Windows XP 64 bit Compatible?

Hi all, I am Fairly New to the world of Laptop. I saw that the Sager NP 5793, 5796 and 9262 can have a 4GB Ram, but only if used with Vista 64 bit to have all the 4GB working.

I read something about Windows XP 64 bit, which allows desktops to use more than the standard 2GB RAM.

So my question is, Will The sager 5793, 5796, and 9262 be compatible with having Windows 64 bit as an OS to get the benefit of the 4GB RAM? and Will it also be compatible to the systems/hardware built in these laptops?

I hope some one can help me with this, as to I am not really a techie, and I am thinking of getting one of the great gaming Sager Laptops.

If there are already similar threads or forums regarding this, could you give me that link?

Again, Thanks in advance.

 

The Sager 5793/5796 and 9262 FULLY support Vista 64-Bit. They do not support XP 64-Bit FYI.

 

Compatible yes.
But you won`t get any support from Sager .
You should first find all the drivers for the unit, like bluetooth,printers,touchpad,etc, before continuing.Might be found on www.clevo.com under the download section, for the m570ru/571ru.
I recommend XP 32 bit or Vista 64bit.

 

oh... wow... that hit me pretty hard.... I've been using x64 xp for a few months now and I've just gotten used to it... Hopefully I can find myself some xp drivers.

 

Why bother? get xp 32 bit with 3 Gb RAM or Vista 64 with 4 gb. They`re both just as good.

 

just as good? well I personally like xp better performance wise and because it just works. And there is a difference between 3 and 4. Not as big as 1 to 2, but its still significant to me when I'm multi tasking.

 

Keep in mind that Microsoft's 64-bit coding is somewhat inefficient because they are trying to keep 32 bit compatibility. 3 GB on a 32 bit version of Windows seems to be roughly equivalent (performance-wise) to 4 GB on a 64 bit version of Windows. The big advantage of 64-bit comes when you are using programs optimized for a 64-bit architecture (which tends to be chiefly professional-level programs right now).

As far as it goes, however, you're going to go through a lot of hassle finding all the drivers you need for XP 64-bit, and Sager won't support it, because the system was simply not designed to be used with XP 64-bit.

 

I agree that XP is still better for games and such, but in overall performance, Vista is superior.

 

"overall performance, Vista is superior"?
I don't think I need too much performance if not for gaming... other then photoshop. And I think vista uses more memory then xp for mundane things too, so I'm not following your logic.

Sigh... I suppose its time to shell out more money to M$...
Though I'm not understanding how the system isn't "built" for xp x64. I've installed xp on laptops with "built for 98" stickers, yet they work fine. abit slow though since its last, last gen hardware.

 

When you go to the Sager website also all of the drivers are for Vista so finding all of them for XP 64 will be hard.

 

Minkang's got it...when I say it's not "built" for XP x64, I mean you're not going to find drivers from Sager, which means you'll be going on a scavenger hunt all over the web hoping you can get all the hardware working.

 

I posted a thread for my 5793 with XP64 a couple of months ago. It works, but it's missing some drivers. The ones I remember are the webcam and the infrared. I do not know if bluetooth worked or not, since I don't use bluetooth.

I ended up switching to Vista x64 anyway. Tho while it has a webcam driver, it's a bad implementation. Why does a webcam need a freakin SERVICE and a 32-bit TSR running all the time?

 

Plus think about this with Vista:
a) the 'flags' on DRM which seem to serve media corporations and not you, the customer. Who knows when they'll go live in a big way and be a serious problem unless *all* your hardware is HDCP ready all down the chain. I for one don't really want to buy a new monitor just so that MS lets me watch an existing legally purchased Blu Ray movie on an OEM MS O/S and a brand new Blu Ray player...
b) the backward compatibility issues people are still suffering with older applications and games
c) restricting the performance of applications MS doesn't like in the O/S DNA
d) the hassle of trying to reinstall it on a HDD upgrade
e) EULA giving MS the right to install whatever it wants and remove whatever it wants (although this may be an XP thing too I suspect)
d) it's bloated and a resource hog

But I guess we'll have to live with the above if the TU model drivers will all be Vista only? Does anyone know if there will be any hardware on the TUs (aside from wireless) that will work worse (not work at all) with XP?

 

If the DRM thing bothers you, simply avoid it. Use another operating system that gives you unrestricted access to the content that Vista enforces DRM on, or better yet, refuse to support formats that you do not agree with. Nobody is forcing you to watch Blu Ray movies.

For the record, DRM does not prevent me or anyone else from playing media the way we always have. The doomsayers didn't get their wish, my mp3's did not magically stop working and my AVI and MPG and [screener]DVD-RIP.Spice.Girls.II.mkv files didn't suddenly cease to function.

Overblown. I'm not sure how "older" you are referring to, but the oldest game I have, Age of Empires I, a circa 1997 game, runs without any modification under Vista X64. Starcraft runs great too. If you have to hold back upgrading your entire operating system because "legacy application X that only runs under certain old OSs" refuses to run, that's the fault of the application maker, not Vista.

