eventually there'll come a time when 10 years old laptops will run 99.999% of native 32bit software in an emulated environment they'll likely drop 32bit compatibility at that point and run them in an emulator
by the time that happens you probably wont want to touch 32 bit hardware anyway. it might not be long before package managers stop building 32 bit kernels though
i know what you're referring to, but that won't stop it, support for 64bit time on 32bit builds was completed in linux 5.6
now that said, software still needs to be modified to support 64bit time, so this won't magically make old binaries understand 64bit time
not happening any time soon
some distros are starting to drop 32bit versions, but there will be options as long as support is in the kernel
i386 support was dropped in 2012, and i486 support has been talked about the last couple years, but even that is still supported, that's a cpu from 1989, older than linux itself
i don't expect i486 and i586 support to last too much longer, but i686 (1996) i don't see disappearing any time soon
>the idea of Windows dropping x86 binary compatibility sounds so unimaginable that several posters literally couldn't understand it
lel
The only software that requires 32-bit are old games and purpose-built commercial software that your company was too moronic to demand the source for. Which are the only two reasons to run Windows in the first place.
why would they drop it? how does that improve windows 12 or save microsoft money?
>By not having to support decade-old APIs.
There is literally zero cost to maintaining what they complain about maintaining. Planned obsolescence is what they're doing here.
2 months ago
Anonymous
Why would it be zero cost to maintain all that code?
The only software that requires 32-bit are old games and purpose-built commercial software that your company was too moronic to demand the source for. Which are the only two reasons to run Windows in the first place.
M$ will never drop 32 bit apps, Macos is a dead land thanks to arm64 and the dropping of 32 bit apps, linux distros have few apps and dropping 32 bit apps will result in a more undesirable experience
incorrect, 64bit time support for 32bit applications is already supported by linux since 5.6 (2020)
32bit applications that were built before then will just have the wrong time after 2038, since that's the highest year that can be represented using 32bit unix time
basically, they'll have "y2k"-like issues, but anything that doesn't rely on accurate time will keep working
C++ apps and C# winforms and wpf apps will only need to be compiled to 64 bit, most of the apps will be easily ported in a short period of time, in macos you need to change a huge part of the codebase, this isn't just arm 64 bit option then compile the app
>They WILL have to stop support sometime before 2038.
In case you weren't aware, Windows is not affected by the 2038 bug. It's only an issue on Poonix and derivatives.
Why are troonixers want to see WINdawgs to fail?
>linux >india flag >severe bugs >completely unrelated action caused devastating consequences
sounds like the Unix Philosophy at work
yea, i think it's because unlike the system(16) > system32 change which required major source code changes, 32bit to 64bit was generally more straightforward, many programs you can just compile 64bit without changing anything, so perhaps they kept the library folder as "system32" just to make it easier to make 64bit builds without changing much or anything
this explanation isn't perfect though, because of how WoW64 works, 32bit programs continue to expect system32, and WoW64 redirects them to syswow64, so why couldn't they do that to 64bit programs to make them point to system64 if they try to use system32 or something?
idk, it's a pretty messy setup
The "system32" path is hard coded in a lot of source code. It's to make it easier to port applications AND to make sure they don't need to add #ifdef to 100000 code files.
ITT: People who don't know what 32-bit binary compatibility is. It means running 32 bit software on 64 bit machines. 32 bit software is still everywhere and even some new software is compiled 32 bit because it's actually faster if there be no need for 64 bit.
>Would you be angry if Windows eventually drops 32-bit binary compatibility?
I would be happy if it dropped both 32 and 64 bit and went straight to 256 bit.
If microsoft bothered to implement an 8086 emulator for x86_64 then yes it could. But NTVDM is implemented using Virtual 8086 mode which can’t work when 64-bit operation is enabled.
However protected mode 16-bit apps did exist(windows 3.x apps) and those could be run in the existing compatibility modes but because of NT autism even those use am emulated CPU under wineVDM. > why WineVDM works
Uses emulation.
They're going to do it sooner or later
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/envisioning-future-simplified-architecture.html
yea, i think it's because unlike the system(16) > system32 change which required major source code changes, 32bit to 64bit was generally more straightforward, many programs you can just compile 64bit without changing anything, so perhaps they kept the library folder as "system32" just to make it easier to make 64bit builds without changing much or anything
this explanation isn't perfect though, because of how WoW64 works, 32bit programs continue to expect system32, and WoW64 redirects them to syswow64, so why couldn't they do that to 64bit programs to make them point to system64 if they try to use system32 or something?
idk, it's a pretty messy setup
2 months ago
Anonymous
actually, the second part could be explained by the fact windows started doing 64bit stuff before amd64
like for example the first 64bit windows xp was "windows xp 64bit edition", which was for /itanium/, which had no such 32bit compatibility, so no wow64
this is also why the amd64 version is called "x64 edition" and not the simpler "64bit edition"
Microsoft isn't just going to drop 32 bit application support, they're planning to drop the win32 API, and maybe even exit the end-user market.
