[Indrek]

Stubby guy: “Okay, so what does it do for fun, then?”
Server guy: “Er, once a week it helps out in HR.”
Stubby guy: “I could use one of those.”
Server guy: “Heh, yeah… you could, yeah.”

Basically the server guy is implying that the stubby guy needs a fitness trainer to help him shake a few kilos.

Hope this helps.

[Indrek]

I didn’t do anything special to it, it just installed and worked right out of the box.

How far did you get when loading the game? Did you see the intro videos? Did you get an error or something?

[Indrek]

Update to my previous post (just to add the websites for the games):

Game: World of Goo
Website: http://www.worldofgoo.com
Compatible?: Yes

Game: Osmos
Website: http://www.hemispheregames.com/osmos
Compatible?: Yes

Game: Dyson
Website: http://www.dyson-game.com
Compatible?: Yes

Game: UltraStar Deluxe
Website: http://www.ultrastardeluxe.org
Compatible?: Yes

Some more games to add to the list:

Game: Age of Empires III (incl. Warchiefs expansion)
Website: http://www.ageofempires3.com/age3, http://www.ageofempires3.com/warchiefs
Compatible?: Yes
Issues: Throws incompatibility warning at start, but works fine regardless

Game: Civilization IV (incl. Warlords and Beyond the Sword expansions)
Website: http://www.2kgames.com/civ4/home.htm
Compatible?: Yes

Game: Dungeon Siege II (incl. Broken World expansion)
Website: http://www.gaspowered.com/ds2
Compatible?: No
Issues: Crashes before title screen. Running as admin doesn’t help. Neither does compatibility mode (game just exits silently without loading anything).
Fix: None yet.

Game: Fable – The Lost Chapters
Website: http://www.lionhead.com/fabletlc
Compatible?: Yes

Game: GTA San Andreas
Website: http://www.rockstargames.com/sanandreas
Compatible?: Yes

Game: Neverwinter Nights (incl. Shadows of Undrentide and Hordes of the Underdark expansions)
Website: http://nwn.bioware.com
Compatible?: Yes

Game: Spore
Website: http://www.spore.com
Compatible?: Yes

Game: The Elder Scrolls IV – Oblivion (incl. Shivering Isles expansion)
Website: http://www.elderscrolls.com/games/oblivion_overview.htm
Compatible?: Yes

Game: Warcraft III (incl. Frozen Throne expansion)
Website: http://us.blizzard.com/en-gb/games/war3
Compatible?: Yes

[Indrek]

@JonusC wrote:

I ment no offence at all sir, i was politely trying to say that you are wrong in stating that x64 “is not worth it to most people”. The binaries are known to be faster and more secure in every way

None taken.
I respectfully disagree, though – most people care about usability and features, not pure speed. Security probably falls somewhere in the middle. At least, such is my experience. Yours is obviously different, hence our disagreement, which I think we will just have to settle with.

Just so the point isn’t lost in the discussion – I do wish we’d move to full 64-bit, I just don’t see it happening in the immediate future.

[Indrek]

@JonusC wrote:

Anyway, yeah – x64 is not as useless as you might have thought.

Pardon, but I don’t think I ever said x64 was useless. Quite the contrary, in fact. However, since most of the software we use is produced by businesses, usefulness is only part of the equation. Even a lot of non-commercial and open-source software is x86 only.

@JonusC wrote:

32-bit only supports dualcore CPU’s, that is – it can only simultaneously process two threads at a time.

Ah, I didn’t know that, thanks.

@JonusC wrote:

as long as it works

That’s the key here, I think. x86 works just fine. Yes, x86-64 is technically superior, but for most people the differences are either minute, or too complex to understand. Until the consumers don’t fully understand the benefits, there won’t be much demand for 64-bit software. Until there’s any real demand, there won’t be a large-scale move to it. And for as long as there’s a significant amount of 32-bit only software, Microsoft is unlikely to drop support for it.
You’re right, though – times, they be a-changin’.

[Indrek]

*shrugs* 32-bit versions of IE and WMP work perfectly well for me (although my music collection is but 1/6th the size of yours). I suspect whatever problems you’re having with 32-bit IE might be caused by add-ons, rather than any inherent instability of the x86 platform, perceived or real.
And at any rate, we can keep bringing up niche scenarios like 120 GB music libraries until the cows come home, but that doesn’t change the fact that there’s currently no need for the entire home computing industry to move to 64-bit.

@RemixedCat wrote:

32 bit does not have multicore support

Come again?

[Indrek]

@JonusC wrote:

You’re kidding, right?

If that was directed at me, then no, I’m not kidding. Look at the examples in the Wikipedia article (data encryption software, complex numerical analysis algorithms), or your own example (hi-def video editing software) – does that sound like the vast majority of the software people are using? Not to me. I’m not denying the advantages of a 64-bit system, they’re definitely there, and numerous. What I’m saying is that the majority of applications (not necessarily users) out there wouldn’t benefit from being converted to 64-bit. Browsers, email and IM clients, office and multimedia software – that’s what most people are using most of the time, and they don’t need massive address space or 64-bit registers. Since there’s no need for the conversion, I doubt it’ll be happening soon enough and massively enough for MS to drop 32-bit support completely from their client OS in the near future. That’s all I’m saying. Whether or not the x86-64 architecture is a crapheap is completely irrelevant.

Of course it won’t happen for a while, but it will one day.

Well, yes, I suppose eventually office documents and websites will grow to gigabytes in size, at which point even the most stubborn developers will have to make the jump.

[Indrek]

Permissions, is why. Or rather, lack of them. You simply don’t have permissions for certain system objects, because they’re owned by the SYSTEM account. For complete root powers, taking ownership of the entire file system and subsequently granting yourself all permissions should do the trick.

[Indrek]

FWIW, many apps don’t really benefit from moving to 64-bit, so there’s little incentive to convert them. Which is not to say they won’t be, but I doubt it’ll happen on a massive enough scale for Microsoft to completely drop support for 32-bit apps from Windows.

[Indrek]

Hi, and welcome!

Yes, if the issue you have doesn’t relate to Aero Peek, then it’s best to post it in a separate topic, so as not to derail this one.
Edit: I see you already have, so nevermind.

[Indrek]

My, but the spambots are getting creative these days…

[Indrek]

@JingoFresh wrote:

The second issue is Aero peek…it just won’t work. It is grayed out for me.

I assume you’ve already used the Performance Options (Win+Pause -> Advanced system settings -> Under “Performance” click Settings) applet to “Adjust for best appearance”? If so, here’s a little trick that worked for me when I had the exact same problem – full Aero, but “Peek at Desktop” was greyed out. Go to Performance Options, find “Enable Aero Peek” on the list, uncheck it, click “Apply”, then select it again and click “Apply” again. I don’t know why, but it worked for me, so maybe it’s worth a shot.

[Indrek]

Another option is to download drivers from the Microsoft Update Catalog:
http://catalog.update.microsoft.com/v7/site

In my case, the packages from nVidia would only install the HD Audio driver for the HDMI output, but not for my graphics card (9300M), but the latest driver from the Update Catalog worked fine. So if you’re having trouble with getting drivers to install, it’s worth a shot to check there.

Note: the Catalog has a ton of different drivers, so be sure to check you get the one for x64 before you download. Click on the driver name for an info popup.

[Indrek]

The following games work fine:
World of Goo
Osmos
Dyson
UltraStar Deluxe
Need for Speed – Porsche Unleashed 2000
Monopoly by Parker Brothers

[Indrek]

Thanks for the welcomes, guys.

[Author]

Posts