Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

MeOW wrote:

XP x64 isn't a "program", and drivers AREN'T scarce at all!
Stop making up gossip stories like that. Server 2003 x64 is widely used and uses the exact same base as XP64 does. At least 99 of 100 hardware vendors fully support it, that's why I started posting here. It's really weird that nobody is prepared to create driver-packs for XP x64 Edition. And yes, I'm tempted to create them myself.

And there is the answer... right now we have one coder (me) and two guys working on the packs for XP (mr_ smartepants and JakeLD). We are at the limit of what we can support for just three people. Heck WLAN has not been updated in a year. And if it were not for those two guys NONE of them would have been done. So your solution to the problem we face is to add more packs... I think that's a brilliant solution sad  I may be wrong, but I get the feeling your reaction to this is going to be that "it's not your problem". Unfortunately that is 99.9% of the problem.

Its easy to sit in the stands and yell at the coach and the team, but are you prepared to get in the game?
To put your money where your mouth is? If you have as much "money" as you have "mouth" we should be able to support XP-64 by the end of the week... wink

So, Let's see some test packs, Proper DriverPacks. If you were to submit valid Graphics, Chipset & Lan packs then you will have convinced me that we would have someone around to update the packs. If I can be made to belive that some help is available to update the packs, then I can and will code DriverPacks BASE to support XP-64. Obviously if no one updates the packs they are not worth having. - This could become your personal contribution, to make an obligation to the community, that would demonstrate to everyone that your commitment to your stated belief runs deeper than a few careless words -

I will restate we get a million downloads a week and nobody askes about XP-64 and even fewer people are willing to do the work it takes to make it happen. Are you one of the few or one of the fewer. Better yet, are you one in a million, will you maintain the 64 bit packs or are you the troll KickArse thinks you are?

It's up to you now. The ball is in your court.

Jeff

actual stats over 40 weeks in this thread
DriverPacks       40 million hits
DriverPacks 64  25 hits
DriverPacks  Views for this topic 7000
Ratio 1.6 million to 1 for hits - or my odds of winning the lottery are better wink
Ratio over 5700 to 1 for Views on this thread - also a wide gap.

more importantly if not one of those 40 million will help with the 32 bit packs
the odds are less than zero that somone will help for the 64 bit ones.
Again it's really all up to you now... are you game... or lame...

DP BartPE Tutorial   DP_BASE Tutorial   HWID's Tool     Read BEFORE you post    UserBars!
http://driverpacks.net/userbar/admin-1.png
The DriverPacks, the DP_Base program, and Support Forum are FREE!.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

MeOW wrote:

Also, note the 'vibe' XP64 enjoys on ptp: " WAREZ ARE NOT TOLERATED LINK REMOVED Jeff "

Pathetic. I wasn't even linking to "warez", I was pointing out a tendency ANYONE with an internet connection can see using Google or any other meta ptp search engine.
Bunch of hypocrites. As if you are remotely "legal" with the inclusion of drivers in packs. Give us a break and grow up!

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

MeOW wrote:
MeOW wrote:

Also, note the 'vibe' XP64 enjoys on ptp: " WAREZ ARE NOT TOLERATED LINK REMOVED Jeff "

Pathetic. I wasn't even linking to "warez", I was pointing out a tendency that ANYONE with an internet connection can see using Google or any other meta ptp search engine.
Bunch of hypocrites. As if you are remotely "legal" with the inclusion of drivers in packs. Give us a break and grow up!

And the Troll has resurfaced! With your type it's not good enough to leave well enough alone. You linked to a warez/ptp site. That's not allowed. You could have just stated what you said in the quoted text and would not have been in violation of the rules of the forum.

In regards to the legality of the Driverpacks, as far as I know there hasn't been even one cease and desist letter to pull one driver from the packs. If there was we would certainly comply. We aren't really doing anything differently than driverguide.com, drivershq.com, pcdrivers.com, etc. We are packaging the files, editing a couple lines in the INF to clean them up because of bad coding and hosting the driver itself. We aren't modifying the actual drivers sys/dll/cab code at all which would certainly be illegal.

