Customer Reviews

Microsoft Windows XP Pro X64 Edition SP2B for System Builders [Old Version]

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I recently bought an AMD dual-core processor that uses a 64-bit architecture, and wanted to enjoy the full benefits of that. In addition to loading Linux, I also purchased a copy of Windows XP Professional 64, the 64-bit version of the OS.

First impressions are that I have a slightly different default desktop wallpaper, but nothing else seems radically divergent from the 32-bit UI. It sees the 2Gb correctly, as expected, and I'm curious to see what it'll show when the other stick of RAM are installed to bring it to 6Gb.

I haven't loaded most of the usual bloat, restricting this machine's use to games and some development tasks I'll bring from work. I might run Office, I might not, but I want to offer some words of advice to potential buyers.

One, good luck finding a 64-bit firewall. As of 22-May-2007, only Ghost Wall works under XP64. Zone Labs (now Checkpoint) has no plans to build one in the near future, Sunbelt's Kerio product is not slated for a 64-bit release either (choosing, like ZoneLabs, to focus on Vista), and Tiny Software (now CA) didn't have a 64-bit version either. So, you can use the stock firewall or Ghost Wall, or roll up your sleeves and build a Linksys router with firewalling capabilities.

Better news from antivirus vendors, though: Alwil's Avast product does work fine under XP64. Since I'm long-removed from running Norton or McAfee at home, I strongly suggest doing your homework before adopting XP64 if you have current licenses of those products. You might be out of luck. Avast is very good, so you aren't losing anything by switching.

The OS runs well, I don't have any crashing or lockups but I haven't really attempted to blue-screen it yet either. I really like the fast boot times and quick response, and while I might be running Linux a bit more on this box for non-gaming purposes, I still like having an MS OS available for helping out friends and family with their MS problems.

Worth buying? Yes, but only if you have a 64-bit CPU and you don't mind searching for native 64-bit apps and utilities.

-Fred

I recently bought a system that has 4 gigs of RAM and tried to run XP 32-bit on it, but Windows only "saw" 2.5 gigs. The BIOS saw the 4 gigs without a problem, so I did my research, and found that getting a 32 bit OS to recognize 3+ gigs is somewhere between a root canal (with no anesthetic) and self-amputation with a spork.
I had a license for XP64, so I installed it. It installed with no issue, and ran through the usual Windows update sessions with no problem at all. There are some driver issues, and if you're using a TV tuner card like I was in my old machine, save yourself the headache. It's not going to happen. I got my sound card running in no time (Audigy2 Platinum Pro),
Avast! Anti-virus installed with no issue, and my rig is up to 100%, showing 4 gigs of RAM, SLI running smooth, and overall a much better eXPerience (see what I did there????)
Do your homework, and realize that 64-bit computing is a newer technology, and will have a shakedown period before it's ready for prime-time, but overall, I'm very happy with my XP64 machine, and would recommend that others get it as well if you have the chip, RAM, and don't need Microsoft holding your hand after it's installed.

Many of us are surprised by Microsoft who ditched their stable and fast XP 64. Instead, they pushed unstable vista on the market before it was done. For programming purpose, XP 64 is a much better choice. I've heard lots of studios in special effects industry kept their old Win32 to avoid all the hassles brought by Vista in their render farms.

I'm reviwing this product in comparison with Windows XP 32-bit, the operating system I've been using for years and still do at work. I reject Vista, which seems practically unusable for an advanced technical user.

One of the things that bugs me about the x64 version is that the 64-bit version of Explorer doesn't support 32-bit extensions - some of which I used frequently. I understand this is a technical limitation, so I'll just have to hope that someday the creators of the software I use frequently will eventually develop 64-bit extensions. There's a way to force use of the 32-bit Explorer by default, but in doing so, the Control Panel becomes pretty much inaccessible except from the Start menu, which is still running the 64-bit Explorer (since most Control Panel items are only available in the 64-bit Explorer).

I like to organize my "Program Files" folder. However, Windows XP x64 wants all 32-bit programs to go into the new "Program Files (x86)" folder, meaning I'll have some programs in the "Program Files" folder and some in the "Program Files (x86)" folder, which disrupts my organization. For most programs, it can work to change the default install folder to "Program Files", but in some cases, Windows (or the installer) overrides your decision and installs to the "Program Files (x86)" folder anyway.

There are other anomalies here and there that I can't easily figure-out and were never a problem with the 32-bit version, but these are usually small annoyances if any.

Otherwise, it's pretty much what you'd expect from XP. It's a pretty solid and usable Microsoft operating system. Easy to install.

Can't really 'review' this because it's Windows XP. It worked, the cd was new, what else is there to say?

it is a new operating system and versatile that maximizes the yield of the new processors x64 bits, the bad thing is that most of software they do not have compatibility with, buys a Norton which I could not install due to not being compatible with this platform

I have thus far found incompatibility to be (almost) non-existent. 64 bit drivers abound for my hardware (save the legacy stuff like printers), and 32bit processes happily reside alongside them (yes, printers included). I moved back to XP from Vista, and XP 64 Pro suits my needs nicely. For image manipulation and math applications, the 64 bit jump is nice (higher RAM cap doesn't hurt). For everything else, it's pretty much irrelevant. I have had 0 compatibility problems, and it runs everything I install, but I also have no compelling reasons to be excited by 64 bit XP. It works. It's XP. More RAM and floatier FPops for some. Eh.

Consider the 2008 server line if you are looking at this product. Previews have looked nice (I like Core). Otherwise, it's the closest thing to Vista-but-not you can get from Microsoft.

Microsoft Windows XP Pro X64 Edition SP2B for System Builders
for anyone who has a 64 processor this Operating System is far Superior to the 32 bit version. It is a must if you have 3GB or more of RAM, and allows you to make better use of your available Memory. I much Prefer it to the Vista O.S. and when the service pack 3 comes out I will just update to it for free, just like you can for the 32 bit version.

Well this was a good buy I'm happy with this OS, when i was running 32 Bit OS, my system only seen 3.25GB out of a total of 8GB
an now it see's all 8GBs to me that was a plus, the only thing that was a bit of a problem is that my Motherboard - (ECS BLACK SERIES GF8200A (V1.0) AM2+/AM3 NVIDIA GeForce 8200 HDMI ATX AMD). The Disk that came with it to load all the drivers for it, popped it in the cd drive to load, came up an said OS NOT SUPPORT!!! - Exact words, so i was like well ***** so i right clicked an hit the explore button installed them one by one worked fine ever since, havint had any problems, i kno people are saying there isn't alot of APPS for this OS but there will be, an theres plenty of 64Bit Applications out there, Recommended to anyone looking for there computers to see more RAM go with this

It's windows. It works. Not too much else to say about it. Came on time...