I have made the decision to go back to xp.  My computer guy says to get xp 64bit.  But, will this make any difference when running TC? 

Currently, probably not (or not much), but it's always a good thing to be prepared for the future. I'm hoping that TC will move in that direction.

John R.

Thanks John.  I'll pick up the 64bit since it's only about $50. more.  I just wasn't sure if it would mess up TC.  A little word to the wise, MS has stopped making XP and I have found Vista to be junk.  I have a new custom built computer and I'm having nothing but hardware and software problems.  Three major hardware manufacturing customer service people have told me to go back to xp if I want the problems to go away.  Why does this remind me of MS windows ME.  I was also told that Vista has a problem recognizing memory over 3gigs and thus, will run slower with more memory. 

Depending on your MB, Win XP will not recognize the full 4gig of ram in 32 bit, 64 bit corrected this problem.  Most likely you are running a newer MB, so should be no problem.

Depending on your MB, Win XP will not recognize the full 4gig of ram in 32 bit, 64 bit corrected this problem.  Most likely you are running a newer MB, so should be no problem.

This is because the memory in the graphics card has to be addressable by the OS. In other words, the graphics memory has to be mapped into the available address space, and this is done from high memory downwards. With 32 bits, the maximum address space is 4GB, so a 1GB graphics card gets mapped to the last GB of the address space. If you have no real memory in that address range then you lose nothing, but if you have real memory there then you cannot use it.
I have XP Pro 32 bit with 4GB RAM and 0.5GB graphics card. The attached section from a Belarc Advisor listing shows that I cannot use the real memory in the range occupied in the graphics card mapping.

[attachment deleted by admin]

Shouldn't you be able to address this in the bios by reducing the aperture for the video card or does that setting address something else?

I found out the hard way.  Went from Vista 64 back to xp 32.  All my problems went away, after 2 more days of work.  I don't see any difference in speed between the two, in fact, it almost seems that xp is running a bit faster, even with the 4gig xp memory limitation.  I do know for sure that TCv14 is running better, no more glitches, and is saving files faster in 2d.

I found out the hard way.  Went from Vista 64 back to xp 32.  All my problems went away, after 2 more days of work.  I don't see any difference in speed between the two, in fact, it almost seems that xp is running a bit faster, even with the 4gig xp memory limitation.  I do know for sure that TCv14 is running better, no more glitches, and is saving files faster in 2d.

TC Pro v15.2 runs much quicker on my home PC (Windows XP 64-bit) than on my work PC (Windows Vista 64-but) - no question about that.  My work PC even has more RAM, a faster processor, and a slightly better video card.

Shouldn't you be able to address this in the bios by reducing the aperture for the video card or does that setting address something else?

I don't actually know, but if its possible at all I would think it would be controlled by the video driver rather than the BIOS.
Whether using a little more RAM at the expense of video memory would be a good trade-off would be an interesting experiment.