Last edited by stamandster (2009-03-19 06:05:30)

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

Believe me, the driver vendors are WELL aware of our work here.  In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they're LEARNING from our work here.
If their legal department was in the least bit concerned about us, they'd issue a C&D letter and we'd fully comply.
But, kickarse is correct.  Warez discussion is forbidden.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

And it would seem young grasshopper was unable to snatch the pebble.

Did someone say troll...?

DP BartPE Tutorial   DP_BASE Tutorial   HWID's Tool     Read BEFORE you post    UserBars!
http://driverpacks.net/userbar/admin-1.png
The DriverPacks, the DP_Base program, and Support Forum are FREE!.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

Overflow wrote:

Did someone say troll?......

You rang?

Hmm, someone seems to be spouting off about X64 not unlike an Apple fanboy, and you know i wont tolerate that!

MeOW wrote:
MeOW wrote:

Also, note the 'vibe' XP64 enjoys on ptp: " WAREZ ARE NOT TOLERATED LINK REMOVED Jeff "

Pathetic. I wasn't even linking to "warez", I was pointing out a tendency ANYONE with an internet connection can see using Google or any other meta ptp search engine.
Bunch of hypocrites. As if you are remotely "legal" with the inclusion of drivers in packs. Give us a break and grow up!

Its a widely understood thing that any mention of P2P (please use the correct terminology, not PTP, when posting in a forum where the average IQ wont tolerate such mistakes please) or software available on, or posting links to such programs is verboten.

That reinforcement to the other statements on this subject aside....

Yes anyone with google or P2P program can search for such programs, its not, however your place to provide direct links to or suggest such things in this forum.

As far as legality of this project goes, its been around longer than P2P and unlike P2P hasnt raised a single issue with vendors as far as im aware. In fact, in a fair world, they would donate to the project as it benefits all vendors whose drivers are included. They are well aware of the benefits to large scale IT deployments particularly of such a project.

As for X64, well the project has to focus on the widest userbase, and that happens to be X86. X64 is, and will be for many years to come a niche market. Why? Its the same conundrum that annoys me about PC's in general and niche market wankers and gamers are to blame. You could give 90% of people an i486 running Windows 3.11 and they still be able to do their jobs. Nothing annoys me more than constant MB/Socket updates forcing people to buy overpowered PC's, the reason being that the PC market now is driven by spotty little geeks who play games on their computers. The rest of us who actually use the PC for productive things really dont need the constant upgrades to nearly all PC components which only cater to the slack jawed IQ challenged bedroom tragics who play world of asscraft 24/7.

I dont need a 1Gb video card, nor do i need an X64 CPU to allow me to use great volumes of RAM. Need i mention that for most of its life every CPU, yes even a Quad Core CPU, is going to be spending its life at Idle, so 1Ghz or 4Ghz makes no difference to sane people.

X64 fits into this niche culture, only adopted by once bleeding edge hipster doofuses who still bleet on about why cant i get XXX app to run in stable manner, why does X64 IE crash all the time etc. Why cant i get an X64 driver for XXX bit of hardware...mainly becuase the bit of hardware is cutting edge as well, or is so old that even X86 drivers havent been updated since 1999. It was your decision to go off the mainstream and follow what most of use recognise as a grand experiment in architecture change by MS and CPU vendors to see who and how many would follow them down the X64 rabbit hole.

Dont blame us, you went down that hole willingly, and must suffer at the hands of MS and the CPU makers for your folly

Diluting the manpower assigned to the project to create a side-project to cater for those who decided to become guinea pigs for the X64 cabal probably isnt going to happen, and ill tell you why. The project caters, as ive said, for the widest userbase possible, and theyre mainstream people, people who chose the (mostly) reliable and stable X86 path because theyre mostly people who actually use PC's for what they are intended for, and in a rare moment of solidarity and forming an intelligence nexus, they chose the right way.

You sadly havent.

Stop blaming the world and own up to your decision to try X64. Sorry it hasnt worked out and that you cant get any help for it here in the way of driverpacks, but were are sensible folk, who run and contribute to a project that caters to people who are running everyday systems.

