Home > Windows > Windows XP 64-bit Edition: Only For OEM Resellers Windows XP 64-bit Edition: Only For OEM Resellers Submitted by Mathew 2004-06-30 Windows 24 Comments Microsoft’s upcoming 64-bit version of Windows XP, which is expected to debut later this year, might not please users considering that the long-awaited 64-bit OS might only be available to OEM resellers. About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 24 Comments 2004-06-30 6:06 pm You can buy an OEM version of Windows XP 32bit from several vendors. Check pricewatch.com. It will be the same with this. 2004-06-30 6:26 pm I don’t understand Microsoft’s reasoning in this matter. All that it will succeed in doing is pissing off users. The first people to adopt a 64 bit platform are most likely the kind of people who build their own PCs. Making it harder for these users to get a copy of WinXP 64 bit Edition will only make them seriously consider using 64 bit Linux instead. Stupid Microsoft, they’re either getting kick-backs from OEMs for making an exclusive item to bolster hardware sales, or they’re hoping to underplay XP 64 bit so more users upgrade to Longhorn in the future. Unless I’m missing something, this sounds like a real bad idea, for users and for Microsoft. 2004-06-30 6:34 pm There’s no way around it. Some *legitimate owners* of Windows XP/32bit use the cracked version due to Microsoft’s attitude of shubbing Product Activation down their throats. If MS doesn’t release WinXP/64bit to the public, many *potentially legitimate owners* will just warez it. Sad, but true. 2004-06-30 6:34 pm So will the 64-BIT include the 32-BIT version also? or will it be 64-BIT only? OEM sounds right since 64-BIT systems do not target the broader consumer market that an upgrade version would serve. 2004-06-30 6:35 pm True… It won’t be a problem to buy. However, it will be a problem for support. Microsoft doesn’t provide support for OEM software, the OEM does. End users which build their own systems will have no support. Maybe it’s such a pile of dren that Microsoft doesn’t want to support it. 2004-06-30 6:52 pm This is rubbish. I was an early adopter of the AMD64 bit line (Athlon 64 3200+) and I even beta tested the Windows XP for 64 bit extended systems betas. If I can’t buy it and get a box I say rubbish. I am glad my Suse 9.1 64 bit os is working fine alongside the XP 32 bit. bloody rubbish. 2004-06-30 7:05 pm Well if memory serves there were later versions of Win95 that could only be gotten OEM. So there’s precedent. Second as hcuar pointed out. OEM’s do the support, not MS. Another precedent. Any surprises so far? 2004-06-30 7:23 pm There are no 64bit windows apps, and since everything is closed source you can’t compile them yourself. yes I know you would still need the 32 bit Libraries, but Apple did it, why can’t MS. Oh wait MS is still stuck with poor x86 processors. x86 Processors which are just now becomes fast enough and strong enough to handle emulating a PowerPC chip, even though the other direction has been around for years. Don’t worry we all know that it’s the MHZ that matters most. 2004-06-30 7:43 pm the first people to adopt 64 bit will not be consumers, but will more than likely be businesses. most businesses purchase machines from OEM’s, hence the reasoning. besides, what type of _average_ consumer truly needs a 64 bit system? and as far as there being no 64 bit windows app…hogwash. there will be thunking libraries (just as in 16 ->> 32 bit), most 32 bit apps will run just fine on the 64 bit OS. 2004-06-30 7:47 pm people who build their own computers buy OEM versions of windows anyway, so this dosen’t stop them or change anything in those regards. The only thing it looks like MS is doing different is to not offer Win64 in a retail box at CompUSA. That makes sense honestly. Saves them from dealing with people who have 32-bit systems and buy the 64 bit ver without knowing what they are doing. People buying OEM usually have a clue. 2004-06-30 7:48 pm Articles like these just create buzz in the windows community, specially to those people who have purchased the Athlon 64/FX or Operton, and Future release of Intel 64 bit chip. Personally, I think just like every Windows Os, it will be release to OEM’s for about 2 months of the initial release, then after that you will see there will be a Professional Edition, and of Course the Corporate Edition. The reason Ms will have to follow these trends, is due to the of Supply and Demand. No System Admin in their right mind will use a OEM release of a OS, Admins