"Ugly Mugly" wrote in message
...
| Jason Cothran wrote:
| "quasar" wrote in message
| ...
| How does it compare to the 32 bit version of XP (running on the same
| 64 bit architecture that is) i.e. how does xp64-on-654/939 compare to
| xp32-on-754/939? Is it faster in any respect?
|
|
| For now, yes. It is considerably faster. A lot of that has to do with
| how "raw" it is though. Once they add all there bloatware in there,
| it will likely slow down some, but the early releases look promising.
| On the flip side, it is already considerably faster "feeling", and
| that's without good drver optimization. From that viewpoint, it also
| stands to get better even as they add the "bloatware" into it. I have
| a good feeling about things to come in the future. They won't catch
| Linux on 64-bit any time soon, but at least they are putting forth an
| effort to put out a product even if it is way overdue.
|
| I guess you have been away from Windows for awhile. There is a program out
| that will let you remove many of the xtras that you misname "bloatware"
| Heck, most versions of Linux come on 3 or more CD's nowdays. Windows still
| comes on 1 cd. So, who has the more xtras? )
|


Sorry if I riled you, but Windows is my primary OS. I didn't mean to ****
off any fanboy by calling bloatware bloatware. This was not meant as a slam
on windows, but a statement of the current condition of the OS. I am sorry
you woke up on the wrong side of the bed and welcome to kill-file for your
unconstructive, militant "input".