Oh and if you dont like the answer, why dont you just follow one of the links you posted to other websites and stop increasing the size of our forum with your inane whinging.....

Probably because looking at those links, where the most common words are "error" and "problem" and also usually include the words "Im trying to run Farcry on X64.... or F.E.A.R crashes on my X64 box" (in my world talk of such things would earn you a bullet in the back of the head), youre still too stupid to realise that X64 for any reasonable person is a huge waste of time......

Last edited by Gollum (2009-03-20 21:20:23)

http://d1syubgj0w3cyv.cloudfront.net/cdn/farfuture/WVc2vyqDPQDoSntQ6nwll_zEmkkFJ35hsjU4c1p2bXs/perpetual:forever/userbar/trollpatrol.gif

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

Hi,
Let's consider 'past' support by MSFT for XP x64 (which, incidentally, ran like Jolly jumper when powered by a 'quite old CPU' like the Q6600 Erik has in his desktop)
MSFT does not write drivers, and far too many people got bit by legacy programs having to run in either compatibility mode or in a virtual machine..
(I can tell you, and should, that the speed/stability benefit of the X64 OS of the past have shown much greater promise in the newer server 2008 OS and Vista X64, and, YES, also in Win7.)

We are, like mentioned more than once, a small group of people doing this.
The regular old timer with core knowledge may have other interests, or may have a limitation (like too few suited hardware long-term test motherboards).

There was a time people not only spent time, they also availed hardware for longer term tests, and I (speaking for myself) I cannot afford the losses caused by fast depreciation of hardware.
Time... or history.
When you look it over you find A good many core member old timers dropped off long before, and some other will, and still other members will come aboard and become core.
The smart old timer might find he has too little of something. (time, resources, expertise, help, programming skills...)
When I think about this, I know I ain't smart.

now think as a sailor, on other tack.
If I tell you I have too few machines, and limited expertise, that is true.
DriverPacks has grown, and its members helped think of new ways to do things.
There was a time I got carried away, while things were easier.. My personal time and thought was on problems caused bu driver writers.. my free time was dwindling.
Others like I have suffered same. And all of us do it for free.
We help you help.
I still want to.

One of the major handicaps I once complained about was that we no longer had access to a post where the great majority of hardware download sites were referenced.
(we also had/have an understanding that we did not use a site where beta drivers got catalogued.)

so, at DriverPacks, for my personal need (as a wannabee helper...) I have needs.
I (and DriverPacks) need to have as many as possible NOT EDITED drivers, and that possibly means all those we have not yet pruned out.
I need to understand all the differences between the X32 OS in its various Service pack (as in, what is supported in this version of win2000 server gold that is not supported in win 2000 client sp4.. and by extensis, XP32 gold and SP3, Vista gold, and vista SP2.. in 32bit/64bit.)

More to the point, we really need the guru to tell us where, in which files, you find the differences about support.
Do you know why we need YOUR expertise about this?
Because driver writers will not always adhere to the standard for that OS, and our old sore (dupes in variants) is not only about the many OS, but also about the ways drivers get distributed (SAD, RIS, DISC, WWW-windows-update or WUP+RIS)

about WUP.
I have this gutfeeling that MSFT were listening.
Their database.. I wish we had access, and then show them how to do the filter. (or, show where the problem are.)
it has X64.
it has X32,
and it has a problem, because driver writers of the past (and the now) still do not always adhere to standard.

The answer was 42?
Kind regards, Jaak.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

Observance; troll always will make a good point.
Observance; Pirate editions of copyright have trends.
Peter's principle, or Shumacher's, they saw trends too.

EDIT,
when I wrote the "tripe"  after thinking about a few things I had speedread.. I thought I had not thought of trends and trolls.
Observance; there is a lot I can think of and we all have learned from a past. One of the people I still respect was a gifted troll.
The guy could help, and more often than not gave correct technical advice, and the site banned him for his political posts.

I know we are here to help you help us, and if I had a site political agenda, it would be aimed to have more techie detail explained by old timer core and, MOST of all, by the new timer whom can/will become core.
Gollum, you can take a sentence and twist it, but you cannot forsake/erase the past.
Granalarity is like a talk with Old Nick. (Jeesh, that guy was good.)

