|I buy a new PC every year, this year is my first 64 bit, and I won't go back. I carry everything over from an external backup drive, years worth of documents, media and applications, and with a bit of effort and patients I got all my old apps up and running on my 64 Vista. Granted, "America's Army" was a major pain, but I made it happen.|
I can't do anything on this year's 64 that I couldn't do on last year's 32, but I can do more of it at the same time. 64 is, IMHO, mostly dedicated to multi taskers. I only go for high performance PC's, last year's 32 was quite comparable in memory and processor to this year's 64, yet I was limited in how many tasks I could burden my 32 with at one time. I've tested this theory by loading up several resource heavy apps from Adobe CS4 all at once, and switching through them. Trying to work with Dreamweaver, Photoshop, Soundbooth, Flash, Premier, FTP and IE all open is not comparable when stacking 32 against 64, 32 system with the same specs cannot handle that payload. Regardless, I'm guessing your mother doesn't need that much performance to check her email and surf recipes. But I bought my mom a 64 for Christmas, she's an amatuer photographer, I knew she'd be using Photoshop, and she has ambitions of building a website for displaying and selling photos. I'm dreading that day...
I can't do anything on my 64 that I couldn't do on my 32, and the same vice-versa. My downside to 64 is a bit less effortless installments of applications, the upside is seamless multi tasking with far less hang time. In the future 64 may become a necessity for advanced users, but I'm betting your mother will happily get her money's worth out of her 32.
If I were in your shoes I'd have welcomed the opportunity to explore 64 at someone else's expense, and would have given it more of a chance before downgrading to 32. No offense intended, but I think you sold yourself a bit short.