For a lot of people, this isn't just a matter of upgrading the OS to a 64-bit OS. It is a more fundamental matter of only having a 32-bit processor on the motherboard. You can't run a 64-bit OS on 32-bit hardware. So Windows 7 was available in 32-bit and 64-bit versions to cover both audiences. Lightroom 6 is leaving that 32-bit hardware audience behind and telling them it is time to be in the 64-bit world. (Which it is, but for those people it is going to mean upgrading the hardware to a 64-bit machine. The bonus of buying a new one is that it will come with the 64-bit OS.)
You don't have to spend a lot to get in the 64-bit game: http://goo.gl/Jxkd3b On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Paul <[email protected]> wrote: > I thought that, too, but was prodded into trying it after buying a laptop > with Win8. I found it to be no better nor no worse than than anything else > I've used - just a little different. All software has it's foibles - you > just have to get used to it and not not like it just because the designer > didn't program it the way you thought it should be. > > -p > > > On 1/23/2015 2:20 PM, Zos Xavius wrote: >> >> 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. >> >> > > -- > Being old doesn't seem so old now that I'm old. > > -- > 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. -- Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh. -- 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.