The answer was 42?
Kind regards, Jaak.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

Observance:
Making a good point is considered acceptable, and encouraged
however delivering attitude (especialy on your first day) is discouraged wink

Observance - Woo Hoo! thanks for weighing in. Nice to see ya...

DP BartPE Tutorial   DP_BASE Tutorial   HWID's Tool     Read BEFORE you post    UserBars!
http://driverpacks.net/userbar/admin-1.png
The DriverPacks, the DP_Base program, and Support Forum are FREE!.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

The page you posted is indeed Google and almost all the listings are for Torrents.

Please read:

WE DO NOT SUPPORT WAREZ AND MOST TORRENTS ARE WAREZ.

As was mentioned in earlier posts, we do not have time to work on XP 64. You will have to find some other site or create them yourself.

Please do not force your opinions down our throats.

Thank you and goodbye. Have a nice day.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

off topic post containing no useful info deleted.
(delete, perhaps you heard of it wink)

Just a link to a google search to a list of warez...
Is that the best you have in the way of rhetoric.

Look if you are going to defend the Alamo... you're going to have to dig deep.

DP BartPE Tutorial   DP_BASE Tutorial   HWID's Tool     Read BEFORE you post    UserBars!
http://driverpacks.net/userbar/admin-1.png
The DriverPacks, the DP_Base program, and Support Forum are FREE!.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

Just posting to vote for driverpacks 64-bit support for windows xp.  Thanks.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

OverFlow wrote:

Just a link to a google search to a list of warez...

It's not a list of "warez", it's a list of OS install images. Any and all persons using driverpacks do not create "warez" when they integrate those packs in installers. Also, warez is something entirely different. Look up its meaning.

Try http://www.google.nl/search?hl=en&q … edition%22 for example. I get 2,990,000 results.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

MeOW wrote:
OverFlow wrote:

Just a link to a google search to a list of warez...

It's not a list of "warez", it's a list of OS install images. Any and all persons using driverpacks do not create "warez" when they integrate those packs in installers. Also, warez is something entirely different. Look up its meaning.

Try http://www.google.nl/search?hl=en&q … edition%22 for example. I get 2,990,000 results.

Wow your intelligent...

So if you didn't get that, it was sarcasm.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

please see definition #1

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en& … p;ct=title

"Warez" refers primarily to copyrighted works traded in violation of copyright law. The term generally refers to illegal releases by organized ...

IE if you put an OS available for download... you have "traded in violation of copyright law." and it is therefore Warez... As stated.

Look it up yourself wink

I can search for DriverPacks and get more than 3 million hits wink
IE Results 1 - 10 of about 11,400,000 for 'driver packs'. (0.34 seconds)

better yet Windows 98
Results 1 - 10 of about 54,100,000 for 'windows 98'. (0.32 seconds)

care to try DOS?
Results 1 - 10 of about 782,000,000 for DOS. (0.29 seconds)

we get three million downloads in a couple of days LOL

YOu might as well post a BIG SIGN that says NOBODY is interested in it
or we could say 780 million more people care about DOS than care about XP-64
or fifty million more people would like to see DriverPacks for win98 .. lol

DP BartPE Tutorial   DP_BASE Tutorial   HWID's Tool     Read BEFORE you post    UserBars!
http://driverpacks.net/userbar/admin-1.png
The DriverPacks, the DP_Base program, and Support Forum are FREE!.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

Just thought I'd throw it out there with another great project that isn't supporting x64

http://www.autopatcher.com/2009/07/x64-scripts/

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

kickarse wrote:

Wow your intelligent...

