Re: Re: Microsoft's x64 strategy

"USNBrendon" <thenavyone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:84E5E0AD-F34F-4D71-8710-1ACD180CC294@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Mike...regarding my statement about EM64T being "almost old news"...I was
> being SARCASTIC and FACETIOUS. Yes, I am well aware of what DUAL core
> technologies are and mean to the general public...hence the sarcasm. We
> are
> already seeing widespread dual-core processors released to the mainstream
> markets, yet Microsoft is still NOT considering XP Pro x64, et al, for
> general consumption? Ugh. It is BAD business...and cruel to those of us
> who
> KNOW how to build a rock-solid and stable system, WITHOUT the help of
> OEMs!
> Once again, I'm sure someone needed clarification on what I wrote...but
> for
> everyone else who got it....BRAVO! ;-)


Maybe I just not saying this clearly enough for you, so I will try again

x64 is considered ready for general consumption - you will see more and more
OEMs shipping x64 systems with the x64 OS.

If you KNOW how to build your own system then you KNOW how to buy an OEM
only operating system for it - don't you ?
So what you do is display a little bit of patience (since mine is now paper
thin) and wait for the x64 products to reach the OEM distribution channels
and the you go BUY one with a $1 power cord or a screw or something JUST AS
YOU DO TODAY !!!!!

--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"USNBrendon" <thenavyone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:84E5E0AD-F34F-4D71-8710-1ACD180CC294@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Mike...regarding my statement about EM64T being "almost old news"...I was
> being SARCASTIC and FACETIOUS. Yes, I am well aware of what DUAL core
> technologies are and mean to the general public...hence the sarcasm. We
> are
> already seeing widespread dual-core processors released to the mainstream
> markets, yet Microsoft is still NOT considering XP Pro x64, et al, for
> general consumption? Ugh. It is BAD business...and cruel to those of us
> who
> KNOW how to build a rock-solid and stable system, WITHOUT the help of
> OEMs!
> Once again, I'm sure someone needed clarification on what I wrote...but
> for
> everyone else who got it....BRAVO! ;-)
>
> "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote:
>
>> "USNBrendon" <thenavyone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:9AA64935-26BB-4988-8C47-5A7EAE4ADDAC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >I have to agree with John Prevette's remarks and concerns! Microsoft is
>> >WAY
>> > off the mark on this one. The trend is towards 64-bit OSs
>> > anyway...period.
>> > With DUAL-CORE processors already in production, EM64T is almost OLD
>> > news!
>> > Come on guys, what gives here?
>>
>> Dual cores make no difference - both AMD and Intel will ship dual core
>> 64-bit chips (this means 2 EM64T enabled cores on the Intel chips)
>>
>> > I certainly understand the issues with
>> > limited drivers and support, yet I took all of this into account when I
>> > began
>> > the custom build of my new system--designed especially for Windows XP
>> > Pro
>> > x64!!! ATI, and even Creative had drivers out which take care of all
>> > my
>> > needs. Intel has provided the latest BIOS and chipset software,
>> > including
>> > the Matrix (RAID) software for my SATA devices! NOW I AM TOLD THAT I
>> > CAN'T
>> > HAVE THIS NEW OS BECAUSE I DIDN'T BUY A PRE-CONFIGURED PC with the OEM
>> > version of XP Pro (32bit), WHICH I ALREADY OWN ANYWAY??? Uh no. That
>> > is
>> > simply WRONG.
>> >
>>
>> No it is you that is wrong. just go to
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/upgrade/default.mspx and you can
>> trade in your XP Pro 32-bit for a x64 version.
>>
>> > I do wish to wage my COMPLAINT and total disgust with Microsoft for the
>> > current plans to release XPx64 ONLY to OEM channels...and furthermore,
>> > to
>> > only allow upgrades for people who bought AMD64 or Intel EM64T
>> > computers
>> > what
>> > SHIPPED with 32-bit XP Pro!!! That sucks guys...since I custom built
>> > my
>> > Intel rig just for the day that everything came together and MS finally
>> > released an OS for us! Talk about leaving me...and many others...out
>> > in
>> > the
>> > COLD. It is BITTER indeed!
