Buying new computers? Are you buying, 32 bit 64bit machines?

I’d like to get your opinion

If you are purchasing new computers, either servers or desktops, are you buying 32 bit or 64 bit machines?

If you re buying 32, why did you buy 64?

I’ve been telling all of my customers for the past year to buy 64bit machines. All are glad they did, the performance gains are substantial.

If you are about to make a purchase, research 64bit for your environment, especially if you use Microsoft software. Some of the applications being released by Microsoft later this year will ONLY run on 64 bit machines. Plan ahead.,,,

Some preamble:
This is a great subject to bring up. For those who aren't to up on what the terms are there's a good article on wikipedia about 64-bit architecture.

It's getting important right now because big manufacturers are beginning to push out products that we use in both 64-bit and 32-bit versions. And it's quite likely they will eventually decide to stop making the products that run on the 32-bit machines most of us are currently buying and using (and as Douggg has pointed out, Microsoft has already decided to do that with some of its more heavy duty server based software).

My response:
I've been sticking with 32-bit so far, but keeping an eye out at the server level. Most of the nonprofits I work with are pretty small and unlikely to need any of Microsofts 64-bit only server products (except Exchange - which they probably ought to be outsourcing anyway and will need new hardware for by the time they come to upgrade in any case).

But I definitely see it as a reasonable step at the server level for organizations with enterprise applications or whom are buying new hardware now for systems they'll be updating regularly over the next three years.

Until I see more gains to be had at the desktop with 64-bit I've been wary for small nonprofits. Most of them aren't getting the most out of their current systems because they don't manage their networks well.

It seems they could get better improvements for their money by investing in a little more memory and better management of their machines. But as files get bigger this *is* going to change, regardless of the need for CPU power. And with a four year or more life span on a machine I can see them being unable to cope with the standard work in 2010.

The thing I'm always wondering about here is whether we're going to see the same sort of networked environment for a small organization in four years time. As more and more applications become web-based, how much of a computer are we going to have left on the desktop?

Douggg - Since you've been putting these machines in I'm curious how the rollouts went. What did you learn from them?

Helen

For a desktop machine I am wary of the 64 bit until Vista is really released and manufactures have really got certified configurations.

As the requirements for Vista ars a bit like jello I wouldn't want to buy any platform that may need some serious upgrades before it will really run the new OS.

My justification is remember all the machines that were Pentium ready and very few ran the upgrade chip.

Most of the machines I buy are entry level with onboard video and audio and fill the office requirement quite well. If I had a specific high power desktop application I may get the hardware early but for now I see as much risk buying future ware than the low cost entry class machines now.

Dave

My thoughts are about the same as those of Helen and Dave, for about the same reasons.


-ENO

There are a few issues, some server apps are 32 bit only and there are driver issues on the desktops.

At this point I see no reason NOT to buy 64 bit servers. If you have a 32 bit app, rearange the hardware. The performance gains are enormous, especially with DBs.

As for desktops. 64 bit WIndows has been out for over a year. There is little software and there are driver issues... But Vista is due out in 8-12 months. Office 12 at the same time. Both are either 32 or 64 bit. The drivers for Vista are the same as for Longhorn. If you buy 32 bit desktops now, they maybe obsolete in a year.

Since 32 bit and 64 bit cost the same I've been telling all my NPOs to buy them now to prepare and stretch their $$$.

Have people seen Office 12? Newbies love it. Very easy to find what you need to do. Oldbies will complain. New menues, and ask why did they make such a big change. After time you will get use to it.

From the tests I have preformed, you will want Vista and Office 12. (It took me over a year to say the same about XP.)

Vista has some networking changes that users will want and I'm sure some admins will hate.

Like it or not Vista/Office 12 will be here in less than a year. I wish it were sooner.

Yup.

Took all that into consideration. Not compelling, especially the arrival of Vista and Office 12.

-ENO

Much the same here - Still buying 32 bit machines and will continue to do so for at least the next 12-24 months.

Reasons - (mostly because we are not techno-junkies and have no desire to risk our business through being beta testers - :-)

1 - Price (32's are still considerably cheaper)
2 - Current perfomance of 32 bit m/c's is more than adequate
3 - Lack of apps for 64 bit
4 - Lack of proper 64 bit business stability testing (although I'm sure this will come in the next year or two)

Don

I agree with Helen, Dave, Eno, and Don. Our specialized apps will not run on 64 bit machines yet. I am in no hurry to jump to Office 12 or Vista anyways. Since the first year of release will probably be full of bug fixes and security issues. I'll let the early adopters have the issues while I sit back and watch.

