People (more businesses than anything) are buying windows 7 still because windows 8 is a complete abomination. I won't be switching unless Windows 10 is really awesome or something spectacular.
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Igor PDML-StR <[email protected]> wrote: > > Zos, > > I agree with the fact that LR works much better if you feed it more dough, > err.. RAM. ;-) > But my point is that it very much usable on a 32-bit Win-7, especially if > you are not working with files on > > Even though the "mainstream support" for Win-7 has ended a week ago, > its extended support period is for 5 more years (and you could buy a > brand new laptop with Win-7 just weeks ago). > Besides, you are forgetting, that there is 32-bit Win-8.1. > > Personally, I have a Win-7/32 system on a i7 processor, and I am using LR-5 > on it. It will probably be squeaking if I needed to work with the files from > 645z's 51MP sensor, but it has been working fine with the files produced > with K-7 and even K-5ii-s, and I am not mentioning some smaller sensor > cameras. > > I guess, for now, I should be fine with LR-5. > And, hopefully, but the time I really need LR-6, I'll have a new laptop. > > The problem with LR-5 that Adobe will not provide updates for the new > cameras (RAW format files). > So, a person who has a perfectly fine functioning less than 1-year old > computer with a 32-bit Windows 8.1 on it, and who buys an "enthusiast > camera" that is capable of shooting [proprietory] RAW, will have a hard > choice: LR-5 wouldn't support those (and probably won't be available once > LR-6 is out), and LR-6 wouldn't run on his/her recent computer. > > > BTW, an interesting thing that I don't quite understand: I just cheked and > there is a bunch of computers still being sold with Win-7 today (albeit > 64-bit where I can see). And that is not an old stock, but on the > manufacturer's websites. Moreover, there is an announcement of new models > coming out in 2015 by Fujitsu, and it mentions Win-7/64 as an option: > http://tablet-news.com/2015/01/21/fujitsu-announces-the-stylistic-q775-lifebook-t935-and-t725-tablets-hybrid-devices-with-windows-and-intel-cpus/ > As far as I remember, when WinXP mainstream support ended, no more WinXP > was available on the new computers. > > Igor > > > > > Zos Xavius Fri, 23 Jan 2015 08:53:18 -0800 wrote: > > Lightroom really benefits from having over 2gb available to it in RAM. > If you are on a 32-bit OS you are restricted to less than 4gb. Windows > 7 eats up 1-2gb on a good day, so you do the math. Its also really > slow on older processors. I don't know about you, but when I have to > export a few hundred pictures at once, its nice to not have to wait 2 > hours for that to happen. Waiting on a raw file to render at 1:1 in > lightroom can be pretty slow on older computers too. My aging core i5 > with 8gb of RAM seems inadequate these days to be honest. Especially > when pushing huge panoramas through photoshop. Most recent windows 7 > installs are 64-bit anyways. This is a non issue except those with > really ancient hardware. BTW, the performance increase between say a > core duo and an i7 is really significant, and its not just the > processor. RAM has increased in speed at a fairly decent clip too. You > can't really expect software designers to support depreciated windows > versions forever. General support for Windows 7 has now ended. > Microsoft doesn't even support it anymore other than security updates > and those will eventually end too. If someone insists on using 32-bit > windows, well LR5 is still plenty powerful enough for the few edge > cases that want to use it with their P&S camera or whatever. I still > use Photoshop CS5 for example. I'm tempted by CC I must admit for the > $10 a month, but CS5 still does everything I really need it to do. The > only thing I want from CC is the expanded panorama tools. > > > On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Igor PDML-StR <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> Darren, thanks for the heads-up. That's an unpleasant news. >> >> Larry, you are right from the point of view of the technology. >> But it is not the right decision from the users' point of view (ot at > > least >> >> some of the users). Adobe is essentially cutting off from the new > > versions >> >> of LR those users who have CURRENT and SUPPORTED versions of the major > > OS, >> >> Windows 7 and Windows 8.*. >> >> And I disagree with your statement: "to really make use of it, you > > really >> >> need pretty serious hardware anyways." >> You don't! That's a myth promoted by the hardware manufacturers and >> supported by software manufacturers. (And in some [many?] cases, > > software >> >> manufacturers are doing a sloppy job by not righting efficient code. I > > know >> >> that from "insiders".) You are looking from an elitist point of view: a >> person who shoots lots of photos with large file size, etc. >> Some people are happily using LR for working on photographs shot with >> advanced P&S's. Some people even use it with photos shot in JPEG (not > > that I >> >> recommend that, but there could be legitimate cases for that). >> Those can perfectly work on a mid-range computer (e.g. laptop) running >> Windows that came with it [which is often a 32-bit system]. >> And while RAM is in my view is the biggest limitation of a 32-bit OS, >> LR is well usable with the 3GB of RAM accessible under 32-bit Windows. >> >> >> One can also make an argument about some people who still need to use > > 32-bit >> >> system because of some other software that has problems running on > > 64-bit >> >> Windows. I don't know if that's true anymore or not, - but I might agree >> that this argument carries less weight, as that, in most cases is the > > fault >> >> of that other software... But again, there could be some >> legitimate cases with some vintage software (maybe not as legitimate > > with >> >> the vintage hardware). >> >> >> Does this decision from Adobe surprise me? Not really! It is not the > > first >> >> time they "pulled the switch" and turned their back on some of their > > users. >> >> Oh, well, I am hooked on LR, but I am not getting married to Adobe. >> There are software manufacturers that I like, and there are those that I >> dislike for some particular aspects. Adobe is on the latter list. (And I >> checked it more than twice!) >> >> Cheers, >> >> Igor >> >> >> >> >> Larry Colen Thu, 22 Jan 2015 15:55:53 -0800 wrote: >> >> Darren Addy wrote: >>> >>> >>> For those who haven't seen it yet, it looks like if you aren't already >>> running a 64-bit OS you are going to need to upgrade to be able to run >>> Lightroom 6: >>> >>> >> > http://petapixel.com/2015/01/22/adobe-lightroom-6-will-compatible-64-bit-operating-systems/ >> >> >> This is a wise choice on their part. LR5 is great software, but to >> really make use of it, you really need pretty serious hardware anyways. >> By going to the bigger OS, they can take advantage of more of the >> hardware, using 64 bit libraries and such. >> > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