>> >
>>
>> Whole section now irrelevant given my comment above - also you will be
>> able
>> to buy the x64 OEM product via the same routes as you can buy al our
>> other
>> OEM only operating systems today. (once it reaches the channels)
>>
>> > Microsoft...you MUST seriously reconsider the trade-in/up program! It
>> > is
>> > FAR TOO RESTRICTIVE, and I'm sorry, but I should not have had to
>> > purchased
>> > a
>> > pre-configured 64-bit box from one of your channel members in order to
>> > be
>> > eligible for the new x64 OS! I beta test for you, I provide technical
>> > support for countless Windows users in my profession, and I custom
>> > built a
>> > FLAWLESS system far superior to ANY of those offered by HP, Dell, or
>> > even
>> > Alienware. (Not to toot my own horn--I state only the facts) Now I
>> > find
>> > out
>> > that I am going to be gigged for NOT purchasing a pre-built system
>> > loaded
>> > with the same damn software I ALREADY OWN??? Not cool...not in the
>> > slightest.
>> >
>>
>> All irrelevant - did you actually have a look on Microsoft.com before you
>> stared this rant ?
>>
>> > That is my rant for the week...although if I had ready access to Mr.
>> > Gates,
>> > I'd rant and rave DAILY until this ridiculous policy is changed!
>> >
>>
>> Then you may end up looking a little more out of line with what is
>> already
>> announced and operational then you appear to be here.
>>
>> > P.S. For those of you who ARE planning on sticking with the betas
>> > until
>> > they time out, it is becoming increasingly easy to find drivers for x64
>> > Windows with each day. Already ATI and Creative have released the
>> > appropriate drivers for my gear, and all that is lacking are some apps,
>> > which
>> > will soon be ported over anyway. There is hope yet! Hang in there.
>> >
>>
>> No need for poor advice the Trial versions and Swap Out program are all
>> available right now.
>>
>> > ;-) Good luck to all who are still using the betas, regardless of RC.
>> > I
>> > ordered the WinXP Pro x64 RTM version CD today as it was officially
>> > released
>> > for "TRIAL" beyond the beta testers/CPP. To this point I have been
>> > beta
>> > testing Win 2003 Server Ed x64 (SP1). I can't wait to have my
>> > dual-boot
>> > configuration with both versions of XP Pro 32 & x64. Of course, I am
>> > also
>> > an
>> > avid user of Cakewalk's Sonar 4 Producer Edition, and us pro audio guys
>> > have
>> > been waiting for a LONG time for this day to come!
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Mike
>> --
>> Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
>>
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights
>>
>> Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
>> newsgroups
>>
>> "USNBrendon" <thenavyone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:9AA64935-26BB-4988-8C47-5A7EAE4ADDAC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >I have to agree with John Prevette's remarks and concerns! Microsoft is
>> >WAY
>> > off the mark on this one. The trend is towards 64-bit OSs
>> > anyway...period.
>> > With DUAL-CORE processors already in production, EM64T is almost OLD
>> > news!
>> > Come on guys, what gives here? I certainly understand the issues with
>> > limited drivers and support, yet I took all of this into account when I
>> > began
>> > the custom build of my new system--designed especially for Windows XP
>> > Pro
>> > x64!!! ATI, and even Creative had drivers out which take care of all
>> > my
>> > needs. Intel has provided the latest BIOS and chipset software,
>> > including
>> > the Matrix (RAID) software for my SATA devices! NOW I AM TOLD THAT I
>> > CAN'T
>> > HAVE THIS NEW OS BECAUSE I DIDN'T BUY A PRE-CONFIGURED PC with the OEM
>> > version of XP Pro (32bit), WHICH I ALREADY OWN ANYWAY??? Uh no. That
>> > is
>> > simply WRONG.
>> >
>> > I do wish to wage my COMPLAINT and total disgust with Microsoft for the
>> > current plans to release XPx64 ONLY to OEM channels...and furthermore,
>> > to
>> > only allow upgrades for people who bought AMD64 or Intel EM64T
>> > computers
>> > what
>> > SHIPPED with 32-bit XP Pro!!! That sucks guys...since I custom built
>> > my
>> > Intel rig just for the day that everything came together and MS finally
>> > released an OS for us! Talk about leaving me...and many others...out
>> > in
>> > the
>> > COLD. It is BITTER indeed!
>> >
>> > Microsoft...you MUST seriously reconsider the trade-in/up program! It
>> > is
>> > FAR TOO RESTRICTIVE, and I'm sorry, but I should not have had to
>> > purchased
>> > a
>> > pre-configured 64-bit box from one of your channel members in order to
>> > be
>> > eligible for the new x64 OS! I beta test for you, I provide technical
>> > support for countless Windows users in my profession, and I custom
>> > built a
>> > FLAWLESS system far superior to ANY of those offered by HP, Dell, or
>> > even
>> > Alienware. (Not to toot my own horn--I state only the facts) Now I
>> > find
>> > out
>> > that I am going to be gigged for NOT purchasing a pre-built system
>> > loaded
>> > with the same damn software I ALREADY OWN??? Not cool...not in the
>> > slightest.
