Re: Windows Vista Release? ? ?

Richard Bonner wrote:

J. Clarke wrote:
Richard Bonner wrote:
The main problem as I see it is that it will have only 32-bit and
64-bit modes. So no old software will run.

Most of it (including some that will _not_ run natively under XP or 2K or
NT) will run fine in a virtual machine--there is a free virtual machine
available, a second one coming, and Microsoft is including one with some
versions of Vista. I don't see this as nearly as great an issue as
others do, but then I see virtual machines as "normal" and their lack to
have been a significant handicap in PCs for a long time.

*** I don't see a problem with that as long as it's always available in
future versions. There is a growing concern about old software and old
data formats being inaccessible by those that need good record keeping
going back decades.

If you need record keeping going back decades you should plan on recopying
periodically and you can do format conversion at that time. There is no
digital storage medium that is proven reliable over more than 20 years.

It is unlikely that Intel is going to remove virtualization from future
processors--it has been part of the architecture since the 80386 and they
have with the latest generation added features to enhance that capability.
Further, Microsoft sees enough future in it to have acquired a company that
produces such software so it would seem unlikely that they are going to
remove the capability. Even if they do there are third-party products that
provide it.

Further, for 16-bit code CPU performance today is so high that soft
emulation is a viable option. Applications running on Bochs may be
dog-slow compared to running natively on a 3 GHz CPU, but they're still
blazing fast compared to an 80286.

Also, it's expected that all
new software (at least initially from Microsoft) will be 64-bit, thus
making all else obsolete so consumers will see yet another forced
upgrade
scenario. )-:

Expected by who?

*** Sorry, that was a bit of an overstep. I meant that to reflect
Microsoft's past behaviour shown their constant changing of things to make
past versions incompatible with present ones.

I haven't really noticed this. Yes, the default formats tend to change with
time to support new features. But that doesn't mean that their current
applications can't read and write files for their older ones. Word 2003
can read and write files going back to Word 97 for example. The new Word
2003/2007 format is XML incidentally.

Nearly all Intel-based notebooks including the new Macs
are 32-bit--the Core Duo processors despite rumors to the contrary are
32-bit processors derived from the Pentium III. If Microsoft stopped
shipping 32-bit code for mainstream applications they would effectively
be abandoning the notebook computer market entirely. Don't expect to see
a shift to 64-bit code for applications until the majority of notebooks
shipping or likely to be upgraded are running the Turion or the new Intel
Merom processor that isn't expected to even ship until 4Q06.

*** Understood. However, at some point, new computers will be shipped
with Vista and Vista software,

Yes, you can expect that sometime late this year or early next year. Many
of those computers will be 32-bit laptops. So what?

It seems to have escaped your notice that Vista not only runs 32-bit code
but also runs on 32-bit processors.

just as new ones currently come with XP.
The user won't have a choice soon. If all new software will be 64-bit,
those using 32-bit systems will be forced to upgrade if they want the
new features, and/or if the new files types aren't accessible by those
with older systems.

I'm sorry, but I don't see the issue here. If you need to read new file
types then you need compatible applications. If you have to buy new
software you have to buy new software and 16 vs 32 vs 64 bit doesn't enter
into it. The big problem with removing the 16-bit subsystem would be that
16 bit code, that can't read the new file types anyway, won't run anymore.
So what?

Your complaint here seems to be that file formats get changed periodically.

I would also expect that later versions of Vista will be
64-bit only.

Why would you expect that?

*** Because the new software will be 64-bit, just as all current new
software is 32-bit, not 16-bit.

And this would influence Microsoft to issue a patch that removes 32-bit
support why?

Microsoft supported 16-bit code in Windows NT 3.5 and 4, Windows 2000, and
Windows XP 32-bit, not to mention the whole Windows 9x sequence and didn't
remove it until the 64-bit version of XP shipped, and even then they only
removed it from the 64-bit version, not the 32-bit. If they follow the
same pattern with Vista then they'll remove 32-bit support when the 128-bit
version ships, or they'll at least go four generations of code, which would
put removal of 32-bit support somewhere in the 2016 timeframe. That is if
there is any downside to continuing 32-bit support, which there may not be.

This may be the straw that breaks the Microsoft consumers' backs

Unlikely in the extreme. Remember that it costs Microsoft nothing to put
a preinstalled virtual copy of DOS, Windows 98, and Windows XP in every
box--if it gets to be a real issue this is likely what they will do.
--
--John

*** I can't see that. They want a monopoly and one way is to
constantly make today's stuff obsolete whether it's warranted or not.
Satisified users don't buy enough new stuff, so they have to make their
present stuff unusable. )-:

I don't see how "making today's stuff obsolete" creates any kind of
monopoly. I can see where it churns sales, but that's not creating a
monopoly--Intel did much the same thing recently with the introduction of
PCI Express and I don't see it hurting AMD sales any. Further, the "new
file formats" from Microsoft that you seem so worried about are XML for the
most part, which OpenOffice 2.0 handles nicely so I don't see how that's
having _any_ part in establishing a monopoly--if anything the "new file
formats" _reduce_ the possibility of monopoly.

In any case, if it doesn't hurt sales then why should they care? If it does
hurt sales they're more worried about next quarter's profits than about
"establishing a monopoly".

Further, regardless of _any_ of this, DOS, Windows 3.x, Windows 98, on up
through XP 64-bit run fine under vmware on Linux, and I will not be at all
surprised if Vista does the same. You can always take that option if it's
a real issue for you.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
.

Relevant Pages

  • questions on Windows Media Formats in XP and Vista for live recording.
    ... I have some questions to ask about windows media format. ... I've successfully used WMF in my own TV application, it can capture live stream and encode into WMV based on the selected WMA and WMV codec and format index. ... But even when I used that genprofile lib directly to generate the WMV file under Vista, ... Btw, it seems that WMA has no formats for VBR for video, I noticed that the does not appear for any VBR audio formats. ...
    (microsoft.public.win32.programmer.directx.video)
  • Re: Virtual PC for Vista Home Premium?
    ... An example of that is the difference between licensing virtual machines when running a retail copy of Vista versus a volume license or Software Assurance copy. ... In the latter case the EULA for Vista Enterprise and Ultimate permit the licensing of four virtualized copies of Windows and the virtualization software used does not even have to be Microsoft's. ...
    (microsoft.public.mac.virtualpc)
  • Re: 32 or 64 some questions
    ... Most Windows programs will still run on Win2K. ... I don't mean to sound pedantic, but it does server to note that the EULA ... This might be different for Vista, ... The EULA on Win2K didn't mention VMs one way or the other, virtualization ...
    (comp.os.linux.hardware)
  • Re: SATA Drivers
    ... VPC runs on all editions of Windows starting with Windows 2000. ... virtual machine impacts Vista or your files. ... only work on XP I highly recommend a virtualization solution. ... You are installing an OS that does not know anything about ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: [News] Windows version of VirtualPC is free!
    ... 2007 (Windows computer version) ... ... VPC and licensing goodness ensue! ... stated that it will include support for Windows Vista as ... Virtualization technologies be used - if you want to use ...
    (microsoft.public.mac.virtualpc)