Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 127763	2012-11-12 07:41:00	Is Win8 worth the change ?	cowboy stu (7021)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1312130	2012-11-13 06:44:00	I can understand the switch to a 64-bit only OS, but removal of the 32-bit libraries (as exists in 64-bit Windows today: WoW64) would be a bit too much...	pcuser42 (130)
1312131	2012-11-13 06:58:00	I'm not bothering with Win 8 as none of my comps need rebuilding and by the time they do win9 will be out or I'll be on Linux	gary67 (56)
1312132	2012-11-13 18:49:00	I can understand the switch to a 64-bit only OS, but removal of the 32-bit libraries (as exists in 64-bit Windows today: WoW64) would be a bit too much... I think you are contradicting yourself, if you don't remove the 32 bit libraries you are not switching to a 64-bit only OS surely ? There comes a point as hardware evolves where it becomes necessary to drop backwards compatibility for the sake of moving forward. Maintaining all the old while creating new causes a lot of issues such as; more work for the programmers, more potential issues, a lot of extra code in the OS (already people complain about windows "bloat") more resources needed can hamper performance, the necessity to develop multiple versions of software for all the possible users. They ditched 16 bit a while back (with XP I think?), I still have games with 16 bit installers that wont install because of that (total annihlation for e.g.) but that's the price of progress. Backwards compatibilty is part of what helped windows stay on top all these years, but it's also something that eventually starts to hold it back and has to be dropped.	dugimodo (138)
1312133	2012-11-13 19:04:00	I think you are contradicting yourself, if you don't remove the 32 bit libraries you are not switching to a 64-bit only OS surely ? There comes a point as hardware evolves where it becomes necessary to drop backwards compatibility for the sake of moving forward. Maintaining all the old while creating new causes a lot of issues such as; more work for the programmers, more potential issues, a lot of extra code in the OS (already people complain about windows "bloat") more resources needed can hamper performance, the necessity to develop multiple versions of software for all the possible users. They ditched 16 bit a while back (with XP I think?), I still have games with 16 bit installers that wont install because of that (total annihlation for e.g.) but that's the price of progress. Backwards compatibilty is part of what helped windows stay on top all these years, but it's also something that eventually starts to hold it back and has to be dropped. +1 Very Nicely put / Explained.	wainuitech (129)
1312134	2012-11-13 19:41:00	I think you are contradicting yourself, if you don't remove the 32 bit libraries you are not switching to a 64-bit only OS surely ? 64-bit only, as in no 32-bit version. :) They ditched 16 bit a while back (with XP I think?) 16-bit compatibility is dropped in 64-bit versions of Windows - 32-bit versions can still run them.	pcuser42 (130)
1312135	2012-11-13 20:58:00	There are many, many companies that will still need ongoing backwards compatibility for the app's they need to run their business. For a number of reasons, these apps wont be re-written just to work on 64bit Win8, or the latest Version of that app may be prohibitively expensive or no longer updated available. Im still having to sell 32bit Win7 or downgrade to XP just so the customer can actually use the PC to run the app's needed to run their business There are still many smaller companies running DOS based apps (as do where I work) That is the real world... :rolleyes:	1101 (13337)
1312136	2012-11-13 22:26:00	There are many, many companies that will still need ongoing backwards compatibility for the app's they need to run their business. For a number of reasons, these apps wont be re-written just to work on 64bit Win8, or the latest Version of that app may be prohibitively expensive or no longer updated available. Im still having to sell 32bit Win7 or downgrade to XP just so the customer can actually use the PC to run the app's needed to run their business There are still many smaller companies running DOS based apps (as do where I work) That is the real world... :rolleyes: This is all true, but you can't keep supporting all that with every new release. People with those requirements can keep the OS they are currently using or find another solution. It's conceivable that you could run a virtual 32 bit OS within a 64bit only one if you really needed 32 bit. Never will a new OS please every possible user, but it doesn't have to. My work might eventually consider windows 7 but at this stage they remove it from all our new PCs and install XP, that's the choice of our IT support guys and nothing to do with the design of Windows 7. Windows 8 will not even get a look in for several years if past experience is anything to go on. Companies do not adopt new Os's the way home users do.	dugimodo (138)
1 2 3