It's very ironic, people whine that Vista tries too hard to maintain backwards compatibility, but once people figured out that they scrapped the 16-bit subsystem (which also hasn't been in XP64 since 2005) they flip because their ancient 16-bit app refuses to run.

Links and examples please. And not just one AV maker complaining (while all the others say there's no problem) but I mean something real.

Windows has been like this since late 2001. For the record, I reinstalled Vista recently and it reactivated without issue.

The EULA does not supercede what world governments dictate. If you think MS's EULA can override the law, that's wrong. In fact, MS is one of the most brutally government picked on companies around. Everything they do is subject to extreme auditing by not only the US government but any government in any region they want to sell Windows. The EU is especially rough these days. Windows N anyone? It's safe to say that anything MS puts in the EULA has been run over with a fine-toothed comb by government watchdogs. They are already knee-deep in Windows 7 code, looking for anything they do not approve of.

Please cite some examples of MS "install whatever it wants and remove whatever it wants" over the last eight years.

Welcome to 2008. Vista may be big, but compared to other operating systems that perform similar functions, it's not that bad. The day of the 100MB idle system is over. Vista doesn't do it, OS X doesn't do it, a prettied-up Linux doesn't do it.

 

As much as I get sick and tired of MS' antics, I do have to agree with this statement; MS is subject to the global version of what my Aussie friends used to call tall-poppy-syndrome.

 

I agree that XP squeezes more performance out of any card,but then again, a god card these days handles gaming just as good in both OSes,with some tweaking.
And then again, I have 4 gb of RAM, so it doesn`t really matter to me

 

Wow, thanks for all the info guys! I really Appreciate it.

I guess its Vista x64 for me . Wouldn't want my future precious gaming rig to have serious problems on me, since I know it will be very hard for me to get support from where I am living. (I live in the Philippines but am planning to buy A Sager from XoticPC together with my friend in California, He buys it for me then ships it to me What a pal! I pay him for the costs of course)

Again Thanks again guys for shining some light on me over this compatibility issue.

 

I will definitely take your advice and use another system (XP). Why should my O/S command me to purchase new hardware just to be able to watch a legally purchased Blu Ray on a licenced O/S? BR is, as you say, equally to blame for getting on the HDCP wagon, whereby the pirates are the ones who will enjoy 1080p with less hassle than the law abiding folks.

No, but I'm surprised you don't mind the 'flags' that stop you recording what you wish? What benefit do you think they give you over XP (aside from the long term 'save the movie business' thing)? How can Joe Public know how far MS will go with these secret flags?

Maybe I'm reading the wrong blogs. My take is that this should not even be a debatable issue at this point.

HTML:

http://www.inspectmygadget.com/2007/06/03/vista-gaming-will-your-games-work-under-vista/

At the moment I hear "well, all you need to do is download this patch, disable this, not use that hardware". Why? What is the benefit over XP (where all the same stuff ran fine). I'm not referring to DOS - just plain vanilla 32 bit stuff that worked without a hitch on XP for the last 7 years.

You're right - the AV ones are the loudest. But desktop search and the google lawsuit, Symantec and their lawsuit? I know the issues there are more 'clash' than deliberately reduced functionality, but MS probably didn't care too much which it was. Then, doctors in New Zealand concerned about denial of service via driver revocation interfering with scans. This is degradation of functionality. cs.auckland.ac.nz

Yes, MS retreated from their initial '2 installs' policy, but you still have to jump through more hoops than XP (where all I need is the key). So not really sure what happens with the licence if the HDD dies (probably my ignorance, though).

No of course it does not, and I did not say it did. But btw, MS seems to be ignoring EU law (1.35bn USD fine last count) generally. The EULA should be something users perceive to be fair (as well as legal) or not buy the product (which is what I will do).

I was not referring to the past but if you want - WGA lawsuit about this being spyware (OK, a lame one!). As to the future, I meant the remote driver revocation thing the doctors are not happy about for example (as well as the TC/HDCP above).

Sorry, disagree with the Linux one. If you layer on enough multimedia, it will slow anything down - the point is MS didn't even try. They just arrogantly ordered you to buy new hardware. Why can't they give me a lean and efficient product?

 

I use XP x64 on my desktop and XP x32 on my laptop. I don't notice much of a difference between the two. Unless you specifically have a use for 64-bit Windows, I'd stick with 32-bit. As noted, this Sager doesn't support XP x64 - as a matter of fact, there's only a few laptops I can think of that ever supported it - however, it does support Vista x64.

I agree that Vista is a very bloated product. I am sticking with XP, but I think I will not be able to avoid Vista on my next laptop.

 

XP itself may not have DRM (specific to Blu Ray anyway) but DRM is certainly there. It's why Blu Ray doesn't like playing on non-HDCP video cards and outputs, even in XP.

