Re: x64 bit version of MCE 2006?

Because in the real enterprise scenarios, customers don't just take a laptop
and run server on it, or take a dell 4-way and run Pro on it.

Microsoft could focus on testing 1,001 different upgrade scenarios, or add
features. Which would you rather have?



"Yves Bélanger" <YvesBlanger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:28C35B5C-402C-4814-AD4D-FC3AB3901C98@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Microsoft is not known for his logic you know...
>
> Let's take this case:
>
> - I buy Windows 2000 Pro and use it for 1 year
> - I want to install Windows 2000 Server so I buy it
> - I can't upgrade from Pro to Server (as a member server)
> - Why?
>
> It's not money since both OS has been bought! Differences between Pro
> and
> Server are some registry changes and some more software. It was possible
> with NT 4...
>
> Why should I need a clean install?
>
> There are mysteries in life...
>
>
> "WM" wrote:
>
>> You're saying it's money driven instead of logic driven. Everything I've
>> heard says MS may even be giving XP 64 away to those with 64-bit systems
>> and
>> XP Pro on them. That doesn't sound "all about money" to me.
>>
>> Upgrading from 32-bit to 64-bit would be even more complicated of an
>> upgrade
>> path than Windows 9X to XP - which is quite possibly the most complicated
>> to
>> date (much more so than an NT to XP upgrade). And many will tell you it
>> is
>> also fraught with peril. The same would be true if you could upgrade from
>> XP
>> Pro to XP 64-bit.
>>
>>
>> "Yves Bélanger" <YvesBlanger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:6E545384-9C7A-4D67-B170-1572D1173AD7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >
>> > I'm not upset because MCE is not ALREADY a 64-bit OS (should better be
>> > a
>> > 64-bit application because the real OS is XP Pro underneath). I'm
>> > just
>> > asking myself why isn't there a Service Pack (or whatever name it
>> > should
>> > be)
>> > that bring the kernel and drivers from 32-bit to 64-bit without a
>> > clean-install
>> > (when it's possible - not MCE for the moment).
>> >
>> > If the upgrade path from Windows NT 4 to Windows XP exist without a
>> > clean
>> > install (it changes almost every files and ALL drivers), there should
>> > be
>> > a
>> > path
>> > to upgrade a XP Edition to another XP edition, or CPU architecture,
>> > even
>> > if we
>> > have to pay for...
>> >
>> > If some tell me about the kernel architecture difference (Hal.dll,
>> > etc.),
>> > it is
>> > possible to upgrade a non-ACPI OS to ACPI OS without loosing anything.
>> > And
>> > the kernel and driver model are differents.
>> >
>> > Sorry if I sound so negative but when something is money-driven
>> > instead
>> > of
>> > logical-driven, I get upset. And here, it's not even a money thing
>> > since
>> > I can
>> > pay to be able to get a x64 architecture from my x86-32bit
>> > architecture.
>> >
>> >
>> > Yves
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "Bob [MVP]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> That makes sense. What doesn't make sense to me is
>> >> why Yves seems to be so upset, and ranting because
>> >> MCE is not already a 64-bit OS... :-/
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> -Bob
>> >> _______________________________
>> >> Microsoft MVP
>> >> Windows XP Media Center Edition
>> >> http://www.microsoft.com/ehome
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "WM" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> >> news:u$8keZvNFHA.3760@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> > It was undoubtedly done because the 64-bit AMD64 processors actually
>> >> > perform better in 32-bit mode (and suffer no deficiencies for
>> >> > it) than most 32-bit processors - and potentially give you a future
>> >> > upgrade path when MS DOES issue MCE for AMD64.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > "Bob [MVP]" <bob@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> >> > news:uEHWeUvNFHA.4052@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >>> So the question is "Why is there MCE computer with more
>> >> >>> performing
>> >> >>> CPUs
>> >> >>> (like
>> >> >>> x64 CPUs) if MCE doesn't need it?"
>> >> >>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> And "Why sell x64 CPUs if home computer doesn't need it?"
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Why? Because either you ordered it that way, or the
>> >> >> OEM/system builder decided to build it that way. You should
>> >> >> ask them why they decided to build a PC with a 64-bit
>> >> >> CPU and a 32-bit Operating System.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> There are legitimate applications that not only benefit
>> >> >> from, but require 64-bit computing. Media Center 2005
>> >> >> simply isn't one of them.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> -Bob
