ie8 fix
madison

Hardware 2.0

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes
Home / News & Blogs / Hardware 2.0

You want 64-bit Office 2010? You can't handle 64-bit!!!

By | March 8, 2010, 4:17am PST

Windows 7 bought with it the increased popularity of 64-bit operating systems on the desktop, replacing the older, memory-constrained 32-bit platform. But just because your system can handle a 64-bit OS doesn’t mean that you’re ready for 64-bit Office 2010.

Over on the Office 2010 Technology Guarantee FAQ page, Microsoft “strongly recommends” that users install the 32-bit version of the new Office suite:

Will a 64-bit version of the Office 2010 product be available?

Yes, 64-bit Office 2010 product upgrades will be available. However we strongly recommend most users install 32-bit version of Office 2010 on both 32 and 64-bit Operating Systems because currently many common add-ins for Office will not function in the 64-bit edition. The 64-bit installation of Microsoft Office 2010 products will be available for users who commonly use very large documents or data set and need Excel 2010 programs to access greater than 2GB of memory. There may be technical issues with the 64-bit version and in order to install a 64-bit version of Office 2010 product users must have a 64-bit supported operating system on their PC.

Add-ins are likely to be Office 2010 64-bit biggest Achilles’ heel, given the fact that there are very few 64-bit add-ons available, even from Microsoft. Add-ons for elements such as antivirus programs are likely too be a major sticking point.

If you use add-ons to augment your Office suite, you’re likely to be tied to 32-bit for many months following the release of the Office 2010.

(via PC Pro)

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

More from “Hardware 2.0”

Topics

Add-ins, 64-Bit, Network Technology, Microsoft Office, Processors, Semiconductors, Hardware, Components, Networking, Office Suites, Software, Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology.

Disclosure

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

All opinions expressed on Hardware 2.0 are those of Adrian Kingsley-Hughes. Every effort is made to ensure that the information posted is accurate. If you have any comments, queries or corrections, please contact Adrian via the email link here. Any possible conflicts of interest will be posted below. [Updated: February 23, 2010] - Adrian Kingsley-Hughes has no business relationships, affiliations, investments, or other actual/potential conflicts of interest relating to the content posted so far on this blog.

Biography

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology -- whether that be by learning to program, building a PC from a pile of parts, or helping them get the most from their new MP3 player or digital camera.

Adrian has authored/co-authored technical books on a variety of topics, ranging from programming to building and maintaining PCs. His most recent books include "Build the Ultimate Custom PC", "Beginning Programming" and "The PC Doctor's Fix It Yourself Guide". He has also written training manuals that have been used by a number of Fortune 500 companies.

Adrian also runs a popular blog under the name The PC Doctor, where he covers a range of computer-related topics -- from security to repairing and upgrading.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
Ask a Question Start a Discussion
66
Comments
Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: You want 64-bit Office 2010? You can't handle 64-bit!!!
shm958@... 11th Jul 2010
@jznoy-dallas
Not only large Organizations like IRS, Election Committees, and Multinational Corporations (nt) need 64 bit Excel, but even mid size companies which use ERP package may need 64 bit Excel.

Database are not suitable for all type of work and we can not afford programmers taking weeks and months to program what can be done in Excel by end users in hours for one time jobs. So Excel 64 bit version is extremely needed for such jobs. It will transfer some work from programmers to end users but with very great improvement in productivity.
View in thread
0 Votes
+ -
I currently use
Ceridan 8th Mar 2010
64bit Office, but exept OneNote(when using the attatch document function) I cannot see why a student would need it... exept if you have a big spreadsheet need.


I plan to get the 32bit version of it anyway...


