Dual boot with XP-64 or Vista-64

In light of the upcoming release of a 64-bit version of Photoshop in the fall, I'm considering installing XP-64

or Vista-64 to take advantage. Problem is, I don't know which one. I've been happily running XP-32 SP2 for a

while now, and will continue to use it for non-photo editing applications. Which one (XP-64 or Vista-64) will

serve me better if I only intend to use it for photo editing purposes?

We tried to use XP64 in our office, but driver support became an issue. This is in a small 3d rendering business. It may work just fine for your home office. We eventually ended up switching to Vista 64, since no one is really supporting XP64. You may be able to *postpone* your switch to Vista, but you will not be able to avoid it indefinitely (unless you go to Mac :) ). Maybe this is a good time to make the switch to Mac.

First, do all the devices you need - scanners, cameras, printers - have VISTA-64 drivers? If they do, I would suggest VISTA.

 

In the past Adobe has supported the current version of Windows and on version back. This CS2 runs under Windows 2000 and Windows XP. CS3, however runs only under VISTA and XP; it does not run under Windows 2000. The same applies to Lightroom; it also does not run under Windows 2000.

 

In 2010, just over a year from now, Microsoft is scheduled to release Windows 7. If Adobe follows true to form, CS4 will run under Vista and XP, and possibly under Windows 7. However CS5 will run under Windows 7 and VISTA, but not XP. By installing VISTA rather than XP you should buy yourself support for one or two extra releases of Adobe products.

I had the same problem and changed to a MacPro. My XP-64 comp just does net backups now. If I knew drivers problem before I'd continue to use my Windows XP 32, now thanks to XP 64 I own a Mac!

And no problems using it with PS CS3 and Lightroom.

I agree with Geland. I have a friend who has a networking business. He said in his onion, that if your going to go to Vista, go to Vista Ultimate, it doesn't have as many problems as the other two versions. He said that MS is coming out with (like Geland said) Windows 7 and that Vista is going to go the way of Windows ME.

Hi Charles,

 

I will respectfully disagree with your friend's comparison of Vista to ME.

 

Windows ME was the last release of Windows based on DOS. It was also rushed into production to get one last DOS release in and was released at approximately the same time as Windows 2000.

 

Vista, on the other hand, was hardly rushed; it was a long time in the making. From what I have read, Windows 7 will be a follow on to Vista as XP was a follow on the Windows 2000. In other words, Windows 7 will incorporate mush of Vista and will add to it.

 

I agree with your friend go with Vista Ultimate. The backup features make it worth while. Purchased as an OEM, or computer builder, product the price is reasonable.

Vista was indeed rushed. They had a deadline to release it and as they got closer, things became sloppy and rushed and it was released on time and "as is".

 

I also agree to go with Vista Ultimate 64 as long as your computer was made after Vista was released. Although I love and use XP-64 and have no issues with it, no one pays attention to it for drivers or updates so installing it means using an OS that is ignored and on it's way out. XP-64 is lighter and faster than Vista. Adobe just released a 64-bit version of Lightroom and states only Vista 64 is supported. However, it runs great on XP-64. I'm crossing my fingers with their 64-bit CS4 as well.

 

So, on an older box, take your chances with CS4 and XP-64. On a newer box with adequate cpu/mobo/ram, go with Vista-64.

I forgot to ask, why dual boot and have 32-bit XP and a 64 bit OS? If I was going dual boot, I'd go with a flavor of Windows 64-bit and Ubuntu.

Here I have five dual boot machines and two that are triple boot. Dual booting allows one to run software and use drivers abandoned by the so called improved OS. One might have a printer that is not supported by XP64 or Vista 64 and one can reboot and then print from the same box. Here I have one program that I still use that will not run under windows; or a dos window. It makes direct calls to the video card. I have two boxes where the first boot session is pure DOS; a stripped down variant that by program requires; a program written before Windows came out! The second boot is win2000; the third XP. One could always just build up a triple boot box with Xp32; XP64 and Vista 64 if one wanted to have some fun. One could also use windows 2003 server; thats what really XP64 is close to; ie the same chassis.

Kelly, have you had a go at server 2008 yet? I'd like to hear your thoughts. Although a different a kernel than

Vista, many are using it with Vista packs and are happy with it as a desktop OS....faster, more stable, no

bloatware or useless resources. Wish I knew more, I'd love to give it a shot.