64bit

64bit

I'm guessing you have a processor that supports DEP. My guess would be an AMD processor as there more common to have conflicts. I'm guessing DEP is getting confused do to your Virtual Machine software and is shutting down legitimate processes. DEP = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Execution_Prevention Basically, when a virus tries to inject a dll or something into a program or modify the memory of a program, DEP can pick up on it and deny it. Running 64bit Windows Xp/Vista there have been known to be conflicts with some 32bit software(SC and Mods sometimes have a conflict). There have also been problems with older software. Basically DEP is a form of hardware virus-protecter. To turn off: http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/01/15/disable-and-turn-off-or-enable-or-turn-on-data-execution-prevention-dep-in-windows-vista/ Also, why use the 64bit version? No programs really take advantage of 64bit, and then theres driver issues....

I'm guessing you have a processor that supports DEP. My guess would be an AMD processor as there more common to have conflicts. I'm guessing DEP is getting confused do to your Virtual Machine software and is shutting down legitimate processes.

DEP = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Execution_Prevention

Basically, when a virus tries to inject a dll or something into a program or modify the memory of a program, DEP can pick up on it and deny it. Running 64bit Windows Xp/Vista there have been known to be conflicts with some 32bit software(SC and Mods sometimes have a conflict). There have also been problems with older software. Basically DEP is a form of hardware virus-protecter.

To turn off:
http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/01/15/disable-and-turn-off-or-enable-or-turn-on-data-execution-prevention-dep-in-windows-vista/

Also, why use the 64bit version? No programs really take advantage of 64bit, and then theres driver issues....

[quote=Oo.Twitch.oO]I swear I am sick in tired of noobs complaing about problems of vista that are so easy to fix.I have finnaly got a vista and any problem that has crossed my path is freaking simple to fix.If you can't handle these problems then you don't deserve a computer.[/quote] Seriously, even if the problems are easy to fix, they shouldn't be there in the first place. Microsoft has too much experience with Operating Systems to be proud of an OS with this many issues.

Quote from Oo.Twitch.oO

I swear I am sick in tired of noobs complaing about problems of vista that are so easy to fix.I have finnaly got a vista and any problem that has crossed my path is freaking simple to fix.If you can't handle these problems then you don't deserve a computer.

Seriously, even if the problems are easy to fix, they shouldn't be there in the first place. Microsoft has too much experience with Operating Systems to be proud of an OS with this many issues.

[QUOTE]Seriously, even if the problems are easy to fix, they shouldn't be there in the first place. Microsoft has too much experience with Operating Systems to be proud of an OS with this many issues. [/QUOTE] It's not an easy task trying to support 12 year old applications, as well as trying to support all these new features and standards, trying to make it easier on the consumer, trying to make a more stable OS without requiring everyone to completely rewrite drivers. Plus so much more. Microsofts in a very tough spot. Everyone has programs that has to run on there OS. These programs could be 12 years old or they could be 12 days old. They have to try and make a more secure OS, but not drop any backwards comaptibility with drivers or applications. It's not an easy task, throw in everything has to run on millions of hardware combinations. The fact is that everytime Microsoft writes an OS it's going to be about 5x harder than the last OS. How do you support 12 year old features and support new and upcoming features without slowing down the OS? How do you make applications that are 12 years old, and whose API is riddiled with holes, secure and make them work perfectly? It's a hard if not impossible task!! Every OS is going to have to be more complex than the last because new things come out constantly that have to be supported. Then of course if Microsoft decides to drop something, everyone complaines and bitches at them. Either way, Microsoft can't win. Every OS is just going to get harder to make until Microsoft decides to drop backwards compatibility, old API's, old drivers, and old standards. Then of course everyone is going to have to bitch at Microsoft for doing so. Then since everyone has to re-write there programs and companies have to rewrite there drivers, Microsoft has to worry about them just deciding to rewrite it for Apple or Linux instead of there new OS. Microsoft has no easy way out, and only real choice is to keep on doing what its doing in hopes that it'll all pay off. Then theres DRM, sure you could yell at Microsoft for supporting DRM....but if they don't, then you wouldn't be able to play DVD's, Blu-Ray, and HD-DVD on you're computer!! Would DRM just go away? Of course not! Every DVD, Blu-Ray, and HD-DVD Player already supports it!!!! Then Apple would throw it in, and of course no one would complain because it's Apple! Now Apple has a feature up on Microsoft, and Microsoft has to stay competitive! In fact I have yet to hear of someone complaining about the fact that yes Apple will support DRM in the future because Os X will be able to play Blu-Ray and HD-DVD in the future.

Quote

Seriously, even if the problems are easy to fix, they shouldn't be there in the first place. Microsoft has too much experience with Operating Systems to be proud of an OS with this many issues.

It's not an easy task trying to support 12 year old applications, as well as trying to support all these new features and standards, trying to make it easier on the consumer, trying to make a more stable OS without requiring everyone to completely rewrite drivers. Plus so much more.

