| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/17/2009 12:42:00 PM · #1 |
I have heard good things strangley enough that Windows 7 is night and day over Vista. I am running 64bit Vista now and it is buggy to say the least.
I checked with Adobe and CS4 is good for Windows 7 as is Lightroom - v3 will be 64bit native.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2009 12:48:37 PM · #2 |
Ive been running Windows 7 ultimate 64bit for quite a few months and its been AWESOME to say the least on my laptop and my desktop workstation and its working fine with my Adobe CS4 web and creative premium suites and Lightroom2 as well far better than Vista 64 ultimate.
-dave
|
|
|
|
11/17/2009 12:50:39 PM · #3 |
| I'm digging it. I haven't really played around with it too much, but I'm going to put a copy of lightroom on it this week I believe. |
|
|
|
11/17/2009 12:52:52 PM · #4 |
I installed it on my main system the other night and am still installing applications and configuring things. One thing I found last night is that Canon does not have a 64 bit RAW codec to allow me to see previews and thumbnails of my RAW files. I did easily find a free 3rd party codec pack that worked fine, however. It includes codecs for most camera brands. I'll try to remember to post a link this evening when I get home.
I have the 32 bit version on a couple of netbooks for several weeks now. |
|
|
|
11/17/2009 12:55:42 PM · #5 |
| I've had the RC for a while now, and the Beta before that. Unbelievably stable, especially compared to 64- OR 32-bit Vista. |
|
|
|
11/17/2009 08:11:15 PM · #6 |
| did you guys just install it over Vista? |
|
|
|
11/17/2009 08:13:50 PM · #7 |
I just upgraded from XP two days ago and I like what I see so far. I'm just ordering an additional 4 GB or RAM (to bring to 6 GB) and that's where I think 64-bit is really going to shine when rendering video or working on 1 GB photoshop files.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2009 08:17:25 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I just upgraded from XP two days ago and I like what I see so far. I'm just ordering an additional 4 GB or RAM (to bring to 6 GB) and that's where I think 64-bit is really going to shine when rendering video or working on 1 GB photoshop files. |
Careful, with a 1GB photo file, they can make a poster the size of Australia ;) |
|
|
|
11/17/2009 08:21:52 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Tez:
did you guys just install it over Vista? |
No. I have a spare 100 Gb partition that I reserved for an OS upgrade. I am presently dual booting Vista and 7, with Vista as the default. Once I get the Win7 installation configured, then I will change my boot menu to default to Win7 rather than Vista. I keep all my data files on a physically separate drive, so all of that is exactly where it was before.
On the netbooks, which got the 32 bit version, I wiped out the existing XP installations, but they were new computers, so nothing was lost.
Here is the link for the RAW codec pack that I mentioned earlier.
Message edited by author 2009-11-17 20:24:07. |
|
|
|
11/17/2009 08:27:38 PM · #10 |
Both of my Win7 installs were fresh installs.
 DrAchoo I kicked my desktop up to 6GB of ram and the laptop to 4GB and they bot run sweeeeet :) the desktop is an Intel quad core and the laptop is a dual core Intel
|
|
|
|
11/17/2009 08:30:09 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by dknourek:
Both of my Win7 installs were fresh installs.
DrAchoo I kicked my desktop up to 6GB of ram and the laptop to 4GB and they bot run sweeeeet :) the desktop is an Intel quad core and the laptop is a dual core Intel |
I'm psyched. I'm running a AMD quad core too, but currently with 2 GB RAM it definitely chokes when I work on big pictures (5000x7500). |
|
|
|
11/17/2009 08:31:03 PM · #12 |
I run both Lightroom 64 and CS4 64 on Windows 7 and it runs outstanding. I dual boot XP 64 and 7 64 but will be doing an in-house cleaning soon and probably eliminate XP from the equation. Originally I felt XP could be used as my gaming platform and 7 my photo/programming. It's becoming a pain to boot from one to the other and I just don't think XP 64 is offering anything above 7 in performance.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2009 10:07:13 PM · #13 |
I've been running Win7, 64-bit on a Core2 Duo (E8500) machine with 8GB of RAM since May 6 (the day after RC1 was made available). I did *not* do a clean install, but I did ghost off the old Vista installation just in case I ran into trouble.