In the US prices for 64 and 32 are the same. So here price is not an issue.

On the server side there are 64 bit apps today that take advantage of 64 bit. The performance gains are amazing. Servers with apps requiring 2 or 4 processors running at high utilization now can get by with one, and not even tax the processor. So no reason not to buy 64 bit servers. (Unless you have apps that will not run in 32 bit emulation, which are few.

64 bit machines run cooler and save on energy costs. So it’s less costly to power a 64 bit machine in power and air conditioning costs.

Have you tried any 64 bit machine? Or is this just your opinion?


As for the Nay-Sayers of Vista and Office 12, have any of your tried either? What are you basing your judgment on? Facts or opinion?

The networking and security enhancements in Vista will push the adoption of Vista by users. If you are into security I’m surprised you aren’t pushing 64 bit machines. They are far more secure than 32 bit, and can not be attacked as easily. Vista’s networking enhancements have eliminated the latency in the network stack. Vista can render a web page 3 to 5 times faster that the same XP box.

For NPOs with limited Technology budgets, I’m encouraging all of them to buy nothing but 64 bit machines. Do the math. It is far more cost effective to buy 64 today.

So in other words, you don't simply want our opinions. You want to debate the issue.

I don't think there's any need for that, given that you already have our reasons, which are more than backed up by Gartner and the real world.

But if you want to believe and preach the word according to MS, go right ahead.

-ENO

Does the end user, who in an average nonprofit environment is only ever going to check email, surf the Web, run Office and some DB program, and maybe do a little number crunching in SPSS or Excel actually need 64-bit computers? It strikes me this is like swatting a fly with a shotgun.

On the server/enterprise side of life, it's true that a lot of companies are moving to 64-bit. But how many nonprofits have the capacity to and actually run an enterprise-class server themselves?

For the end user and everyday workstations, neither the price of buying 64-bit, nor the relative advantages at this time seem to be worth it. Vista will install fine on 32-bit systems, otherwise Microsoft would have a revolt on its hands when people try to run it on their trusty P3s.

The only 64-bit platform I've seen folks adopt is Apple's G5, but again only for graphics, video and other processor intensive uses. My question is, why buy 64-bit now when 32-bit PCs and Apples will run fine for the forseeable future? By the time 64-bit computing is absolutely mandated for everyday workstation use, 32-bit hardware will be old enough to need a replacement anyway.

I've been shopping lately for new PCs and have targeted Windows Vista ready machines. My reasons are threefold:
[olist]
1) Vista is expected this year, and while it will run on capable systems I would like to use and evaluate it on its new terms, not its legacy terms.
2) Our nonprofit, though small, is a bit above ARCARC's average (above) and could well benefit by running the 64-bit version of Vista.
3) We tend to replace systems at a slow rate. I'm shopping now because some systems are 6 years old. If 64-bit becomes commonplace in 2007 or 2008, we might still be waiting to upgrade till 2010 or beyond.
[/olist]
Reading this thread has prompted me to reconsider my justification. I'm a bit surprised at the naysaying, but appreciate the points made.

I am not sure whether I will buy my 64 bit boxes before or after IP6 is mandated..
Oh wait the internet did not collapse..
Grrr gartner group lied again

Oz

32bit to 64bit words of caution. I saw this happen to many times with NT to 2000 rollovers. Do your homework. Make sure that all you devices, hardware, and peripherals, will be supported under 64bit. The manufacturers may not write new drivers to support it their older devices under the new platform. And though windows comes with a lot of drivers already, it doesn't have all of them. If you are also running custom applications, you need to get with your developer, cause odds are it won't run on the 64bit platform.

Now as far as going 64bit, at the workplace, not going to happen here, not for a while at least. Why? cause it just not necessary. We run 4 servers, with 30 clients. For us the cost benefit ration is just not there. The work stations type letters and email,a few do desktop publishing, and 2 do accounting. I run 2 dual PII400 compaq proliant servers, for DC and DNS, and due to a generous private donation 2 PIII Quad Xeon 500s, which don't even make a peep, under our heaviest workload. Larger organizations would get some benefit from the change, but most of the smaller ones should stay with what they got, save their money, and what until 64 bit is no longer a choice, but a requirement.

If it aint broke don't fix it. And if you got oney to throw away, my agency accepts contributions.