Microsofts in a very tough spot. Everyone has programs that has to run on there OS. These programs could be 12 years old or they could be 12 days old. They have to try and make a more secure OS, but not drop any backwards comaptibility with drivers or applications. It's not an easy task, throw in everything has to run on millions of hardware combinations.

The fact is that everytime Microsoft writes an OS it's going to be about 5x harder than the last OS. How do you support 12 year old features and support new and upcoming features without slowing down the OS? How do you make applications that are 12 years old, and whose API is riddiled with holes, secure and make them work perfectly? It's a hard if not impossible task!! Every OS is going to have to be more complex than the last because new things come out constantly that have to be supported. Then of course if Microsoft decides to drop something, everyone complaines and bitches at them. Either way, Microsoft can't win. Every OS is just going to get harder to make until Microsoft decides to drop backwards compatibility, old API's, old drivers, and old standards. Then of course everyone is going to have to bitch at Microsoft for doing so. Then since everyone has to re-write there programs and companies have to rewrite there drivers, Microsoft has to worry about them just deciding to rewrite it for Apple or Linux instead of there new OS. Microsoft has no easy way out, and only real choice is to keep on doing what its doing in hopes that it'll all pay off.


Then theres DRM, sure you could yell at Microsoft for supporting DRM....but if they don't, then you wouldn't be able to play DVD's, Blu-Ray, and HD-DVD on you're computer!! Would DRM just go away? Of course not! Every DVD, Blu-Ray, and HD-DVD Player already supports it!!!! Then Apple would throw it in, and of course no one would complain because it's Apple! Now Apple has a feature up on Microsoft, and Microsoft has to stay competitive! In fact I have yet to hear of someone complaining about the fact that yes Apple will support DRM in the future because Os X will be able to play Blu-Ray and HD-DVD in the future.

[quote=Cole]Also, why use the 64bit version? No programs really take advantage of 64bit, and then theres driver issues....[/quote] If you have more than 2 GB of RAM (yes 2, not 4, but the exact number may depend on some complicated issues I don't want to explain), then a 64-bit version of Windows may be needed to have access to all of it. As for DEP, it is for helping close some types of security holes in programs that could potentially allow code to execute (without DEP); however, it will not prevent you from installing a virus yourself by installing something that contains it. :P It does this by preventing code from executing in any area not marked as containing program code. [quote=spinesheath][quote=Oo.Twitch.oO]I swear I am sick in tired of noobs complaing about problems of vista that are so easy to fix.I have finnaly got a vista and any problem that has crossed my path is freaking simple to fix.If you can't handle these problems then you don't deserve a computer.[/quote] Seriously, even if the problems are easy to fix, they shouldn't be there in the first place. Microsoft has too much experience with Operating Systems to be proud of an OS with this many issues.[/quote] People shouldn't be so quick to blame Microsoft for the problems with third-party applications. Everything Microsoft is advocating software vendors to do with their programs in Windows Vista could have (and SHOULD have) been done ever since Windows 95, basically 12 years ago. Here I will list each thing that programs need to do in Vista, that could have already been done in Windows 95 but was optional, along with the name of the Vista feature related to it that makes it now required. [LIST] [*]Data Execution Prevention (DEP) - requires marking memory as executable that will contain code. The mechanism for marking memory as executable has existed since Windows 95. Some programmers have been using it for years, some have ignored it. [*]User Account Control (UAC) - requires programs to store user's files and settings somewhere in the user's profile folder (often within the documents folder) and in the user's part of the registry. The mechanisms for doing so have existed since Windows 95. Some programmers took advantage of it, some did not. [/LIST] Those are the main features in Vista affecting program compatibility, as far as I know. Basically it is the makers of the incompatible third-party programs who are to blame for their lack of compatibility with those two Vista features. Not abiding by those practices has also caused compatibility issues to some extent for people running them on Windows 2000 or XP - particularly for system administrators trying to get programs to run for the non-administrative users. This has been quite a problem with various third-party programs for years and many people have been very frustrated by it. For quite a long time, system administrators have had to make a compromise to run such programs if the program is a necessary program - giving users of the system administrative access on their user accounts, which compromises security. UAC is partly Microsoft's attempt to force developers to make their programs store their data and settings where they should have been storing them all along.

Quote from Cole

Also, why use the 64bit version? No programs really take advantage of 64bit, and then theres driver issues....

If you have more than 2 GB of RAM (yes 2, not 4, but the exact number may depend on some complicated issues I don't want to explain), then a 64-bit version of Windows may be needed to have access to all of it.

As for DEP, it is for helping close some types of security holes in programs that could potentially allow code to execute (without DEP); however, it will not prevent you from installing a virus yourself by installing something that contains it. It does this by preventing code from executing in any area not marked as containing program code.

Quote from spinesheath

Quote from Oo.Twitch.oO

I swear I am sick in tired of noobs complaing about problems of vista that are so easy to fix.I have finnaly got a vista and any problem that has crossed my path is freaking simple to fix.If you can't handle these problems then you don't deserve a computer.