>> >
>> > That is my rant for the week...although if I had ready access to Mr.
>> > Gates,
>> > I'd rant and rave DAILY until this ridiculous policy is changed!
>> >
>> > P.S. For those of you who ARE planning on sticking with the betas
>> > until
>> > they time out, it is becoming increasingly easy to find drivers for x64
>> > Windows with each day. Already ATI and Creative have released the
>> > appropriate drivers for my gear, and all that is lacking are some apps,
>> > which
>> > will soon be ported over anyway. There is hope yet! Hang in there.
>> >
>> > ;-) Good luck to all who are still using the betas, regardless of RC.
>> > I
>> > ordered the WinXP Pro x64 RTM version CD today as it was officially
>> > released
>> > for "TRIAL" beyond the beta testers/CPP. To this point I have been
>> > beta
>> > testing Win 2003 Server Ed x64 (SP1). I can't wait to have my
>> > dual-boot
>> > configuration with both versions of XP Pro 32 & x64. Of course, I am
>> > also
>> > an
>> > avid user of Cakewalk's Sonar 4 Producer Edition, and us pro audio guys
>> > have
>> > been waiting for a LONG time for this day to come!
>> >
>> > "WM" wrote:
>> >
>> >> One thing to consider - "porting" ones skillset from X86 to X64 is an
>> >> entirely different thing than X86 to Itanium. Unlike Itanium, from
>> >> the Windows perspective there isn't a huge amount to learn - it's
>> >> more about application compatibility.
>> >>
>> >> 4/16/2005 6:12:02 PM
>> >> John Prevette <JohnPrevette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>> >> message
>> >> <5FB142E7-37A2-453C-8C1A-924D6D7DEC75@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >>
>> >> > Mike,
>> >> > From a Production perspective at a company, your replys are all
>> >> sound.
>> >> > What I am trying to do is learn 64 bit computing at home so I can
>> >> hit the
>> >> > ground running with it at work. If it is too expensive to
>> >> implement at home,
>> >> > then I can't learn it as easily and I can't feel comfortable
>> >> specifying it at
>> >> > work so maybe we don't go forward with it until I get the time to
>> >> spend on it
>> >> > at work (if I ever do). We are currently specing about 300,000
>> >> dollars worth
>> >> > of hardware that may or may not be 64 bit capable for one project
>> >> alone.
>> >> >
>> >> > At work, all technolgies that are "new" are restricted as to who
>> >> can "play
>> >> > with them". With x64, our Architecture group controls that so it
>> >> isn't my
>> >> > job to be an expert in x64 so I really can't mess with it at work
>> >> because I
>> >> > wouldn't be working on my assigned tasks. To get around that, a
>> >> guy learns
>> >> > on his own time ... gets an MCSE, gets x64 running at home, and
>> >> then can use
>> >> > that knowledge at work to the benefit of himself (and, of course,
>> >> Microsoft).
>> >> >
>> >> > Microsoft gave away thousands of copies of Windows Server 2003
>> >> Enterprise
>> >> > Edition with 25 CALS (NFR version) to MOC training students and
>> >> what was the
>> >> > reason ... to get the technology into the hands of the people that
>> >> will learn
>> >> > it and then specify it at their companies thus bringing in more
>> >> sales. Why
>> >> > not a program to give out 3 months worth of x64 NFRs to MOC
>> >> candidates this
>> >> > summer or maybe a copy to everyone at Tech Ed 2005?
>> >> >
>> >> > So, Windows 64 bit finally comes out and I go out and buy cheap
>> >> AMD
>> >> > hardware at Fry's and install RC2 and I'm running 64 bit ... the
>> >> learning has
>> >> > begun. I thought an easy next step was to find an NFR image for
>> >> x64 so that
>> >> > I could use my existing three NFR copies as the basis of a
>> >> permanent platform
>> >> > to learn with at home. What I am finding is that access is
>> >> restricted so
>> >> > Linux steps forward and Windows stalls just like 64 bit on Itanium
>> >> due to the
>> >> > hardware price.
>> >> >
>> >> > The answer that I am still searching for is whether I could use
>> >> my 32 bit
>> >> > key on a 64 bit NFR CD? Microsoft's web site tells me that if I
>> >> own a
>> >> > license to Windows 2003, then it can be used for the 32 bit or 64
>> >> bit version
>> >> > ..
>> >> >
>> >> > ----------------------------
>> >> > http://www.microsoft.