create their own distrobution designed for their computers and needs. And as far as I know, there is tons of software that will run on these systems, the 2 reasons being, the .Net, a the 32 bit compatiblity mode. Again, if this article is adressing the New “Windows Xp 64 bit Edition, for 64 bit Extended systems” then the above is all true. Windows 2003 64-Bit Edition for 64-Bit Extended Systems http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/64bit/extended/trial/defaul t.mspx Windows XP 64-Bit Edition for 64-Bit Extended Systems http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/default.mspx 2004-06-30 7:54 pm Not all closed source http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=articl… Plus any fully managed CPU-neutral .NET 2.0 apps will automatically run as 64-bit processes on 64-bit versions of Windows. There are also closed source applications being developed while Windows x64 is in Beta. The “no 64-bit Windows apps” comment also ignores applications currently available for client and server versions of Windows IA64. Apple’s OS won’t be fully 64-bit until next year when Tiger is released. There have been 64-bit versions of Windows since 2000 w/ the Itanium. 2004-06-30 7:56 pm There are no 64bit windows apps, and since everything is closed source you can’t compile them yourself. Actually its probably more along the lines of existing 32-bit computers not being able to run the 64-bit version, so why offer it as un upgrade/retail product ? There isn’t anything 64-bit to upgrade as its a new OS. yes I know you would still need the 32 bit Libraries, but Apple did it, why can’t MS. They can and likely will with Longhorn but people want a 64-bit version of XP now. Why make a hybrid version of XP at this point ? It would be an unclear upgrade path. Oh wait MS is still stuck with poor x86 processors. x86 Processors which are just now becomes fast enough and strong enough to handle emulating a PowerPC chip, even though the other direction has been around for years. Don’t worry we all know that it’s the MHZ that matters most. WTF does that got to do with anything ? The issue with emulating PPC on x86 is an issue of registers largely, or to be precise the x86 has fewer registers than a PPC chip. Does that make one processor a better design than the other ? Depends on the job at hand. Beyond some basic weekend fun what would be the point of emulating PPC on x86 ? All major applications that the majority of people run are available on Windows already. 2004-06-30 8:37 pm go back and read the article what did the man say? he said it is oem. oem ships with support from the hardware maker not from ms. if you buy it online or via a catalog or in store and follow the license and get it with a piece of hardware (the man said a cable) you get no support per se. oem is much cheaper than retail. you will support it yourself if you buy oem to put on your self built box. if you get oem with a configured box from a hp or whoever, you will get support from them. nowhere does it say that you will not be able to buy it. what is meant is that you will not be able to buy it in a shiny box sitting on a shelf in wal-mart. read more carefully. plus this is all hypothetical as it has not gone gold. relax. 2004-06-30 8:43 pm I can sort of understand why Microsoft might do this, not that I think it is a good idea, but I can understand. They do not want some user walking into a store and seeing WindowsXP 64bit and picking it up thinking it is the version they need (when they really need a 32bit version), or perhaps someone coming and seeing it and thinking its a new version of Windows and going out and buying it. @ BSofA: I’m sorry, but the old tired argument of WPA is pathetic. I personally just swapped out my mobo, CPU, hard drive, NIC, and soundcard. When I installed Windows I STILL did NOT even have to call Microsoft to activate it, it did it right over the internet with absolutely no hassle. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, the ONLY people who should have a problem with WPA are the people who are using a pirated copy of Windows. 2004-06-30 9:13 pm Sorry… I think if a user is buying an OS, they should be aware enough to know which version to purchase. Microsoft isn’t doing this to prevent confusion for users. They most likley have other intentions. 2004-06-30 10:19 pm But what possible (reasonable) intentions could those be? Why did Microsoft only release Win95 OSR2 to OEMs and no boxed copies? 