I've been using it daily on my main home machine, without any real issues. I will be updating the other of our home machines soon. |
|
|
|
11/17/2009 10:59:15 PM · #14 |
I didn't have any real issues with Vista 64, but a few weeks ago I upgraded in place to Win7 ultimate, and I like it.
I did have a couple stability problems at first, that were related to my video card drivers (and showed up when I used Media Center and it was futzing with the video mode). For some reason, there was an upgrade waiting in Windows Update for it, that wasn't part of the release. But once that was updated, all was fine.
I have been running LR 64 bit for quite a while. It's been available as 64 bit since 2.x.
I have CS4, 64 bit, but I usually run CS4 32 bit, since not all my add-ins work under CS4/64.
I have 6GB of memory, but between LR and CS4, it goes quickly, so 8 or MORE would be even better. You don't need it for other things, but you do if you are running LR and CS4 together!
I have a single processor, 2.6 GHz quad core machine. Nothing expensive, and a GeForce 9500S video card.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2009 11:18:21 PM · #15 |
| I'm running Win 7 on my MacBook and so far, so good. I just have the 32 bit version, though. Besides being an excuse to upgrade hardware, what's the allure of 64 bit? |
|
|
|
11/17/2009 11:20:12 PM · #16 |
I am currently in the backseat of a car in rural Gippsland, Victoria Australia with my iPhone tethered to my brand new Acer Aspire 1810TZ Ultraportable. It runs Windows 7 64 Bit with only 2GB of RAM, and it runs better and cleaner than my desktop running Vista with all the bells and whistles. I love it. I prefer a Mac, and am getting a new iMac, but this little fellow is running so beautifully, it amazes me. I have Photoshop CS4 now installed and it runs really well with only 2MB of RAM which I will upgrade to 4GB as soon as I can.
Message edited by author 2009-11-18 02:47:31. |
|
|
|
11/17/2009 11:37:09 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I'm running Win 7 on my MacBook and so far, so good. I just have the 32 bit version, though. Besides being an excuse to upgrade hardware, what's the allure of 64 bit? |
Main reason is the ability to address more ram. 32 bit addressing cannot make full use of 4 Gb. The Mac is also on a path to 64 bits as. Some Mac OS software components are 32 bit, other parts are now 64. (Now you have me reminiscing about breaking the 640k barrier back in the "olden days"...)
BTW, 32 bit Win7 runs quite nicely on my 1.2 Ghz netbook with 2 Gb ram. Noticeably slower than my other computers when running processor intensive things, but quite acceptable for general usage and even some modest photo editing.
Message edited by author 2009-11-17 23:39:37. |
|
|
|
11/17/2009 11:54:41 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by hotpasta:
I am currently in the backseat of a car in rural Gippsland, Victoria Australia with my iPhone tethered to my brand new Acer Aspire 1810TZ Ultraportable. It runs Windows 7 64 Bit with only 2MB of RAM, and it runs better and cleaner than my desktop running Vista with all the bells and whistles. I love it. I prefer a Mac, and am getting a new iMac, but this little fellow is running so beautifully, it amazes me. I have Photoshop CS4 now installed and it runs really well with only 2MB of RAM which I will upgrade to 4MB as soon as I can. |
I assume you mean 2GB of RAM...not 2MB, otherwise, it's REALLY amazing ;)
Though my first microcomputer had 256 bytes of memory, and a two digit display :) It was a Cosmac Elf... //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COSMAC_ELF
The next one I got had a whopping 4KB of RAM...the TRS-80 Model I.
...
then through the IBM PC permutations...
...
Now I have 6GB and it's not enough :)
Message edited by author 2009-11-17 23:55:09.
|
|
|
|
11/18/2009 02:47:06 AM · #19 |
| Oops...corrected it now. I meant 2GB |
|
|
|
11/18/2009 05:24:25 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by Tez:
did you guys just install it over Vista? |
Yeh I did that, my pc came with an upgrade voucher for Win 7 (64 bit). Install was easy and took approx 55 mins from start to finish.