Your is wrong, it should be "you're" from you are.
Tip: http://jult.net/entry/411/Spelling__Grammar_for_dummies

Still very weird no driverpacks for XP x64 Edition exist out there. Annoying, to say the least.
Luckily, not so regarding update-packs;  http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6400

People using 32 bit XP on hardware supporting 64 bit are idiots.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

Everyone is entitled to an opinion...even if it's wrong. wink

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

Your opinion on not supporting xp64 is the wrong one here, let's have that down for once and for all;

XP x64 should be supported. It's easy, considering the few official drivers that are being maintained for it.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

MeOW wrote:

XP x64 should be supported. It's easy,

If it's easy, then what's stopping you from supporting it?  Go for it.
All 3 XP-64 users should be pleased. tongue

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

ROFL@ Erik big_smile

Look, MeOW, there's a reason we have the 3rd Party DriverPacks section, it's there so guys like you can create their own packs to support their rare, exclusive or otherwise uncommon HW.
No one, I repeat, no one is keeping you from bundling " the few official drivers that are being maintained for it" into a pack and releasing it.
The resources are all there, the tuts are all there, you may even ask if there's something still unclear to you after you have read them (thrice...).
Why don't YOU go ahead and make one?
Why, in your eyes, do WE have to do it? Do we owe you something or are you just being unreasonable, again...?


PS: Show me the system that can run XP x64 and cannot run Win 7 x64...
To kind of quote yourself:
People using a legacy OS on modern, x64-capable HW, are idiots!

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

Helmi wrote:

Show me the system that can run XP x64 and cannot run Win 7 x64...

Show me the hardware on which XP64 performs slower than W7. There still isn't any.
Plus, do you mean to say the W7 GUI is preferred over the XP one? Sorry, there are still many who disagree with that. Which is why XP x64 is still in play and kept up to date.

I'm forced to use and admin Win7 for work-related matters, and I assure you:
I still get stuff done MUCH faster in XP x64. If anything, Win7 is made for non computer savvy users, not for us experts.

Last edited by MeOW (2011-02-03 05:02:13)

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

Wow, great job at resurrecting the thread.
You only missed the anniversary by a couple of days...

Anyhow, seeing as this is a pointless discussion any way you look at it, let me just say this much:

If XP x64 had not been abandoned by MSFT and (which is directly related to the former) had there been better support by HW and SW makers all around I'm sure we'd include proper support for it.
It's not that we hate XP x64 (or you, for that matter), but facts are, it was merely a tech demo by MSFT at that time and not intended for productive use (which complies with the lack of third-party support).
Our resources are meager so we focus on what's most important and that is not XP x64 support, for the aforementioned reasons.

If you want to dedicate some time and efford into creating NT5 x64 DriverPacks, you are more than welcome.
Please, go ahead! I'm sure, if you were to encounter any issues with the BASE, we'd be glad to help out, if possible.

But all you do is troll about lack of support (for reasons that have been told you several times...) and call any user of Win7 (which is, AFAIK, all of the Team) ignorant noobs.
Great way of begging for a favour, mate...

If you are so expert (and you surely must be, using XP x64 and all), why haven't you accomplished creating a DP for that in over a year (see top of post)?
As your skills excel those of all of us combined, that shouldn't have taken you longer than a week, methinks...

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

@MeOW.  If you are REALLY h*ll-bent on supporting XP64, the SAD2 utility I've developed MAY be modified to support it.  But I will not support XP64, it's a dead platform.
SAD2 file here: http://www.mediafire.com/file/dhc1d68r4 … -101203.7z
Do NOT pollute other threads with XP64 support requests, I'll delete them.

As a matter of fact, our support for all NT5-based platforms will be diminishing in the near future while we devote more time to NT6.
Sorry, but there are only so many hours in the day and I for one will only support the OS of choice for the vast majority of our users...that does not include XP64.

Re: [REQ] 64bit support - No... Not for NT5 based platforms

Again!!!!

Got to give the little kid some props for persistence! tongue

Get those packs pumped out... Shouldn't take too long since there are only about ten drivers, and we'll figure something out for ya.

If you do a first class job of putting the packs together THEN we MIGHT try to help YOU to make SAD / dpinst.exe work


AKA - Put-up or Shut-up

DP BartPE Tutorial   DP_BASE Tutorial   HWID's Tool     Read BEFORE you post    UserBars!
http://driverpacks.net/userbar/admin-1.png
The DriverPacks, the DP_Base program, and Support Forum are FREE!.