I personally haven't recorded anything in many years. If an input source is not sending a signal with some form of rights management, neither Vista nor any other OS has any reason to block it. If it *is* sending a rights management signal.. The author has decided they do not want the user copying it. That's something to take up with the author, not MS.

What secret flags?

I think you're blaming Vista for game maker's shortsightedness. You can say so-and-so game required a patch (from the game maker, not MS) to run, but you know, I installed Tribes II and without any patches or fiddling it ran. I played online, I had fun, it was a painless experience. If Sierra can do it, anyone can. Maybe those other companies just aren't as good at making games. That's Vista's fault?

They probably read that "red herring" article about how Vista's DRM was going to break mp3's and introduce "tilt bits" and how Vista would purposely obscure everything for some random reason. That was before Vista even was released, and was widely dismissed long ago.

Actually, for frequent installers, Vista will happily install, and run without a key, for 30 days. This is perfect for test installs and temporary setups. If you do activate, and have some tragic problem requiring reactivation, *and* if it gives you grief about it, just like XP the process is "call MS, BS reason, they usually just want to get you off the phone so they whip up a new activation." I went through that with XP and it was a non-event, I was off the phone in just a few minutes with a reactivated XP.

I recently installed Vista x64 on my new gaming rig, and I left it keyless for two weeks while I made sure the hardware was all going to get past the break-in period.

MS is allowed to argue fines imposed on it. Just as Windows N shows that they can and do give in when they have to as well.

Are you absolutely certain, without a doubt, at all whatsoever, that MS will randomly, or even intentionally, completely revocate and break a driver, and damage systems arbitrarily? Do I even have to google the answer to that for you?

Actually Race Driver: GRiD was among the catalysts that led to me buying a new PC. I upgraded my gaming rig because the games I want to play are more intense and graphically rich than they were when I had the previous setup. Vista had nothing to do with it.

Vista doesn't belong on old hardware. I don't even argue that. In fact the cutoff hardware is relatively close to Vista's launch, the Core 2 Duos are about the lowest hardware I'd "reasonably" run it on. Heck I was freaking when they said they'd make a 32-bit Vista, I had high hopes they'd cut that one off and set a nice, solid watermark for Vista by making it 64-bit exclusive. Yeah it would reduce the market share, but most people running it on old 32-bit systems do not get a satisfactory experience anyway, so they just become vocal and negative.

Vista has it's issues, but "DRM will make my mp3s stop and I can't record anything and TILT BITS and arbitrary driver revocation and MIKKKRO$$$$$$HAFTTTTT!!!!!!!" is just FUD, plain and simple. There are many happy Vista users who never see any of this and never will. I have yet to hear of anyone having a driver revoked on them.

http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/w...-protection-twenty-questions-and-answers.aspx

Be a darling and tell everyone the date of this blog.

 

Some interesting points there. But just to be clear – I’m not anti-MS, so none of the Mikkkro$$-whatever hysterics thing for me, please. I’m an XP fan, as is evident from my posts. I don’t work in the ‘IT’ industry - I just buy fast Clevos to play games and am really looking for posts that will help me separate the MS PR from the FUD. Your posts help ... but seem oddly uncritical of MS. This is rare - even its fans have gripes...

Why does Vista have to oblige? I thought I paid MS to program some software for me that works in my interests, not those of a media corp? We have to fight piracy, but this … this is giving the pirates a quality as well as price edge.

Do you know precisely what content media corps. will put the flags on next year? Is there a policy, law or set of rules? Will they be in TV guides marked as ‘Non Vista’? If the answer is ‘no’, then they are not transparent enough for me, so the word ‘secret’ is probably a bit emotive, but gives the idea. I’ll stand by it (and by XP).

I’m not ‘blaming’ Vista – I’m just saying that for whatever reasons there are still glitches busy folks can do without. When I see the first Vista-only game, I’ll review my position. In your last post you claimed the idea of things not running was overblown. Now it is the fault of the game makers. I don’t care whose ‘fault’ it is – I note there are issues, and so will stick to XP.

Great advice, thanks!

Not sure I see where you're going with that - there was due process, they took it all the way and lost - now they just need to pay. So they violate the laws, exhaust their appeals, and then refuse to 'do the time'. That gives me great confidence in the EULA.

And are you absolutely certain that they will never revoke a driver? Please forward relevant email from Ballmer. Googling this will just give factless babble, unless someone has a crystal ball. I am however fairly certain about XP will not do this (subject to the next 'security' update), so (again) I’m sticking with that. In the MS quote you gave, the revocation would be 'ideally in advance'. 'Ideally'. Quite funny.

No, I agree we need to make progress, but why don't things work in the XP compatibility mode, at least? And why am I now shelling out 3,000 USD for state of the art hardware, and the O/S (still 32 bit, if I chose Vista) would run about as fast as in 2001? if I don't want the GUI, why can't I turn enough of it off to work as fast as the last O/S. Welcome to 2008, I guess...