Runs a lot quicker than Vista did (PC has 4gb Ram, Intel(R) Core(TM) Quad CPU Q8200 @ 2.33GHZ)
Not played about with it yet
Message edited by author 2009-11-18 05:28:18.
|
|
|
|
11/18/2009 09:56:13 AM · #21 |
been running RC 32 bit on my laptop for 4 months. Night and day jump in performance from XP SP2. It's a tablet too, so there's even more overhead.
Boot time dropped from a minute and a half with XP (46 seconds off a fresh install) down to 26 seconds. After 4 months, THIS HASN"T INCREASED significantly. I think it's around 32 seconds right now, but that's probably antivirus. Oddly, my desktop boots in about 18 seconds. Not sure why, but it takes almost 10 seconds just to do the hardware bootup to get to starting windows. Windows is up and ready in about 4 seconds after it starts to load. In comparison, my laptop is already loading windows after 4 seconds and takes almost 30 seconds to get the thing ready to use. (all in win7) Laptop has 2gb RAM on a 1.6ghz centrino... it's pretty old. I think 2004.
I've never been interested in Vista and specifically avoided it so I can't provide comparison notes.
Been running full ultimate on my desktop (you already know the stats from the other thread stew), and full ultimate on my comp at work.
Honestly, I'm a bit surprised to find that I've had a few more problems with it at home than I expected. It has crashed on me a few times. It never did that on my tablet and hasn't done that on my work comp. Not even once. And I haven't even given it a run in yet. Too many midterms.
I've also installed it on my boss's comp. It took 37 minutes on his. (about 25 minutes on my work comp and I forgot to notice on this computer...)
Compared to an XP install, it's faster and simpler. There are a few other tweaks necessary. A lot of other little 'maintenance' programs don't really need to be installed.
I found a compatibility issue with Threatfire that was slowing some things down and actually caused a boot hang that required that it be removed via a safe mode boot. Back down to straight Avast and malwarebytes for security. I haven't had a virus problem in a long time though, so I'm not too worried.
Interestingly, just in general snappiness, the laptop holds its own against my desktop. Although only a couple windows 7 visual features are turned on compared to all but one or two on the desktop.
For me though, the best thing about it is that it is starting to be what I expect from an OS. More of a client to run your computer rather than a program. I've never been able to run my computer with such a tidy and clean desktop before either. I only have the recycle bin icon on my desktop. Makes for a heck of a picture frame. ;)
Message edited by author 2009-11-18 10:18:50. |
|
|
|
11/18/2009 11:08:37 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
I found a compatibility issue with Threatfire that was slowing some things down and actually caused a boot hang that required that it be removed via a safe mode boot. Back down to straight Avast and malwarebytes for security. I haven't had a virus problem in a long time though, so I'm not too worried.
|
I have been running Threatfire (along with Microsoft Secuirty Essentials) with no problem. In fact I had to install that because I had a problem running Comodo AV/Firewall. Odd !
Message edited by author 2009-11-20 00:11:43.
|
|
|
|
11/18/2009 04:01:52 PM · #23 |
| I bought a PC with Vista, and went with the free upgrade, the install went perfectly and some of the weird stuff that was happening with PC went away. So far I am happy with the new OS> |
|
|
|
11/19/2009 06:28:12 PM · #24 |
I've never had any issues with Vista Home Premium 64 bit on my PC, but I love love love Windows 7. I'm still running the RC and it's been rock solid since June. I run Windows 7 Ultimate RC 64 bit on my Intel Quad Core Q8200 with 8 GB of Ram. I have zero issues running either Adobe CS4 or Lightroom 2.5. I often run them both at the same time and their performance is flawless under Windows 7.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2009 06:55:40 PM · #25 |
| I'm running it -- it's quite nice! I've been running the betas (both 32 and 64 bit) since January and ended up buying the 64 bit OEM version from NewEgg for ~$135. Haven't had any issues, and I get to use the whole 4GB of RAM that's in my computer. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 06:51:33 PM EDT.
