On 5/7/05, Stewart Stremler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A lot of MSwindows applications are backwards compatible, and that's > part of the problem, I think. Instead of making a clean break, they > make a lot of little breaks with backwards compatiblity. MOST things > will work if you upgrade... just enough to keep most of the users > happy. > > This makes it really hard to fix truly broken things (Win32 API, > for example).
An InformationWeek article says that, with the 64-bit version of Windows, there will be no DOS (which they've already dropped with XP) and no 32-bit apps. Specifically: "Windows XP x64 won't support DOS, 16-bit, or Posix applications, or some older networking protocols." So, that oughta be a significant break for Microsoft, if not entirely clean. They can relieve themselves of some maintenance and support effort, and they can deflect the heat from any unhappy customers. InformationWeek: Gates' 64-Bit Pitch http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=CVOBN000EQD50QSNDBCSKHSCJUMEKJVN?articleID=161501499 Unrelated, the article also notes that max memory on 64-bit systems will be 128 Gbytes of RAM and a potential for 16 terabytes of virtual memory. It'd be hard to forget anything! -todd, eagerly awaiting his first 64-bit chip -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
