> I really don't think the universally hated Vista will be long for this world.

Oh, and you think XP64 which is already dead a buried is any better? That's like saying, "I think this ship is about to sink so I'll just board the one that's already at the bottom of the ocean!" I don't see how XP64 is even an option at this point.

I just installed Vista64 and it's a complete joke. There are no drivers for it. The first problem I had was there are no drivers for my M-Audio Firewire 410 audio interface so, I've got no audio. I thought, no problem, I'll just use my PreSonus Firewire Studio. Nope! No 64-bit drivers for that either. OK, so I'll plug in my M-Audio Radium49 MIDI keyboard controller. Nope! Won't find any 64-bit drivers for that either.

Then I decide to do some web surfing with the 64-bit version of Internet Explorer. Nope! Every toolbar I installed (Google, AVG, etc.) failed to display. No 64-bit support. Every web site I visited needs one plug-in or another just to display their home page and NONE of the browser plug-ins support 64-bit either. So it's back to the 32-bit version.

It's a sad, sad, situation when almost 2 years after launch nobody supports this OS.

So then I try using Vegas Pro 8.1. None of the OEM plug-ins work. The reason I had to get a Vista64 system working was to see why my product, Ultimate S Pro, didn't work on Vista64. I've figure that out and got it working and will be releasing a new version shortly, but in the process, every project that I opened up to test Vegas 8.1 with had missing plug-ins with no versions that work in Vista64. I can't see how anyone is going to use Vegas 8.1 for any serious work, but I didn't want my plug-in keeping my customers from being productive so I'm doing my share. The problem is, it's an ecosystem and with no one else supporting Vista64 it's a very cold and desolate environment. I was actually thinking of using it day-to-day but with no support for my MIDI and audio hardware I'm afraid not.

Having said that, I can't imagine how worse XP64 is. These manufactures don't have ANY 64-bit drivers after all this time and one of them even said their priority was working on Windows 7 drivers (bypassing the doomed Vista64 all together) and you want to install XP64??? I can't imagine what a lonely experience you are in for. (bring a harmonica for those lonely nights waiting for drivers to be released) ;-)

My personal impression is that 64-bit is not ready for "prime-time", but if you want 64-bit, "bite the bullet" and install Vista64 Home Premium ($99) instead of XP64. Turn off all of the bells and whistles that you don't need (and trust me you don't need any of them) and use whatever works (which isn't much). Either that, or just wait for Windows 7. Me? I've got dual boot and stay in XP almost exclusively. (maybe in a few more years when there are 64-bit drivers I'll boot the Vista64 partition again.) lol

> Have you heard that there isn't support for 64-bit XP?

There is no "official" support. I have read that some have it working. Check the Windows Vista form here. The only problem is that you are on your own. Not a place you want to be if you make your living doing video or audio.

~jr

At some point, if Sony can actually make 8.0x stable (maybe 8.0d ?) I'll finally upgrade to 8.0x. Thus, since I don't use it, I don't have any first-hand experience to contribute here. However, from what I'm reading -- and most of that is nicely summarized in JR's post -- the way to use 8.1 is as a rendering engine. So, build and edit your project in 7.0d (very, nice stable version) or 8.0b or 8.0c (depending on which one gives you fewer problems) if you have some real need for a specific feature in these relases. Then, re-boot (I assume a dual-boot configuration) to XP64 (you couldn't pay me to use Vista -- I'll buy copies of XP on eBay for as long as MSFT will let me install and register it). Once re-booted open the project and immediately render it using 8.1. If any further editing is required, go back to 8.0x.

As near as I can tell, the only real advantage to most people with 8.1 is the final render, and that advantage is substantial (some have reported a two-to-one improvement). That kind of speed improvement just doesn't grow on trees, and is worth having. However, it doesn't appear that timeline performance has improved, although if someone can tell me from their own experience that I am wrong, I'm all ears.

There are several guys running XP 64-bit over on the SONAR forums, quite happily I might add. Sure there are problems with drivers and such, but for the most part their machines are only used for one thing...audio processing.

That being said, I haven't looked very far into going 64-bit yet. But I would simply install the OS and Vegas on an empty 80gb hard drive in my machine, and run it. I hadn't thought of plug-ins yet, but I don't really use any yet. So that may indeed be a problem down the road.

TB

EDIT: I should add that I don't do any of this for commercial purposes, so it my situation is likely different from somebody who is trying to do this.

Hardware drivers have always been an issue for XP64 as well as Vista64. Usually the advice is to get hardware for which there are 64-bit drivers but if you already own hardware that you must use then you can be put in a tight spot trying to use Vista64.

You can forget about drivers for XP64 if they don't already exist. Very few vendors will write a driver for an old OS, especially since they've already had a few years to do it and didn't.

I assume that when we're talking about plugins not working in 8.1, that includes VST plugins. Audio editing could be a problem. Some plugins will eventually come along but probably not all of them.

I've been wondering if there's any use to frame serving from 8c to 8.1? It'd really be a matter of whether 8c could successfully frameserve a project that it couldn't otherwise render, Like 8c not being able to finish an AVCHD render but maybe being able to frameserve a whole project to 8.1.

Rob Mack

"Oh, and you think XP64 which is already dead a buried is any better? That's like saying, "I think this ship is about to sink so I'll just board the one that's already at the bottom of the ocean!" I don't see how XP64 is even an option at this point."