>> >> >> _______________________________
>> >> >> Microsoft MVP
>> >> >> Windows XP Media Center Edition
>> >> >> http://www.microsoft.com/ehome
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Yves Bélanger" <YvesBlanger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>> >> >> message
>> >> >> news:F2C176CC-1C38-4C99-B32F-8AC41FBD027C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> So the question is "Why is there MCE computer with more
>> >> >>> performing
>> >> >>> CPUs
>> >> >>> (like
>> >> >>> x64 CPUs) if MCE doesn't need it?"
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> And "Why sell x64 CPUs if home computer doesn't need it?"
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> If MCE was 64-bit aware, maybe it will process more quickly?
>> >> >>> Codecs
>> >> >>> processing
>> >> >>> 64 bits at the time should be more efficient that codecs
>> >> >>> processing
>> >> >>> 32
>> >> >>> bits at the
>> >> >>> time... No?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Yves
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> "Bob [MVP]" wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> Why does MCE "really need" the features of 64-bit computing?
>> >> >>>> It's an operating system/application designed for home use.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> --
>> >> >>>> -Bob
>> >> >>>> _______________________________
>> >> >>>> Microsoft MVP
>> >> >>>> Windows XP Media Center Edition
>> >> >>>> http://www.microsoft.com/ehome
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> "Yves Bélanger" <Yves Bélanger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
>> >> >>>> in
>> >> >>>> message
>> >> >>>> news:8273CDF0-A79A-4AEB-9EC0-DD7A05300D0D@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>> > I bought a HP Media Center HTPC with a AMD64 processor some
>> >> >>>> > months ago.
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>> > I really wish that MCE 2005 or newest versions will soon use
>> >> >>>> > the
>> >> >>>> > benefits
>> >> >>>> > of 64-bit
>> >> >>>> > computing for the PCs running these kind of processor.
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>> > Why releasing new processor with more features when the OS are
>> >> >>>> > not ready and
>> >> >>>> > that Microsoft will not provide upgrade of the current OS and
>> >> >>>> > new
>> >> >>>> > version
>> >> >>>> > of the
>> >> >>>> > editions of XP that really need these features (like MCE)?
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>> > Money, money, money... It's all that company wants!!
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>> > Yves
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>> > "Michael Creasy [MSFT]" wrote:
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>> >> There's been no announcement of any future release.
>> >> >>>> >>
>> >> >>>> >> --
>> >> >>>> >> Michael Creasy [MSFT] - http://blogs.msdn.com/mcreasy
>> >> >>>> >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
>> >> >>>> >> confers
>> >> >>>> >> no rights.
>> >> >>>> >>
>> >> >>>> >> "Gregory" <Gregory@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> >> >>>> >> news:3472EDDC-5EFA-4F67-8B42-270928817E56@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >>>> >> > Since Intel is going to enable x64 bit versions of desktop
>> >> >>>> >> > processors in
>> >> >>>> >> > 2005, will the next version of MCE (possibly MCE 2006) be
>> >> >>>> >> > x64
>> >> >>>> >> > enabled?
>> >> >>>> >>
>> >> >>>> >>
>> >> >>>> >>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: NT to W2K3 Migration
    ... You cannot just promote a member server to AD. ... upgrade your PDC to windows 2000 or 2003, whichever flavor of AD you want to ... Upgrading from Windows NT Server 4.0 ... ensure that you have designed a DNS ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: NT to W2K3 Migration
    ... How to Upgrade from Windows NT Server 4.0 ... Best Practice Active Directory Design for Managing Windows Networks ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Native 2003 mode and NT4 workstations?
    ... Migrating from Windows NT Server 4.0 to Windows Server 2003 ... How to Upgrade from Windows NT Server 4.0 ... ensure that you have designed a DNS ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Migrating NT4 to Windows 2003
    ... Migrating from Windows NT Server 4.0 to Windows Server 2003 ... How to Upgrade from Windows NT Server 4.0 ... Best Practice Active Directory Design for Managing Windows Networks ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Migrating NT4 to Windows 2003
    ... Migrating from Windows NT Server 4.0 to Windows Server 2003 ... How to Upgrade from Windows NT Server 4.0 ... Best Practice Active Directory Design for Managing Windows Networks ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
Loading