Just got Win7 64 bit - why are the default programs all 32 bit? Even with 64 bit versions?

[Taverner]

I am posting this from a 64 bit IE which you get when you run it from the program

But if you hit the default IE button, it gives you the 32 bit version

Why?

[Taverner]

1. Oh wait, I know why...

There are no 64 bit versions of any of the helper apps (e.g. Flash) so its useless

[HopeHoops]

2. Because IE blows moose cock.

No, this IS NOT a Sarah Palin thread.

[Taverner]

3. Firefox has let me down lately

It hasn't been stable for a year - so I migrated

This is from an ex-Netscaper

I used to love it - then they started getting sloppy

I will probably migrate to Chrome soon though...

[HopeHoops]

4. E-FUCKING GADS! Chrome is nothing but a data gathering engine.

Be thee ware for here there are dragons.

How the hell did Firefox let you down? I run it on XP, Vista, OS X and Linux and never have any problems with it on any of those platforms. Safari is almost as fast on OS X, but not quite.

[Taverner]

5. Versions 3 and above

Version 2 was awesome! Loved it!

I used to use XP, but now I'm on Win7. How else are you going to use 8 gb of memory?

Linux has gotten much better - but it's just too much work walking my wife through it, so I use Win7

[HopeHoops]

6. I'm not willing to subject myself to Win7 until the 6 month manditory suffering period is over.

That's just M$ standard procedure. I sincerely hope you're joking about the 8GB thing. Vista isn't great, but it runs comfortably on 1GB and actually works like an operating system with 2GB. XP is actually a more stable platform, but even it can't touch Win98 SE despite the fact that it is derived directly from it.

My favorite Linux box is an HP 10.2" netbook that came SHIPPED with Linux. It already had Firefox, Thunderbird, and Open Office installed (among other things). It is a sweet little unit and it was relatively inexpensive.

[Taverner]

7. Its not a .0 release

It's actually Vista .5

It's all the rage in software these days - the 'not a dot oh relase' thing

[HopeHoops]

9. More like Vista dot D'OH!

[Taverner]

14. But its mainly bugfixes - MS finally learned to patch before progressing...

[jmowreader]

8. Uhh...

Windows XP was derived from Windows NT. Windows 98 was derived from DOS. Totally different architecture under the hood.

[HopeHoops]

10. No, 98 was 95 with bug fixes.

XP is still 98 under the hood. Vista is the first real NT derivative. And don't even get me started on Windows ME.

NT 4.0 SP 4 was and remains the most stable thing M$ has ever produced.

[jmowreader]

11. No, that's not right...

The progression of DOS based windows was: Windows 1 through 3.x, 95, 98 and ME

The progression of the NT core Windows was: NT 3.1-4.0, 2000, XP (they also released a Server 2003 at the same time), Vista (Server 2008 was released), to Windows 7.

Windows XP runs the NT 5.0 core, not the Windows 98 core. They run DOS-based apps in a compatibility box like Apple did with the pre-OS X applications.

[Taverner]

13. As an MCSE let me validate what jmowreader has said

Yes, XP is NT to the core.

Windows ME was the last version of DOS based OSes for MS

[TreasonousBastard]

12. Give Opera a shot before helping Google conquer the world...

www.opera.com

[hobbit709]

15. Use SeaMonkey if you liked Netscape.