Windows users will be mad I'm sure, but they'll only have themselves to blame. Microsoft makes less from licensing Windows to users who need win32 software support, than Valve makes from users buying games to play with Proton.
Microsoft has no business case anymore for spending billions of dollars supporting win32 for businesses still running Windows 7, or for PC Gamers who pirated Windows in the first place and will never give Microsoft a dime.
Same reason Microsoft half-assed their DOS support and left it to rot. Who cares if a cheapskate still has some thing running on DOS? They can just use FreeDOS or DOSbox. Its not worth it for Microsoft to support it.
Only real question is whether Microsoft tries to copy Apple, or whether they follow IBM's lead and just exit the end user market to focus on hosted solutions for paying business customers.
They reportedly showed off Windows ARM Phones again recently, but the fact they dropped Android app support just after that probably means it was a dud.
They did it 3 years ago, window 11 is 64 bit only.
Bring a more researched shit post next time.
not what he's talking about
bring a more researched shit post next time
false, spastic.
will never happen.
eventually there'll come a time when 10 years old laptops will run 99.999% of native 32bit software in an emulated environment they'll likely drop 32bit compatibility at that point and run them in an emulator
architectures that windows supports vs binary compatibility you can still run 32bit exe's on 64bit windows system32 strikes again maybe delete it?
System32 is actually all 64bit.
You'll find the 32bit stuff in SysWOW64.
im more worried about linux dropping x86_32 compatibility as my home server repurposed old shitware
by the time that happens you probably wont want to touch 32 bit hardware anyway. it might not be long before package managers stop building 32 bit kernels though
gentoo will always be an option
Doesn't mean if the underlying instruction set is the same I shouldn't be able to run software from that time period.
I'd guess kernel support drops within 10 years. 2038 is approaching...
i know what you're referring to, but that won't stop it, support for 64bit time on 32bit builds was completed in linux 5.6
now that said, software still needs to be modified to support 64bit time, so this won't magically make old binaries understand 64bit time
not happening any time soon
some distros are starting to drop 32bit versions, but there will be options as long as support is in the kernel
i386 support was dropped in 2012, and i486 support has been talked about the last couple years, but even that is still supported, that's a cpu from 1989, older than linux itself
i don't expect i486 and i586 support to last too much longer, but i686 (1996) i don't see disappearing any time soon
There will always be linux support for older hardware.
yes desktop users are not mobile users, if you can't offer long term support you're shit
why would they?
If they did that, goyslop86 would have no advantage over other instruction sets and could be easily replaced, Shittel may be angry
>Already unusable on <4gb
>32 bit era hardware barely works past 1709 anyways
Why *are* they still supporting it
why are ~~*you*~~ a tripgay?
why would they drop it? how does that improve windows 12 or save microsoft money?
*it doesn't*
>how does that improve windows 12
Never been a concern to Microsoft for anything.
>or save microsoft money?
By not having to support decade-old APIs.
>By not having to support decade-old APIs.
There is literally zero cost to maintaining what they complain about maintaining. Planned obsolescence is what they're doing here.
Why would it be zero cost to maintain all that code?
The only software that requires 32-bit are old games and purpose-built commercial software that your company was too moronic to demand the source for. Which are the only two reasons to run Windows in the first place.
> schizo babble
amazing
>the idea of Windows dropping x86 binary compatibility sounds so unimaginable that several posters literally couldn't understand it
lel
Linux is even worse in that regard.
how do you figure?
M$ will never drop 32 bit apps, Macos is a dead land thanks to arm64 and the dropping of 32 bit apps, linux distros have few apps and dropping 32 bit apps will result in a more undesirable experience
They WILL have to stop support sometime before 2038.
incorrect, 64bit time support for 32bit applications is already supported by linux since 5.6 (2020)
32bit applications that were built before then will just have the wrong time after 2038, since that's the highest year that can be represented using 32bit unix time
basically, they'll have "y2k"-like issues, but anything that doesn't rely on accurate time will keep working
C++ apps and C# winforms and wpf apps will only need to be compiled to 64 bit, most of the apps will be easily ported in a short period of time, in macos you need to change a huge part of the codebase, this isn't just arm 64 bit option then compile the app
>They WILL have to stop support sometime before 2038.
In case you weren't aware, Windows is not affected by the 2038 bug. It's only an issue on Poonix and derivatives.