PS: I like Open Office but it's lacking an note taking app(aka OneNote) and the writer usualy messes the .doc formatting(needed when i'm doing a report for a school project... they dont accetp .odt).
0 Votes
+ -
Re your PS
jorjitop 8th Mar 2010
You can save Open Office docs in .doc or .xls etc. as necessary.
0 Votes
+ -
What he said was that OO screwed up his docs
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 8th Mar 2010
I've seen this on too frequent an occasion too: Save a carefully crafted document as a Word .DOC file and load it back into OO or into Word (any version) and formatting and/or content has been lost.
0 Votes
+ -
And
dookus 8th Mar 2010
You can set the default to any document type you wish without having to remember to choose the document type in the "Save as" dialogue..

http://tinyurl.com/39j9fy
0 Votes
+ -
This applies to Photoshop as well
Axsimulate 8th Mar 2010
NT
0 Votes
+ -
Hmm
Cylon Centurion 8th Mar 2010
I have tried to run x86 Photoshop on my x64 Windows 7... crashes every time I try to do some heavy editing. sad
0 Votes
+ -
yep, but until
Drakaran 8th Mar 2010
the plug in makers make 64 bit versions, we're all kinda stuck with what comes in PS64. Course, I'm thinking Adobe figured the 64 bit version would mainly be used for automated batch processing.
0 Votes
+ -
This issue applies to ALL 64-bit apps that permit plug-ins
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 8th Mar 2010
VERY few vendors ship 64-bit versions of their plug-ins:

Adobe still doesn't ship Flash64 so IE64 can't run it (and neither can Chrome64, Firefox64, etc).

Adobe's 64-bit PhotoShop doesn't get to enjoy many 32-bit only plug-ins (although those vendors REALLY should know better!)

Office is just the latest in the long line of 64-bit apps which can't load 32-bit add-ons.

However, perhaps Office64 might give vendors the impetus to port their add-ons to 64-bit? I sure hope so because Excel x64 absolutely ROCKS on *BIG* data happy
0 Votes
+ -
@De-void
Axsimulate 9th Mar 2010
Yep, they all do. It's a matter of when 64 bit OSs hit that critical market share that makes it worth the time and effort it takes a particular software maker to do the conversion. To the lay person, it's sounds cut and dry, but it's typically not, it's a little more involved. It will come, but it will be a slow process.
0 Votes
+ -
Curiosity ...
Rick_R 8th Mar 2010
Just out of curiosity ... who actually uses spreadsheets or other DOCUMENTS or presentations that require more than TWO GIGABYTES of data IN MEMORY? What are the content, topics, etc., of such documents?

(I assume that anyone doing, e.g., climate or nuclear explosion simulations probably are using custom Unix software.)
0 Votes
+ -
Thinking... IRS, Election Committees, and Multinational Corporations (nt)
jznoy-dallas 8th Mar 2010
.
0 Votes
+ -
Wrong tool
pwcdr 9th Mar 2010
For me, such massive amounts of data simply belong into a database, not in a spreadsheet.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: You want 64-bit Office 2010? You can't handle 64-bit!!!
shm958@... 11th Jul 2010
@jznoy-dallas
Not only large Organizations like IRS, Election Committees, and Multinational Corporations (nt) need 64 bit Excel, but even mid size companies which use ERP package may need 64 bit Excel.

Database are not suitable for all type of work and we can not afford programmers taking weeks and months to program what can be done in Excel by end users in hours for one time jobs. So Excel 64 bit version is extremely needed for such jobs. It will transfer some work from programmers to end users but with very great improvement in productivity.
0 Votes
+ -
I've seen it in action
crazydanr@... 8th Mar 2010
Last place I worked - word/ppt docs with 50-100 large picturs, with video and text on other slides.

These were presentations about construction projects that had to take in effect environmental and archeological locations. By using the video/pics, they could discuss the areas in question during a meeting.

Maybe not the right way to tackle the problem, but there really wasn't an easy solution.
0 Votes
+ -
Well...
bmonster 8th Mar 2010
If you are using flat files (csv, tab delimited, etc.) for data transfer between systems, and you want to view the contents of the file you might use excel because it will format it into columns for you. Sometimes these file could be larger than 2 gig.
0 Votes
+ -
Slicing and dicing
wright_is 9th Mar 2010
large data warehouses can easily get into the gigabytes of information.

That said, with older versions of Excel, it would complain that the dataset was too large, which usually meant that there was an error in the parameters... But there are times when you really need all of that information...

The question is, whether the OLAP plug-in for the 64-bit version would be available in the first place... :-P
0 Votes
+ -
RE: You want 64-bit Office 2010? You can't handle 64-bit!!!
shm958@... 10th Jul 2010
@Rick_R,
When we have to retrieve data from ERP software [Oracle E-business suit, OPM Financial module] and process them in spread sheet, it becomes very huge file. Excel 2007, although theoretically supporting 1 million rows in a sheet, becomes useless for such huge database. We have started using Excel 2010 32 bit with significant improvements and will be shifting to Excel 64 bit shortly. Those who have to process huge data downloaded from ERP are likely to benefit from 64 bit Excel 2010.

I am also shifting to 64 bit Office on my home PC, even though I do not have to handle large files there because in future 64 bit office will be the de-facto standard and will make image editing, video editing [which I do not use at present, but may use in future] etc fast.

Satish Mehta
0 Votes
+ -
Ultimately 64-bit native software is faster, and more secure
WinTard 8th Mar 2010
So 32-bit third party add-ons will simply have to be recompiled under a 64-bit compiler. How difficult is that?

Just give it one year, and everything will be polished...

~~~~~~~~~~~
The past is a guidepost, not a hitching post.
~ L. Thomas Holcroft
0 Votes
+ -
LOL !!
websquad 8th Mar 2010
Surely you jest ... maybe 10 years ??
0 Votes
+ -
I love your optimism, but your facts are lacking
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 8th Mar 2010
64-bit code is, on the whole, rarely measurably faster than x64 unless the code is highly memory-constrained and thus causes a lot of paging: The 64-bit version of such code causes far less paging and thus improves performance markedly.

However, for most apps, 64-bit code and data is bigger on disk, takes longer to load, takes up more RAM, consumes more cache thus rendering cache less efficient, etc.

Yes, 64-bit code DOES have more registers to play with and can optimize some instructions more effectively, but these benefits are usually offset by slower loads and saves.

I agree that most well-written add-ons can largely be recompiled to 64-bit with little/no code change, but until the 64-bit host apps become available and customers start demanding their 64-bit add-ins, there will be little impetus for the vendors to do the work.

Once it starts to happen though, it'll happen pretty quickly.

It will, however, take many years for users to be running 64-bit apps by default, unless those apps are used to load and process > 2GB data.
0 Votes
+ -
Well...
zkiwi 8th Mar 2010
Floss my teeth with used hamster! I'd never ever thought I'd ever agree with you. Maybe I should go do something to alleviate the shock :P
0 Votes
+ -
Hear, Hear!
still not nice 8th Mar 2010
I'm shocked as well.. silly

64bit is the future, but it ain't quite there yet...
0 Votes
+ -
@de-void
Axsimulate 9th Mar 2010
The move to 64 bits will be slowed because of the way Microsoft split 32 bit and 64 OSs. So your right, it will take many years. I think Apple had a better idea by combining theirs into one OS. In theory, that should ease the transition. Where as Microsoft's way is more abrupt.
0 Votes
+ -
Not that simple
DNSB 8th Mar 2010
From my experience, few plugins are going to recompile to 64 bit as easily as setting a compiler directive to produce 64 bit code. Otherwise, Microsoft wouldn't have the issue they currently have with Office x64.

The more likely scenario is the the recompiled plugin either crashed on startup or starts up and then crashes at the oddest times with an added fillip that your data will be corrupted.

Admittedly, the plugins being worked on were not for MS Office but still the 32 bit product was extremely reliable while the 64 bit version has been nothing but a money sink.

Just remember how long it took to move from 16 bit to 32 bit and be prepared to support 32 bit for the next decade.
0 Votes
+ -
a plug in set is usually
s_souche 9th Mar 2010
a set of relatively short and independent procedures.

Office is a set of heavy application that incorporated
changes over the years and the decades.

What delays the migration to 64 bits of add in is not the
technical difficulty, it is the scarce r&d resources of add
in developers and the very limited ( near zero ) profit that
would emerge from the 64 bit migration.

going from a two infrastructure to a four infrastructure
workflow ( from win+mac 32 to win+mac 32+64 ) is challenging
in term of organisation. this is the huge investment. as a
result this will come when editors see profit from the 64
market, profit they obviously don't see as of today. But
things will change fast as 64 OS generalize, only because
custumers do not wan't to deal with 32/64 disparity and will
install 64 soft on 64 OS anytime they can, once again to
reduce costs
0 Votes
+ -
Test system
johnfenjackson@... Updated - 8th Mar 2010
I've been checking out a complete 64 bit system over the last few weeks with no problems thus far. I should add though that it is a fairly 'pure' system: Office 2010 beta x64 and Lightroom x64 with no additions.

Small utilities like Acrobat, CCleaner, KeePass, ... and Internet bits and pieces (IE8, Flash, JRE18, Silverlight) are all 32-bit and seem to be OK too.

What else? 7Zip, Comodo firewall both 64 bit. OK.

All working both in W7 and Server 2008R2.

Indeed I am becoming so confidant that I'm thinking of buying a DELL 410 server. This should up the general quality of components, make the data more secure, provide 6 hot swap bays and loads of room for expansion. The only problem is the graphics card - no 16x PCI-E slot you see. However CLUB3D have two cards capable of 2560x1600 using a 1x PCI-E slot. If that works I have the power of MAC PRO for half the price.

Maybe the shock M$ received with Vista incompatibility and the convergence of the client and server codebases will start to yield dividends now?

Businesses though - that could be a whole different ball game with add-ins and combinations.
0 Votes
+ -
Vista vs. 7 (x64 Division)
pghammer21@... 8th Mar 2010
Despite the shipment of XP64 (which saw next to no penetration anywhere), Vista x64's issues with driver support can be laid squarely at the feet of hardware vendor foot-dragging (especially second-tier hardware vendors that did not take the time to write proper x64 or even x32 drivers). Windows 7 was the direct beneficiary of the screaming from customers at those self-same IHVs over poor driver support for x64-based Windows, as situations like mine, where I had complete support for all my hardware, were decidedly rare with Vista, but much more common with Windows 7. Logitech, for example, not only has driver support for most of their webcams (and all of their mice), they have x64 versions of their webcam and mouse utilities as well, which wasn't the case with Vista x64. The end result of that has been more pre-loads of 7 x64 on capable hardware vs. Vista x64 (or even 7 x32, which is rare to find pre-loaded these days on non-enterprise/corporate desktops or even laptops). However, you are largely correct about the enterprise.
0 Votes
+ -
@pghammer21
Axsimulate 8th Mar 2010
I worked at a software company at the time Vista was released. We were trying to write drivers but Microsoft kept changes the rules. Even in Oct, Nov, and Dec of 2006 they were making changes. Every time Microsoft made a change it virtually jerked the rug out from under our feet. That made it impossible for us to release our driver in time. Not only that, but Microsoft was imposing steep fees to get drivers passed their approval process, and with the DRM embedded so deeply in Vista, it made it harder to get passed their approval process. Microsoft was clearly rushing Vista to the market despite it being in development for about 6 years at that point.
I can't speak for other developers however since we were getting our info straight from Microsoft, I'm sure other developers were being hampered as well. So I wouldn't exactly blame the hardware vendors.
0 Votes
+ -
Precisely why Vista nearly died on the vine..
JCitizen 8th Mar 2010
Perhaps with Ballmer out of the way, maybe they could get something sane done.
0 Votes
+ -
Frankly, this had nothing to do with Ballmer ...
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 8th Mar 2010
... believe me, he's the LAST person you want anywhere near your engineering team! wink

The problem was with Allchin and his diabolical approach to building OS' that resulted in the Cairo fiasco, shipping Win2000 2 years late, XP a year late, the Longhorn fiasco, Vista being shipped 2 years later than first planned.

He left the company after Vista and ... suddenly ... the Windows team found that with Sinofsky's fantastic leadership and customer focus, that they could ship a stellar OS within 2 short years.

Let's just say that Win8 should be VERY interesting indeed! wink

To the earlier poster's point: Yes, MS did keep changing the internals of the new graphics driver infrastructure until the 11th hour which made it VERY hard for nVidia, AMD and Intel to complete their drivers. But at the same time, all three hadn't dedicated enough resources to building said drivers until WAY too late in the game.

Luckily, most of those issues were resolved long before Win7 emerged and we all reap the rewards.
0 Votes
+ -
@de-void
Axsimulate 9th Mar 2010
It also didn't help developers that Microsoft dumped the first version of Longhorn and started all over. That really screwed with developers. Many had a very good reason to distrust Microsoft until the last moment.
0 Votes
+ -
Corporate disconnect, and arrogance...
JCitizen Updated - 9th Mar 2010
I still love to blame everything on the leader, and that is Ballmer, after all he was in there near the top during a lot of these decisions.

I just love hating Ballmer period! devil

There is no doubt Microsoft deserves to suffer with the way they have jerked around the developer industry in the last decade.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: You want 64-bit Office 2010? You can't handle 64-bit!!!
rseiler 8th Mar 2010
Even the IE controls that *come with* Office x64 can be incompatible. Case in point: Sharepoint's datasheet controls installed with Office do not work against Windows Sharepoint Services 3.0. They may against the upcoming 4.0.
0 Votes
+ -
Front-end vs. Back-end
pghammer21@... 8th Mar 2010
That is precisely the issue facing enterprises - the x64 clients often require new server-side software, which introduces its own share of complexities. Not everyone is as lucky as I am, where I was actually able to banish one application altogether (Adobe Acrobat Professional) because of improvements in Word 2010 x64's document conversion (PDF conversion in particular).
0 Votes
+ -
Good!...
JCitizen 8th Mar 2010
Adobe must DIE! DIE! DIE!

Okay---I'm alright now! happy
0 Votes
+ -
RE: You want 64-bit Office 2010? You can't handle 64-bit!!!
pghammer21@... 8th Mar 2010
I've already installed the 64-bit version of Office 2010 beta on three systems (two running 7 Ultimate and one with 7 Home Premium; both x64, of course), and add-ins and plug-ins remain the big problem. Outlook Connector (Hotmail) does have an x64 plug-in (however, it is bug-ridden, which is why I don't use it); however, that is the only plug-in I used with Outlook 2007 that I need in the future. PDF is handled by Adobe Reader (which works just fine with the x64 Outlook 2010), and conversions are done by Word 2010 (which is far faster at conversions than Word 2007, even with SP2 applied). Security applications are coming onboard (while McAfee isn't ready, both MSE and Norton Security Suite 3.0 and newer are), so I'm pretty much ready to rock.

One thing I am also impressed with is Outlook's support for multiple mailboxes (even ones of different types), especially IMAP (which I had actually dreaded prior to Outlook 2010). Google GMail supports both POP and IMAP from the jump, so I switched from POP to IMAP for that as a test; Outlok x64 performs absolutely flawlessly pulling mail via IMAP from the GMail IMAP server, despite the nonstandard settings. (So much for Outlook being strictly an Exchange client.)
0 Votes
+ -
Let's hope for a single 32/64 install DVD
Charles Gordon 8th Mar 2010
Even better would be to pick and choose which components would be 32/64...if you just needed an Excel ad-on you could go 64 bit on everything else.
0 Votes
+ -
Won't happen
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 8th Mar 2010
You'll get 32-bit DVD and a 64-bit DVD - both won't fit on the same disk.

Also, be VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY careful mixing and matching 32-bit and 64-bit editions of different parts of the suite - you'll find that you'll suffer a great deal of pain in the long-term taking this approach.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: You want 64-bit Office 2010? You can't handle 64-bit!!!
derf24 8th Mar 2010
We have three PCs running Windows7 64-bit Home Premium on our home network. Two were previously on Vista 64-bit Home Premium. My experience is that the worst of all the software vendors for providing reliable 64-bit application programs is - you'll never guess it! - a little company called Microsoft. Office 2007 should have been available in 64-bit version from day one. My other PC running Windows XP Pro SP3 I built in April 2005 and it still meets the requirements of Windows7 64-bit service. Mr. Gates should add some of us longsuffering customers to his list of charities by injecting the odd $1Billion into 64-bit application software support. Has he never heard of the old adage "Charity begins at home?"
0 Votes
+ -
Why do you want 64-bit Office?
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 8th Mar 2010
Serious question.

What benefits do you expect from a 64-bit version of Word? How many of your word documents are larger than 1.5GB - 2GB? I am guessing none - therefore you'll get no benefit from 64-bit Word.

Perhaps you load > 1.5GB - 2GB Data from your databases in order to execute complex derivatives calculations - in which case, you WILL benefit from Excel 64-bit. If not, I doubt you'd gain anything.

Same for Powerpoint. Same for OneNote. Etc.