>> >> com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/priclicfaq.mspx
>> >> >
>> >> > Q. How do I find the pricing and licensing terms for the 64-bit
>> >> versions of
>> >> > Windows Server 2003?
>> >> >
>> >> > A. The 32-bit and 64-bit versions of the software are the same
>> >> price. The
>> >> > license grants the customer the option of using either the 32-bit
>> >> version or
>> >> > the 64-bit version of the software. Client access licenses (CALs)
>> >> are still
>> >> > required to access or use the server.
>> >> > ----------------------------
>> >> >
>> >> > So, my question is, can I and how do I get a 64 bit NFR CD so I
>> >> can use my
>> >> > current 32 bit NFR licenses?
>> >> >
>> >> > As in my reply to the MVP about MSDN, cost is the key. Telling
>> >> the wife
>> >> > I'm buying an MSDN subscription for a grand isn't going to fly.
>> >> >
>> >> > p.s. -- Check your math ... 180 days is 6 months, not 4 but that is
>> >> still
>> >> > too short to have a permanent system at home that I can use to
>> >> learn with.
>> >> > ;-)
>> >> >
>> >> > John Prevette
>> >> > MCSE Windows Server 2003
>> >> >
>> >> > "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > "John Prevette" <JohnPrevette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>> >> message
>> >> > > news:3855691F-C6D6-4600-9C55-BB17E9829396@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> > > > Can anyone explain Microsoft's strategy with x64 from the
>> >> perspective of
>> >> > > > getting it into user's and developer's hands? For example,
>> >> Microsoft gave
>> >> > > > out thousands of 32 bit copies of Windows Server 2003
>> >> Enterprise with 25
>> >> > > > cals
>> >> > > > for MOC training students (non-expiring NFR version). The x64
>> >> version,
>> >> > > > however, you have to go get it from an OEM. One of the gripes
>> >> against
>> >> > > > Windows is that they haven't been 64 bit like Linux and now it
>> >> is finally
>> >> > > > here but the access is restricted to getting it through the OEM
>> >> channel.
>> >> > > > You
>> >> > > > can download the trial but with 180 days, it dies before you
>> >> get much
>> >> > > > done.
>> >> > > > What is the logic behind the restriction?
>> >> > > > --
>> >> > > > John Prevette
>> >> > >
>> >> > > John,
>> >> > >
>> >> > > The specifc nature as regards driver support for a robust
>> >> production
>> >> > > environment lends itself well to the OEM model in that they ship
>> >> you a
>> >> > > system complete with all hardware and supported drivers. This
>> >> will have
>> >> > > been tested as is supported by that OEM.
>> >> > > If you are using "self build" server then you can acquire the OEM
>> >> products
>> >> > > just as you do toady through the various distributors such as
>> >> NewEgg for
>> >> > > example
>> >> > > http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.
>> >> asp?submit=manufactory&catalog=368&manufactory=1149&DEPA=6&sortby=14&order=1
>> >>
>> >> > > (obviously once it reaches the distribution channels).
>> >> > > Developer have access to the products via MSDN subscriptions.
>> >> > > 180 days is 4 months - that should be long enough for your trial
>> >> and
>> >> > > evaluation. If not please get back to us detailing what trailing
>> >> and
>> >> > > evaluation process you have that runs for more then 4 months.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > --
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Regards,
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Mike
>> >> > > --
>> >> > > Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
>> >> > >
>> >> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
>> >> no
>> >> > > rights
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use
>> >> these
>> >> > > newsgroups
>> >> > >
>> >> > > "John Prevette" <JohnPrevette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>> >> message
>> >> > > news:3855691F-C6D6-4600-9C55-BB17E9829396@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> > > > Can anyone explain Microsoft's strategy with x64 from the
>> >> perspective of
>> >> > > > getting it into user's and developer's hands? For example,
>> >> Microsoft gave
>> >> > > > out thousands of 32 bit copies of Windows Server 2003
>> >> Enterprise with 25
>> >> > > > cals
>> >> > > > for MOC training students (non-expiring NFR version). The x64
>> >> version,
>> >> > > > however, you have to go get it from an OEM. One of the gripes
>> >> against
>> >> > > > Windows is that they haven't been 64 bit like Linux and now it
>> >> is finally
>> >> > > > here but the access is restricted to getting it through the OEM
>> >> channel.
>> >> > > > You
>> >> > > > can download the trial but with 180 days, it dies before you
>> >> get much
>> >> > > > done.
>> >> > > > What is the logic behind the restriction?
>> >> > > > --
>> >> > > > John Prevette
>> >> > > > Windows Server 2003 MCSE
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >>
>>
>>
>>


.