC, and for taking the time to type it! This
is very helpful, and I'll tuck it away for the day when I feel ready to
move to Vista x64.
Regards,
Margaret
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Quicken 2008 Deluxe Vista 64 bit - Couple of questions | February 29, 2008, 6:18 am |
| quicken xg users | June 28, 2006, 9:24 pm |
| Multiple Users? | March 6, 2007, 3:36 pm |
| Help for UK Quicken users | September 29, 2008, 10:28 am |
| Are there any Smith Barney users out there? | April 24, 2006, 9:41 pm |
| Warning to users of recurring transactions... again | January 30, 2007, 2:25 am |
| Past Microsoft Money Users - Question about Ads | September 12, 2006, 6:52 am |
| The cheapest and easiest way to have multiple users access | March 29, 2007, 5:38 pm |
| Heads up to Quicken 2002 users in Canada | December 19, 2007, 3:01 pm |
| Advice requested from more experienced Quicken users | June 3, 2006, 1:54 am |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap