"Which is more readable?" is the wrong question to ask. Your smaller chart is
clearly more readable, Ed, but it hides the upgrade path many users will be
(or should be) interested in: 32-bit to 64-bit migration. People who are
running 32-bit now on their 64-bit hardware will tend to continue to run 32-
bit, because you're not helping them at all with migrating to 64-bit. As far as
your chart is concerned, 32-bit and 64-bit versions of Vista and 7 don't even
exist. Yes, some people won't care enough to perform a clean install, but you
know darned well X64 (EM64T/AMD64) software runs significantly faster than
X86 code, and the future is with X64. For those people who do care (or
should care), you're doing them a disservice by omitting the 32-bit and 64-
bit distinctions from your chart.
"Which chart best describes the situation?" is a much better question.
Microsoft's chart covers their corporate butt *and* tells the story of what will
be required to migrate to 64-bits from 32.
Sorry, Ed, your chart loses.
Discussion on:
Message 9 of 1
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