Seriously, even if the problems are easy to fix, they shouldn't be there in the first place. Microsoft has too much experience with Operating Systems to be proud of an OS with this many issues.

People shouldn't be so quick to blame Microsoft for the problems with third-party applications. Everything Microsoft is advocating software vendors to do with their programs in Windows Vista could have (and SHOULD have) been done ever since Windows 95, basically 12 years ago. Here I will list each thing that programs need to do in Vista, that could have already been done in Windows 95 but was optional, along with the name of the Vista feature related to it that makes it now required.

• Data Execution Prevention (DEP) - requires marking memory as executable that will contain code. The mechanism for marking memory as executable has existed since Windows 95. Some programmers have been using it for years, some have ignored it.
  
• User Account Control (UAC) - requires programs to store user's files and settings somewhere in the user's profile folder (often within the documents folder) and in the user's part of the registry. The mechanisms for doing so have existed since Windows 95. Some programmers took advantage of it, some did not.
  

Those are the main features in Vista affecting program compatibility, as far as I know. Basically it is the makers of the incompatible third-party programs who are to blame for their lack of compatibility with those two Vista features. Not abiding by those practices has also caused compatibility issues to some extent for people running them on Windows 2000 or XP - particularly for system administrators trying to get programs to run for the non-administrative users.

This has been quite a problem with various third-party programs for years and many people have been very frustrated by it. For quite a long time, system administrators have had to make a compromise to run such programs if the program is a necessary program - giving users of the system administrative access on their user accounts, which compromises security. UAC is partly Microsoft's attempt to force developers to make their programs store their data and settings where they should have been storing them all along.

This is probabbly a bit off subjct, but Windows Vista can't be made into a Virtual Machine becacuse it has a double-security encryption cdoe setup. Anyone know how to stop this?

This is probabbly a bit off subjct, but Windows Vista can't be made into a Virtual Machine becacuse it has a double-security encryption cdoe setup.
Anyone know how to stop this?

[quote=Falkoner]Here's how, pay money to remove Vista and get XP.[/quote] Vista came with downgrade rights so..vista to xp=free I have vista ultimate and it works fine i do not see a problem... [quote=AfterLifeLochie]This is probabbly a bit off subjct, but Windows Vista can't be made into a Virtual Machine becacuse it has a double-security encryption cdoe setup. Anyone know how to stop this?[/quote] keep vista and make a xp/win 98se virtual machine :D best way around it

Quote from Falkoner

Here's how, pay money to remove Vista and get XP.

Vista came with downgrade rights so..vista to xp=free

I have vista ultimate and it works fine i do not see a problem...

Quote from AfterLifeLochie

This is probabbly a bit off subjct, but Windows Vista can't be made into a Virtual Machine becacuse it has a double-security encryption cdoe setup.
Anyone know how to stop this?

keep vista and make a xp/win 98se virtual machine best way around it

Hmmmm..... I think there could be a possible problem when downgrading from Vista to XP. Vista and XP both have cryptography control on them, preventing installation of USB devices that are not 'digitally signed' or manufactured by Microsoft. When downgrading (my friend did this), the cryptography database corrupts, preventing installation of any unsigned USB devices in XP. (Microsoft actually acknowledged this :D , but I can't find thier link yet!). This also occurs in VMWare Machines AND when downgrading, on certain models, from Vista to XP [QUOTE]If you have more than 2 GB of RAM (yes 2, not 4, but the exact number may depend on some complicated issues I don't want to explain), then a 64-bit version of Windows may be needed to have access to all of it. As for DEP, it is for helping close some types of security holes in programs that could potentially allow code to execute (without DEP); however, it will not prevent you from installing a virus yourself by installing something that contains it. It does this by preventing code from executing in any area not marked as containing program code. [/QUOTE] I only give my VMWare Machines 2GB each, that means that I can install 25 VMWare Machines on one hard drive. My Vista PC curently has 30GB, 6.50GB used.

Hmmmm.....
I think there could be a possible problem when downgrading from Vista to XP.
Vista and XP both have cryptography control on them, preventing installation of USB devices that are not 'digitally signed' or manufactured by Microsoft. When downgrading (my friend did this), the cryptography database corrupts, preventing installation of any unsigned USB devices in XP. (Microsoft actually acknowledged this , but I can't find thier link yet!).
This also occurs in VMWare Machines AND when downgrading, on certain models, from Vista to XP

Quote

If you have more than 2 GB of RAM (yes 2, not 4, but the exact number may depend on some complicated issues I don't want to explain), then a 64-bit version of Windows may be needed to have access to all of it.

As for DEP, it is for helping close some types of security holes in programs that could potentially allow code to execute (without DEP); however, it will not prevent you from installing a virus yourself by installing something that contains it. It does this by preventing code from executing in any area not marked as containing program code.

I only give my VMWare Machines 2GB each, that means that I can install 25 VMWare Machines on one hard drive.
My Vista PC curently has 30GB, 6.50GB used.