>linux
>india flag
>severe bugs
>completely unrelated action caused devastating consequences
sounds like the Unix Philosophy at work
The "system32" path is hard coded in a lot of source code. It's to make it easier to port applications AND to make sure they don't need to add #ifdef to 100000 code files.
ITT: People who don't know what 32-bit binary compatibility is. It means running 32 bit software on 64 bit machines. 32 bit software is still everywhere and even some new software is compiled 32 bit because it's actually faster if there be no need for 64 bit.
>Would you be angry if Windows eventually drops 32-bit binary compatibility?
I would be happy if it dropped both 32 and 64 bit and went straight to 256 bit.
Why do you need more than 64bits?
I run old exes in Wine anyway
yes as it would cause many issues.
They would never do it because the shitflinging at them would be ginormous. They already claimed Windows 10 would be the last Windows
They will eventually, just like they did for 16-bit code.
Its trivial enough these days to just spin up a WinXP vm so who cares?
16-bit code was never supported on 64-bit windows. You can't drop what never existed in the first place.
Fun fact, NTVDM could run on 64bit just fine, that's why WineVDM works. NTVDM also ran on non-x86 platforms and emulated an x86 CPU
If microsoft bothered to implement an 8086 emulator for x86_64 then yes it could. But NTVDM is implemented using Virtual 8086 mode which can’t work when 64-bit operation is enabled.
However protected mode 16-bit apps did exist(windows 3.x apps) and those could be run in the existing compatibility modes but because of NT autism even those use am emulated CPU under wineVDM.
> why WineVDM works
Uses emulation.
so 32-bit will be dropped when 128-bit comes out
Maybe when we start switching to Quantum computing (at least on a small scale) or are close to it.
Too many commercial users still have ancient 32-bit base shitware and it would cause immense butthurt if they drop native support.
Realistically won't happen unless Intel/Amd release a cpu that doesn't support 32 bit instructions.
They're going to do it sooner or later
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/envisioning-future-simplified-architecture.html
Are compatibility layers good enough yet?
Yes, binary compatibility is the most compelling reason to use windows.
32 bit applications will still run under this proposal, but 32 bit operating systems won't.
no, it will just force people to rewrite old shit IN RUST
windows should drop 64bit compatibility instead.
linux would gain market share for old games
What percent of the desktop market cares that much for old games?
maybe 1% so linux could double market share
WineVDM would probably be upgraded to 32-bit so only a minor nuisance for me
Why are troonixers want to see WINdawgs to fail?
Already happened with W11
>computers are still 64 bit in the year 2024
>this console was 128 bit in the year 2000
How did they do it?
You don't need 128bit
The PS2 is 128-bit in the same way a modern AMD64 PC is 512-bit.
Supporting old software is sort of the whole point of Windows
So I can delete my system32 folder then?
no, that's where 64bit libraries go
>64bit libraries are in system32
>32bit libraries are in WOW64
*SysWOW64
yea, i think it's because unlike the system(16) > system32 change which required major source code changes, 32bit to 64bit was generally more straightforward, many programs you can just compile 64bit without changing anything, so perhaps they kept the library folder as "system32" just to make it easier to make 64bit builds without changing much or anything
this explanation isn't perfect though, because of how WoW64 works, 32bit programs continue to expect system32, and WoW64 redirects them to syswow64, so why couldn't they do that to 64bit programs to make them point to system64 if they try to use system32 or something?
idk, it's a pretty messy setup
actually, the second part could be explained by the fact windows started doing 64bit stuff before amd64
like for example the first 64bit windows xp was "windows xp 64bit edition", which was for /itanium/, which had no such 32bit compatibility, so no wow64
this is also why the amd64 version is called "x64 edition" and not the simpler "64bit edition"
Microsoft isn't just going to drop 32 bit application support, they're planning to drop the win32 API, and maybe even exit the end-user market.
Windows users will be mad I'm sure, but they'll only have themselves to blame. Microsoft makes less from licensing Windows to users who need win32 software support, than Valve makes from users buying games to play with Proton.
Microsoft has no business case anymore for spending billions of dollars supporting win32 for businesses still running Windows 7, or for PC Gamers who pirated Windows in the first place and will never give Microsoft a dime.
Same reason Microsoft half-assed their DOS support and left it to rot. Who cares if a cheapskate still has some thing running on DOS? They can just use FreeDOS or DOSbox. Its not worth it for Microsoft to support it.
Only real question is whether Microsoft tries to copy Apple, or whether they follow IBM's lead and just exit the end user market to focus on hosted solutions for paying business customers.
They reportedly showed off Windows ARM Phones again recently, but the fact they dropped Android app support just after that probably means it was a dud.
>Schizoposting troonix
Get a job, Black person, lmao.
Someday we will be able to name a file con on a windows system. It is then and only then will we be free of the past.