2004-06-30 10:27 pm Most retail shops sell OEM product just as freely as boxed. The one difference is you usually have to purchase a hardware component along with the OEM copy of Windows. Support? Either way: Yeah right! Microsoft doesn’t want to deal wiuth your hardware issues and the retail store doesn’t want to teach you how to install it properly. Have a Technician install it or take responsibility for doing it yourself. Above all else, we’re still reeling from bad 32bit drivers and .DLL hell.. why go to 64 when 32 isn’t mature? By a Mac instead.. or play yer 32 games knowing its gonna BSOD and you’ll hafta reinstall every 2 months 2004-06-30 10:47 pm i think CPUGuy is right. the general consumer is not smart enough to know or even look for the difference between a 64-bit and 32-bit version of windows. i disagree that people who don’t know aren’t buying operating systems. people who *think* they are computer savvy see or hear about a new version of windows and they will buy it. we all know these people, the kind with just enough knowledge to be dangerous, not enough to get themselves out of the situation they’ve put themselves in. i wouldn’t put it past people like this to buy it, open it, try to instal it, it won’t run so take it back, but wait they can’t take it back because they’ve opened it, oh they’re now out $300 bucks. so for once i think this is a semi-smart move by MS. i say semi-smart because apple has licked this problem already and we’ll see it again in first half 2005 when they lick it again. do you go buy a 32-bit panther or panther with 64-bit extensions? no, one version, one install DVD, the installer figures out the necessary stuff to install. ttiger will be the same way, just like most previous Mac OS aand even software releases have been in the past (read: a combination of intelligent installs and fat binaries for the 68k->PowerPC conversion). this is what MS should be pushing into stores. No Windows for 64-Bit or Windows for Pentium Class processors, you just buy Windows, and the installer figures it out. And if you bought Windows already, you should be entitled to the 64-bit version if that’s the only difference (i’m not saying free upgrade to 64-bit longhorn, i’m saying windows xp users get windows xp-64). when’s the last sign of good faith redmond has given to its users? 2004-07-01 1:38 am “Oh wait MS is still stuck with poor x86 processors. x86 Processors which are just now becomes fast enough and strong enough to handle emulating a PowerPC chip, even though the other direction has been around for years. Don’t worry we all know that it’s the MHZ that matters most.” You mean VirtualPC? Yeah, it sure emulates x86 well! I mean, a 1GHZ G4 can *flawlessly* emulate a Pentium 166! 2004-07-01 3:55 am “Oh wait MS is still stuck with poor x86 processors. x86 Processors which are just now becomes fast enough and strong enough to handle emulating a PowerPC chip, even though the other direction has been around for years. Don’t worry we all know that it’s the MHZ that matters most.” ever heard of a mac boot rom? think that had anything to do with the mac os not being emulated unless you ripped a rom like in basilisk? the number of ignorant people that say things while so full of themselves never ceases to amaze me. 2004-07-01 4:43 pm Microsoft only released Win95b to OEM’s only to emliminate confusion over which copy customers should buy when they went into stores. Oh wait… Never mind. That would be stupid. I think Microsoft and the OEM’s had a little deal to pump up the demand for new computers rather than upgrading existing machines. Let’s be honest… Most people do not buy OEM copies from places like Newegg. I would consider most people buying from the online retailors to be experience users/self-builders. I’m not even sure during the time of Win95b where one could have purchased a copy. Maybe a local PC shop? 2004-07-01 6:13 pm Yeah, I got my copy of it from a local PC shop. They sold me some cheapo motherboard for like $1 and Win95b for regular price. 2004-07-01 8:24 pm “Most people do not buy OEM copies from places like Newegg. I would consider most people buying from the online retailors to be experience users/self-builders.” most people are not buying 64 bit capable cpus. even those that are, most likely only enthusiasts will be deeply interested in upgrading to the new 64 bit capable os when it is received. oem fits them just fine. for the average joe that has bought a $1200 emachine with an athlon64 in it at the local circuit city, they will use the computer until it dies. without moving the os to the 64 bit version.