<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 64-Bit Systems on The Rise</title>
	<atom:link href="http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2009/09/15/64-bit-systems-on-the-rise/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2009/09/15/64-bit-systems-on-the-rise/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=64-bit-systems-on-the-rise</link>
	<description>Everyday PC Tech, Tips, and Tricks</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 13:11:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Prudhomme</title>
		<link>http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2009/09/15/64-bit-systems-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-21065</link>
		<dc:creator>John Prudhomme</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Aug 2012 06:33:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/?p=11872#comment-21065</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The download speeds on your site were way off tonight on &quot;Full tests&quot;. I verified my download speed before and after doing the tests at 2 independant internet speed test site &amp; it was 12.2 Mbps. I ran the full tests twice and your rating of my download speed was less than 9 Mbps. Something is definately off.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The download speeds on your site were way off tonight on &#8220;Full tests&#8221;. I verified my download speed before and after doing the tests at 2 independant internet speed test site &amp; it was 12.2 Mbps. I ran the full tests twice and your rating of my download speed was less than 9 Mbps. Something is definately off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: walter shebib</title>
		<link>http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2009/09/15/64-bit-systems-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-6882</link>
		<dc:creator>walter shebib</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 May 2010 18:49:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/?p=11872#comment-6882</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[i found out from your site. you need a 64 bit desktop to run a blue ray rom. also i have 4gb of memory and im planing on doubling that. also this pc is quad. so i guess it is a xp pro sp3 running system. no more 32 bit vista garbage. excuse me but that former pc made me a nervous reck. so much for the spelling. thank you for the support walter]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i found out from your site. you need a 64 bit desktop to run a blue ray rom. also i have 4gb of memory and im planing on doubling that. also this pc is quad. so i guess it is a xp pro sp3 running system. no more 32 bit vista garbage. excuse me but that former pc made me a nervous reck. so much for the spelling. thank you for the support walter</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vincent B</title>
		<link>http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2009/09/15/64-bit-systems-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-6881</link>
		<dc:creator>Vincent B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 07:57:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/?p=11872#comment-6881</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DavidW,
How did you get your MP830 working on Win 7 64 Bit? Which drivers are you using?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DavidW,<br />
How did you get your MP830 working on Win 7 64 Bit? Which drivers are you using?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mc2fran</title>
		<link>http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2009/09/15/64-bit-systems-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-6880</link>
		<dc:creator>mc2fran</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 01:43:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/?p=11872#comment-6880</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, I agree the logic given for 4 gb is flawed. Addresses can be bigger with 64 bits, hence more memory can be used, but is not required.

I can&#039;t use my Palm Zire71 or my Xerox copier/printer with the new 64 bit computer. Are drivers really that hard to write? It&#039;s because these are older peripherals that the makers don&#039;t want to support any more.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I agree the logic given for 4 gb is flawed. Addresses can be bigger with 64 bits, hence more memory can be used, but is not required.</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t use my Palm Zire71 or my Xerox copier/printer with the new 64 bit computer. Are drivers really that hard to write? It&#8217;s because these are older peripherals that the makers don&#8217;t want to support any more.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William</title>
		<link>http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2009/09/15/64-bit-systems-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-6879</link>
		<dc:creator>William</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:43:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/?p=11872#comment-6879</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[People didn&#039;t upgrade to XP x64 SP3 because there was never one for XP x64, as that is based on windows 2003. Also 4GB of ram isn&#039;t required for 64bit, but 32bit can only support up to about 4GB due to memory register addresses whilst 64bit can support much more.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People didn&#8217;t upgrade to XP x64 SP3 because there was never one for XP x64, as that is based on windows 2003. Also 4GB of ram isn&#8217;t required for 64bit, but 32bit can only support up to about 4GB due to memory register addresses whilst 64bit can support much more.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DavidW</title>
		<link>http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2009/09/15/64-bit-systems-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-6878</link>
		<dc:creator>DavidW</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2009 00:47:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/?p=11872#comment-6878</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Doug,
64 bit drivers are not a requirement for running Canon printers on 64 bit operating systems. Our Canon MP830 runs fine with Win 7 64 bit. Windows 7 64 bit works very well on all 32 bit applications that I&#039;ve tested so far, with the exception of some virtual drive software.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Doug,<br />
64 bit drivers are not a requirement for running Canon printers on 64 bit operating systems. Our Canon MP830 runs fine with Win 7 64 bit. Windows 7 64 bit works very well on all 32 bit applications that I&#8217;ve tested so far, with the exception of some virtual drive software.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2009/09/15/64-bit-systems-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-6877</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 22:13:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/?p=11872#comment-6877</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The charts are a little confusing. What does attach rate mean? and is the number a percentage or what? The last chart claims Vista is popular among 64 bit OS users. What other OS is it compared to, the rarely factory installed XP64?  Did the author mean that it was popular among users that had 64 bit processors?
Some clarification please.

KEn]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The charts are a little confusing. What does attach rate mean? and is the number a percentage or what? The last chart claims Vista is popular among 64 bit OS users. What other OS is it compared to, the rarely factory installed XP64?  Did the author mean that it was popular among users that had 64 bit processors?<br />
Some clarification please.</p>
<p>KEn</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2009/09/15/64-bit-systems-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-6876</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 19:24:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/?p=11872#comment-6876</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My Compaq desktop (about 4-5 years old) which I am still pretty happy with, has the AMD athlon 64 processor, but came with XP (naturally).  Is this a 64 bit processor, and if so, why didn&#039;t it come with XP64.  Ive looked into upgrading to 64 bit XP, but the challenge of finding drivers etc. looked a little too daunting.  Especially since Vista came into light, many software/hardware companies have probably stopped writing new drivers for XP.  Will my current system run better with W7, provided I upgrade the memory to the 4 GB max?  It currently only has 1gig pc3200 memory, would W7 run on just 2gig?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My Compaq desktop (about 4-5 years old) which I am still pretty happy with, has the AMD athlon 64 processor, but came with XP (naturally).  Is this a 64 bit processor, and if so, why didn&#8217;t it come with XP64.  Ive looked into upgrading to 64 bit XP, but the challenge of finding drivers etc. looked a little too daunting.  Especially since Vista came into light, many software/hardware companies have probably stopped writing new drivers for XP.  Will my current system run better with W7, provided I upgrade the memory to the 4 GB max?  It currently only has 1gig pc3200 memory, would W7 run on just 2gig?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Corpsecrank</title>
		<link>http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2009/09/15/64-bit-systems-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-6875</link>
		<dc:creator>Corpsecrank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:24:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/?p=11872#comment-6875</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am currently running 7 RC 32bit but when I move to the full version I intend to use 64bit. XP 64bit was a horrible OS but the reason was nothing more than a lack of decent support. Today 64bit support is pretty much there and it&#039;s time to make the transition.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am currently running 7 RC 32bit but when I move to the full version I intend to use 64bit. XP 64bit was a horrible OS but the reason was nothing more than a lack of decent support. Today 64bit support is pretty much there and it&#8217;s time to make the transition.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jerry</title>
		<link>http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2009/09/15/64-bit-systems-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-6874</link>
		<dc:creator>Jerry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:44:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/?p=11872#comment-6874</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I agree with Billy!  If Adobe doesn&#039;t/can&#039;t do it is time for competition to come up with one and put Adobe out of business.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Billy!  If Adobe doesn&#8217;t/can&#8217;t do it is time for competition to come up with one and put Adobe out of business.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

 Served from: techtalk.pcpitstop.com @ 2013-05-23 14:55:39 by W3 Total Cache -->