Rebuilding an app to be 64-bit doesn't deliver some magical performance benefit. In fact, in most cases, 64-bit code performs at almost the same level as 32-bit code because the few 64-bit code efficiencies are offset by increased IO due to 64-bit code and data being bigger than the 32-bit equivalent.

So, can you please name some of the "reliable" 64-bit applications you use on a daily basis? Ignore drivers - they're a given. I am talking about apps here.

Oh ... and by the way ... Gates hasn't been involved in Microsoft's daily (or even weekly) business for more than 2 years now.
0 Votes
+ -
Let's drop 32-bit forever already!
Gradius2 8th Mar 2010
Is time to drop 32-bit already!

Is way too old, I remember when I first used with 80386, that was before 1990 ! Over 20 years ago!!

IT speaking, means over 200 years !

Die 32-bit!
0 Votes
+ -
Agreed-Die 32bit
dtroyerSMU 8th Mar 2010
There are no advantages to 32bit. Its the companies who refuse to move on to better and faster systems that drag technology down.

Probably when 128 or 256bit CPUs come out the 32bit will die. Just the way people move, ever so slowly or the why-fix-it-if-it-aint-broke mentality. Those people end up with broken things that do nothing.
0 Votes
+ -
There are several advantages to 32-bit ...
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 8th Mar 2010
... not least of which is that 32-bit code and data is smaller than 64-bit.

Thus, 32-bit code takes less disk space, takes less time to load from disk into RAM, takes less room in RAM, takes less room in the CPU's data and instruction caching mechanisms resulting in more efficient cache use and thus the code waits less and runs faster.

Also, considering that most apps today are 32-bit, and that most add-ons are also 32-bit, they are compatible and work smoothly together.

However, you can't load 32-bit code into a 64-bit process so there's pain when integrating 64-bit apps and 32-bit add-ons. Doing the work to make add-ons 64-bit will not happen unless the 64-bit apps appear and customers start asking for 64-bit add-ons.

This leads us to apps - why are there so few 64-bit apps? Because so few apps consume anywhere near the 2GB memory boundry that currently qualifies them as good candidates for a 64-bit port.

What do you expect to gain from a 64-bit notepad or 64-bit iTunes? You won't get much (if any) perf improvement, so what is it, exactly, that you hope to gain.

The migration to 64-bit is already underway, but unlike the migration from 16-bit to 32-bit, there are still few benefits for doing so.
0 Votes
+ -
Not entirely correct...
smtp4me@... 9th Mar 2010
A 64 bit OS running on a 64 bit processor must run 32 bit applications in emulation mode (WOW - Windows on Windows). The additional overhead of running 32 bit applications in 64 bit mode can cause performance degredation.

If you are referring to 32 bit applications on a 32 bit OS, then yes, you are correct.
0 Votes
+ -
64 bit is much safer
FiOS-Dave 9th Mar 2010
Under 32 bits, the address space randomization technique is flawed. 64 bit is much safer, in that respect.
0 Votes
+ -
Me 3 --- DIE 32 BIT!!!
JCitizen 8th Mar 2010
Fortunately I'm finding more and more utilities and security software that is totally 64bit, and good riddance to 32 bit!

More and more of my present applications are updating to 64 bit based application layer operations.

Everything is running faster and smoother on Vista x64 by the month! The list of processes with that *32 after it, are shrinking and shrinking.

Die 32 bit~ LONG LIVE X64!!!
0 Votes
+ -
"Everything is running faster and smoother on Vista x64"
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 8th Mar 2010
Good for you. But unless you're running Vista x64 on a machine with > 4GB RAM, you're not likely to be experiencing as much perf as if you were running a 32-bit version of the OS!

Read my posts above.
0 Votes
+ -
6Gbs...no problemo...(nt)
JCitizen 9th Mar 2010
.
0 Votes
+ -
I believe you on Office especially de-void..
JCitizen 9th Mar 2010
thank God I don't rely on it; I'm mostly planning ACAD type engineering software and especially HD digital movie production.

My plans don't include Adobe or Sony either!

Hopefully a Win 7 version of cable compliant systems comes out soon too; I'd like to upgrade.
0 Votes
+ -
Whine whine whine
still not nice 8th Mar 2010
It'll change when the marketplace is ready to change.

There are still millions of 32bit machines out there being used, my own included. wink

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
Click Here
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

Blog Roll

Blog Archive

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix