Maximum PC 64-bit RSS Feed

64-bit Windows is More Secure, for Now

Bart Salisbury — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:09:38 -0600

Microsoft is doing some chest-thumping over the advantages of it’s 64-bit operating systems. According to Joe Faulhaber, who works at the Microsoft Malware Protection Center, the 64-bit versions of Windows and Vista are less likely than their 32-bit counterparts to be infected with malware.

According to Faulhaber, who relied on information gathered by Microsoft’s Malicious Software Removal Tool (MSRC), during the first half of 2009 64-bit XP was 48 percent less likely to be infected, while 64-bit Vista was 35% less likely to be infected. No information was available for Windows 7 for the obvious reason it hadn’t yet been released, but it is expected the same would hold true for it. Faulhaber suggests the reason 64-bit versions are more secure is that malware, written mostly for the 32-bit world, is confused by 64-bit.

Not so fast, chicken Marengo! Alfred Hunger, vice president of engineering at the security firm Immunet, and formerly of Symantec, says there’s plenty of 64-bit malware out there. In fact, its a pretty easy thing for malware creates to whip up 64-bit versions if and when they desire. The low levels of 64-bit infection, he says, is more due to the low levels of 64-bit penetration in the market. If there aren’t all that many people using it there’s no incentive for malware makers to pay attention.

Microsoft’s own bi-annual Security Intelligence Report offers up another possibility: 64-bit users are smarter than 32-bit users. Being technologically more savvy they are less likely to bring malware onto their machines. The report concludes that as 64-bit spreads from the provenance of techno-geeks the current difference in infection rates between 32-bit and 64-bit will evaporate.

Image Credit: If you dream it.../Flickr

The Pros and Cons of 64-bit Windows 7

Alex Castle — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:30:00 -0500

The Windows 7 launch is finally upon us, which means that a lot of people who skipped the beta and RC launches will be getting their first taste of Microsoft’s new operating system. This also means that a lot of people are going to have to make some decisions soon, like which version of Windows to buy, and whether to go with the 32- or 64-bit version of the operating system.

What’s that you say? “Shouldn’t everyone with a 64-bit capable CPU upgrade to 64-bit Windows?” Well, not quite. There are some major advantages to a 64-bit OS, but there are drawbacks to consider as well. In this article, we’ll describe the pros and cons of 64-bit Windows, so when the time comes to upgrade you’ll know which version is right for you.

Why 64-Bit Windows Rocks

So what’s all this 64-bit hubbub about, anyway?

In a 32-bit operating system, memory addresses are 32 bits in length, limiting the total number of unique addresses available to around 4 billion—effectively capping the total amount of memory your system can use at one time to 4GB.

With 64 bit addresses, an operating system could theoretically use up to 16.8 million terabytes of RAM. Now, you’re obviously not going to have access to that kind of hardware for quite a while, but it does mean you’re actually going to be able to take advantage of today’s dirt-cheap memory prices.

Why 64-bit Windows Doesn’t Rock So Much

But there are also several reasons why 64-bit Windows isn’t for everyone. Here are a few of the biggies:

You need at least 4GB of memory

This one should be obvious: a 64-bit OS won’t help you if you don’t have at least 4GB of memory (It will help a little bit if you have exactly 4GB, as 32-bit Windows actually limits you to using 3.5 GB, for other reasons). Still, if you’re still rocking 2GB of memory (or less) you should really upgrade; it’s dead simple and will barely make a dent in your pocketbook.

32-bit drivers don’t work anymore

Generally, 32-bit applications work in 64-bit Windows, but the same can’t be said for drivers. In other words, old, crappy hardware might not work anymore. If you absolutely can’t be bothered to upgrade your 7-year-old printer, you might want to skip on 64-bit Win7.

Some software breaks in 64-bit Windows

It’s less common than hardware issues, but some programs do break in 64-bit Windows. Particularly, old programs written for pre-XP versions of Windows may not work in 64-bit Windows 7. If you’re still running a 16-bit program for some reason, it definitely won’t work in a 64-bit operating system.

Also, just because a program has a 64-bit version, don’t assume that all plug-ins for that program are 64-bit compatible as well. Not all Photoshop plugins, for instance, will work in 64-bit Photoshop.

Not all software benefits from 64-bit

Finally, consider that when you upgrade to a 64-bit OS, all your programs won’t magically start taking advantage of the extra memory. A program has to be written and optimized with 64-bit processors in mind, and right now that’s a minority of all programs. If you mostly use your PC for browsing the web, for instance, you probably won’t see much of an increase in speed with 64-bit Windows, because none of the major browsers have official 64-bit versions (for that, blame Flash, which is firmly 32-bit).

What does take advantage of 64-bit processing? Photoshop, video editing software, 3d modeling programs, CAD. Heavy-hitters, basically. And while very few games have 64-bit versions, there are some (such as Crysis) which work better on a 64-bit system, and you can expect considerably more in the near future.

By default, Windows stores 32- and 64-bit programs in separate folders

So there you have it. There are some drawbacks, sure, but they’re not going to effect the vast majority of users, and the benefits of a 64-bit OS will only get more pronounced over time, as more and more developers write 64-bit versions of their apps.

Microsoft Examining Idea of 128-bit Successor to Windows 7

Ryan Whitwam — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 21:21:19 -0500

As we know, the successor to Windows 7 may already be in development. What we didn’t know is that Microsoft may be considering making a 128-bit version of the OS. It was suspected that Windows 7 would be the last version of Windows to ship a 32-bit version, but will there still be two different versions, 64 and 128-bit?

The clues came from a LinkedIn profile for one, Robert Morgan, a senior developer at Microsoft. In his profile, Morgan stated he was working on, “projects including 128bit architecture compatibility with the Windows 8 kernel and Windows 9 project plan.” There’s certainly no confirmation that Windows 8 will have 128-bit support, but Microsoft could be on the way to that technology. If not Windows 8, then maybe Windows 9.

This is all still very early speculation. We most likely won’t even see Windows 8 until at least 2011, but more likely 2012. We may see more clues in updates to Microsoft’s server products before that. Until then, keep an eye on LinkedIn. Apparently people love divulging details in their profiles.

64-bit Wireless Adapters?

The Maximum PC Staff — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 14:15:56 -0500

I’m building a new rig using Windows Vista. I thought I’d try the 64-bit version since all the bugs and such should be gone by now. Everything went fine until I attempted to install a wireless adapter in the PCI slot. Much to my surprise, I can’t find an adapter that’s compatible with the 64-bit version. I’ve found many sites that claim to sell 64-bit wireless adapters, but when I check the details of the specs they all say 32-bit compatible. Am I missing something or do they not exist? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

—Jeff Davison

Jeff, PCI wireless adapters have been a notorious tricky spot for adopters of 64-bit Windows. Browsing web forums will throw up a few posts from people claiming varying amounts of success using wireless cards from Belkin, Linksys, and D-link, but to say that 64-bit support by any vendor is spotty is to put it mildly.

It may be best to just buy a long Ethernet cord. Although setting them up can be a pain, especially if your PC is far from your router, wired connections are faster, more secure, and more stable than wireless. Another option is a wireless bridge, which connects to your computer via Ethernet cable and doesn’t require drivers. We still prefer wired connections over wireless bridges, which frequently get mixed reviews, but if your PC is truly inaccessible via Ethernet, a wireless bridge is probably your best bet. We’ve heard good things about Linksys’s WGA600N.

SUBMIT YOUR QUESTION Are flames shooting out of the back of your rig? First, grab a fire extinguisher and douse the flames. Once the pyrotechnic display has fizzled, email the doctor at doctor@maximumpc.com for advice on how to solve your technological woes.

64-Bit Chrome Emerges for Linux First

Paul Lilly — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 15:19:21 -0500

As open-source proponents will tell you, there are several advantages to running Linux, and the open-source camp is about to have another bragging point, at least if you're a Chrome user. Google Chrome will soon be available in 64-bit form, but only for Linux.

"The V8 team did some amazing work this quarter building a working 64-bit port. After a handful of changes on the Chromium side, I've had Chromium Linux building on 64-bit for the last few weeks," said Chrome engineer Dean McNamee.

While Vista 64-bit users might be miffed at being left out in the cold (at least for now), the move make senses, given that 64-bit adoption is still stronger on the Linux side than it is with Windows. But given the smoother experience of moving to 64-bit on Vista compared to XP, and Windows 7 shaping up the same way, we imagine a Windows version of 64-bit Chrome can't be far behind.

One of the benefits of 64-bit software is the ability to better utilize large amounts of RAM. 64-bit software can also take up more disk space, but with 1TB drives fast becoming the norm and not the exception, even mainstream users aren't likely to scoff at the trade-off for additional performance.

Mozilla Mulls Moving to 64-Bit with Firefox 3.6

Paul Lilly — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 14:30:26 -0500

Any Firefox fan will be quick to point out the open-source browser's numerous advantages over Microsoft's Internet Explorer, including 780 trillion add-ons (slightly exaggerated), better Web standards support, and arguably better performance and security. But one thing IE has that Firefox doesn't is a 64-bit browser, at least for the time being.

While no official 64-bit version of Firefox yet exists, one Firefox contributor who goes by the online alias Makoto has already ported both Firefox 3.0 and 3.5 to 64-bit editions, and has announced plans to do the same for versions 3.6 and up. If he holds true to his promise, it could mean official 64-bit builds might become a reality with Mozilla's next release, especially since Mozilla has talked about adding 64-bit support in the near future.

It might seem like a minor update, but a 64-bit build translates into faster speeds when logging onto sites using encryption (think of online banking), better memory management, and an overall snappier feel.

Make it happen, Mozilla,

Ask the Doctor: 64-Bit Choice

The Maximum PC Staff — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 10:00:00 -0500

I’m currently debating whether to install XP x64 or Vista x64 on my main rig. I will be playing a lot of games, including Counter-Strike, Left 4 Dead, and Far Cry 2, and doing some video editing with Sony Vegas and Adobe After Effects. I’ve tried Vista x64, but issues with Creative soundcards have haunted me for the past week and a half. I still haven’t tried XP x64, but I’ve heard that there’s less support for it compared to Vista x64. I’ve already confirmed that some of my crucial programs do run on XP x64, but what about devices like the printer and camera? I have an E8400 overclocked to 4GHz, 8GB of G.Skill RAM, and an ATI Radeon HD 4850.

—Miguel Bagara

Despite our misgivings with Vista in the past, many of us, including the Doctor, have been impressed by the improvements to the OS in the past year. 64-bit XP never really got the support it deserved from software developers and hardware makers.

64-bit Vista, on the other hand, has much better device support, is more stable, and came out at a time when 64-bit processing had become much more mainstream. And although Creative hasn’t been great about Vista 64 drivers, the company released a beta driver with Vista 64 support in late November. You should check the manufacturer websites for your printer and camera to make sure they have 64-bit Vista drivers. Given your 8GB of RAM and DirectX 10-capable videocard, as well as the games you like to play, the Doctor thinks you’ll really benefit from Vista 64.

Microsoft Confirms 64-bit Office 2010

Paul Lilly — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 15:15:43 -0500

As it turns out, the rumors were true; Microsoft does plan on releasing its Office 2010 software suite in both 32-bit and 64-bit flavors, says ArsTechnica, who received confirmation from a Microsoft spokesperson via an email exchange.

"Yes, Office will have two separate 32-bit and 64-bit versions," the spokesperson wrote. "Office 2010 will be the first to do this."

While the benefits of running Office natively in a 64-bit environment might not be particularly exciting, making the popular software suite available as such could help expedite 64-bit adoption among other vendors. Love it or hate it, this also means a certain debt of gratitude is owed to Vista, the first mainstream Windows OS to really push 64-bit onto the masses.

Appropriately enough, look for Office 2010 to be released sometime next year.

Image Credit: Microsoft