Nice rant.Please wipe off the drool.

I've already rigged that ship in the past-had no trouble with drivers or compatibility except for wavelab. At the time I didn't see any benefit from running vegas 8 under xp 64. But now that 8.1 is here let me please ask-
has anybody run Vegas 8.1 under xp64? Discuss. I would love to hear about this from somebody at Sony maybe....

"Nice rant.Please wipe off the drool........... I would love to hear about this from somebody at Sony maybe...."
=========================================

Well..... that's pretty silly.
Why would you hear from Sony? They have already made it load and OFFICIAL.... they do not support XP64... period.... end... done. If you even have to submit a problem ticket to Sony, they won't even look at this issue. They will simply write back: "WE DO NOT SUPPORT XP64"

The bottom line is that if you decide to go XP64, then you're on your own, which brings us to the next bit of silliness; forum members are the only ones that are going to help you with this so telling a forum member to "wipe off the drool" is more like biting the hand that feeds you.

Now, having said that... my 2 cents.... if you already have XP64 complete with drivers and it's working for you, then hey.... there's no loss in giving it a try is there? There have been a few that have tried and have claimed success.

On the other hand, if you don't have XP64 yet, then there is no sense upgrading to it. XP64 has not only lost support from Sony but many other manufacturers too. It's just a matter of time before XP64 users run into a brick wall with some driver or piece of software.

Of those that own both Vista64 and XP64, most are claiming that vista64 is a more stable platform and is MUCH less problematic in finding support and drivers. Although I don't have (and have never tried) XP64, I do have Vista Ultimate 64 and have had no issues at all in finding drivers. I also find it an extremely stable platform, and pretty fast too after turning off some of the silly little extras Microsoft placed on it.


And BTW.... Wavelab doesn't work in Vista either.

Yes, Vegas 8.1 works under XP64 and it's INCREDIBLY FASTER than ANY previous version, even 8.0c !!!

In some cases, believe me, it's 10 TIMES FASTER, in other cases, on very complex projects, it renders without problems, while 8.0c simply crashes due to low memory availability (my machine got 4 Gbyte). On average, it's 1.5 - 2 times faster and even more, but as I told, it depends a lot on the single project.

Even the 32 bit project mode (128 bpp) is A LOT FASTER, and, finally, usable.

I believe Vegas 8.1 it's THE Vegas as It should have been since very long ago: fast and usable, even on complex projects.

The drawbacks are:

1) On my machine it cannot read AVI codecs like DivX and XviD. I don't know if it's only a problem of my machine, or of the software. Please let me know if anybody has the same problem.

2) Sometimes, I said sometimes, not often, it crashes in a apparently random way. Repeating twice the same action, it no longer crashes...

It think Sony has to fix these issues, but, apart from that, Vegas 8.1 for me really ROCKS and make a 64-bit machine buying worthwhile !!!

Hi everybody.

I am VERY confused. There is another current thread about 8.1 rendering speed, and people in that thread are reporting virtually no improvement in rendering times. Some are even reporting significant degradation in rendering performance.

Do a search in this forum and you can find a few people who say they installed 8.1 on XP64 and that it worked.

Seems the biggest reason to use 8.1 is its ability to access a lot more memory. Not necessarily speed, just the ability to finish a render.

Rob

Sounds to me like it depends which way the wind is blowing.

Try with:

1) Complex projects
2) HD source media and very high res still images
3) Very heavy codecs, like for example, AVCHD
4) 32-bit (128 bpp) project mode

In most of these cases I find a significant difference in performance. I do know 64 bit mode basically concerns memory management, but often this has to do with performance too, as a side-effect. Consider this:

a) A 32 bit task can address no more than 4 Gbyte of RAM, a 64 bit one can. Also, due to some Windows limits in memory management, 32 bit tasks CANNOT actually address all 4 Gbyte of ram (but only 2 Gbyte or so) even if you have them installed on board.

b) When a task runs out of memory if it doesn't crash it starts a heavy swapping from disk which makes it crawl: this happens most often in 32 bit mode than in 64 bit one, since 32 bit tasks can address less memory than 64 bit ones. I have some projects which make 8.0 crash while render perfectly with 8.1. I have some projects which render 3-4 times faster in 8.1.

c) Since 64 bit internal registers store twice data as 32 bit ones, some operations (but not all) run faster, because they take less clock cycles to execute (ideally half), expecially when they must process a huge amount of data per time unit (128bpp mode).

d) Further, even the swapfile in 64 bit mode can be bigger than 4 Gbyte and be managed properly by Windows.

I know in some cases there is no difference between 32 bit and 64 bit Vegas but in many other cases the difference is noticeable.

Hi everybody.

Rob, frameservering is rendering. It's just choosing a different output format.

Thanks for the info.:)
I do believe I'll wait until 8.1b. I "ignore 3rd party codecs" so I'm not super fussed about divx.
Sonar screams under xp64-so does Lightwave.And oddly enough Reaktor (32)
Wavelab works under Vista-not 64 bit however.
In order to bite the hand that feeds you-it can't be feeding you (and everyone else) BS.
32 bit xp pro only recognizes 3.2 gb of ram-Xp64- 1 TB