Windows 9
-
Colborne_Greg wrote:
as long as the operating system has the desktop and compatibility for 32 bit apps it will have this offset problem.
Colborne_Greg wrote:
Windows 8 is the only modern OS without this problem
Windows 8 has the desktop and compatibility for 32 bit code. Backwards compatibility with 32-bit code is a big part of the amd64 design and supported by 64-bit Windows including Windows 8. Having said that, 64- vs. 32-bit and backwards compatibility for 32-bit is a very different discussion than what you started with, namely to indicate that metro somehow replaces desktop and desktop is only for "old code". Seems like two completely different topics :)
Do we live in a 64 bit world? We don't live in a world where apps are made correctly to use 64 bits, and this compatibility which metro does not have is why the desktop is there and is the only reason. AMD is hardware as is Intel, otherwise operating systems like metro would not have a base line to advance from. The desktop can not utilize 64 bits ever as the segment problem is in the heart of every programming language for the desktop.
-
Stomp. Stomp.
7 pcs in my office, all with 50 inch screens, and Microsoft Kinect, with touchless gesture software I can stand 6 feet from the screen and use it like a touch screen. The desktop will die and the PC will rein on.
-
I couldn't care less that you don't care. Unless you're an illiterate American, of course, in which case I could care less.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
What I do or do not is a solid response as would I could or could not do is a choice at the moment the situation arises. You are not the keeper of the meaning of languages. If you were you would like windows 8.
-
I couldn't care less that you don't care. Unless you're an illiterate American, of course, in which case I could care less.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
I do not care is zero caring, I could care less, would mean to say I have caring and the possibility of me to care less is there, but what I think you mean to say is I couldn't care less, which could mean zero caring but it is also a phrase with a reference to how I currently care about something, but when I say I don't care - the amount I care is clear.
-
I do not care is zero caring, I could care less, would mean to say I have caring and the possibility of me to care less is there, but what I think you mean to say is I couldn't care less, which could mean zero caring but it is also a phrase with a reference to how I currently care about something, but when I say I don't care - the amount I care is clear.
I don't need to be told what I want to say; I know that with high precision. My comment simply indicates that illiterate Americans obviously do not know what they are saying.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
I don't need to be told what I want to say; I know that with high precision. My comment simply indicates that illiterate Americans obviously do not know what they are saying.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
If you know what you are talking about with high precision, and you were referring to myself - then indeed you do not know what you are talking about as I am not American.
-
Do we live in a 64 bit world? We don't live in a world where apps are made correctly to use 64 bits, and this compatibility which metro does not have is why the desktop is there and is the only reason. AMD is hardware as is Intel, otherwise operating systems like metro would not have a base line to advance from. The desktop can not utilize 64 bits ever as the segment problem is in the heart of every programming language for the desktop.
No, the desktop is not there solely for 32-bit support. The desktop will remain because the metro full-screen app store environment isn't sufficient to handle everything. Metro addresses a particular need but doesn't replace what the desktop environment provides. Win8 pushed metro a bit too hard and I think MS realized that which is why in 8.1 you can choose to boot directly to the desktop (and skip the start screen). It also appears with Windows 9 certain profiles (like desktop/laptop machine) will be very desktop-centric. And yes, you can create a 64-bit desktop application. 64-bit is not restricted to Metro apps :)
Colborne_Greg wrote:
The desktop can not utilize 64 bits ever as the segment problem is in the heart of every programming language for the desktop.
I think you're confused wrt programming languages and 32- vs 64- bit. Which programming languages "for the desktop" are you referring to? You can write in C++, for example, and compile that to either 32- or 64-bit code. The language itself doesn't restrict you to one or the other. Additionally, you can use C++ to create desktop applications and metro store apps. So "programming language for the desktop" doesn't really make any sense.
-
No, the desktop is not there solely for 32-bit support. The desktop will remain because the metro full-screen app store environment isn't sufficient to handle everything. Metro addresses a particular need but doesn't replace what the desktop environment provides. Win8 pushed metro a bit too hard and I think MS realized that which is why in 8.1 you can choose to boot directly to the desktop (and skip the start screen). It also appears with Windows 9 certain profiles (like desktop/laptop machine) will be very desktop-centric. And yes, you can create a 64-bit desktop application. 64-bit is not restricted to Metro apps :)
Colborne_Greg wrote:
The desktop can not utilize 64 bits ever as the segment problem is in the heart of every programming language for the desktop.
I think you're confused wrt programming languages and 32- vs 64- bit. Which programming languages "for the desktop" are you referring to? You can write in C++, for example, and compile that to either 32- or 64-bit code. The language itself doesn't restrict you to one or the other. Additionally, you can use C++ to create desktop applications and metro store apps. So "programming language for the desktop" doesn't really make any sense.
I did not say the desktop could not have 64 bit apps. I said that the desktop apps could not utilize the 64 bits, windows xp x64 edition, the best it could use was 54 bits. 32 bits can barely utilize 3.2 GB of RAM. 64 bits can handle billions of terabytes. We have yet to have a machine that can handle over 200 GB of ram, and there isn't a desktop app in history that has been able to utilize even those 200 GB. Just to keep the math simple. if 3.2 GB is 32 bit then 6.4 GB is 33 bit, and 12.8 is 34 bit, 25.6 is 35 bit, 51.2 is 36 bit, 102.4 is 37 bit, 204.8 is 38 bit. <---- no desktop app has even gotten here. n The only benefit that the desktop has had from being 64 bit is being able to manage more then 3.2 GB of ram.
-
If you know what you are talking about with high precision, and you were referring to myself - then indeed you do not know what you are talking about as I am not American.
Ah, so it's all about you, is it? I tellya, the egos in this place...
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Ah, so it's all about you, is it? I tellya, the egos in this place...
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Buddy first off, when someone starts a sentence with I it is indeed about themselves, and secondly this thread is something I started, so when I say I don't care, it isn't an ego trip. What you are doing is being a self righteous ass.
-
I did not say the desktop could not have 64 bit apps. I said that the desktop apps could not utilize the 64 bits, windows xp x64 edition, the best it could use was 54 bits. 32 bits can barely utilize 3.2 GB of RAM. 64 bits can handle billions of terabytes. We have yet to have a machine that can handle over 200 GB of ram, and there isn't a desktop app in history that has been able to utilize even those 200 GB. Just to keep the math simple. if 3.2 GB is 32 bit then 6.4 GB is 33 bit, and 12.8 is 34 bit, 25.6 is 35 bit, 51.2 is 36 bit, 102.4 is 37 bit, 204.8 is 38 bit. <---- no desktop app has even gotten here. n The only benefit that the desktop has had from being 64 bit is being able to manage more then 3.2 GB of ram.
Yes, I recall reading this[^] article which discussed the limit in Win64 being 44 bits. So in 64-bit Windows you're not actually getting the full 64-bit address space. You are getting a LOT more than with 32-bits though :) However, none of this has anything to do with desktop vs. metro which was the original discussion. For a given machine running 64-bit Windows 8, 64-bit code running as a desktop app or a metro windows store app will both be subject to the same limitations. The hardware/OS limitations apply equally to both.
-
Yes, I recall reading this[^] article which discussed the limit in Win64 being 44 bits. So in 64-bit Windows you're not actually getting the full 64-bit address space. You are getting a LOT more than with 32-bits though :) However, none of this has anything to do with desktop vs. metro which was the original discussion. For a given machine running 64-bit Windows 8, 64-bit code running as a desktop app or a metro windows store app will both be subject to the same limitations. The hardware/OS limitations apply equally to both.
Yeah it does This whole problem is due to the 16 bit offset, the fact that 32 bit was built on top of it and so is 64 bit. Only metro with the .net framework as the substructure which is a paradigm shift from the 16 bit offset; will software advance - therefore the desktop is a piece of shit.
-
Yeah it does This whole problem is due to the 16 bit offset, the fact that 32 bit was built on top of it and so is 64 bit. Only metro with the .net framework as the substructure which is a paradigm shift from the 16 bit offset; will software advance - therefore the desktop is a piece of shit.
- You can build metro apps using native C++ code without going through the .net framework 2) You can use the .net framework to create either metro apps or desktop apps 3) Code using the .net framework is subject to the same Win64 address space limitations as any other process running on the machine Whether you like it or not, the desktop isn't going anywhere :)
-
- You can build metro apps using native C++ code without going through the .net framework 2) You can use the .net framework to create either metro apps or desktop apps 3) Code using the .net framework is subject to the same Win64 address space limitations as any other process running on the machine Whether you like it or not, the desktop isn't going anywhere :)
- applications use metro and have to use these libraries, use whatever language you want 2) metro is the .net framework as an operating system (not limited by OS), .net framework is an add on to the desktop (limited by OS) 3) in windows 8 the desktop is an application of the metro memory address space. The desktop is a piece of shit.
-
- applications use metro and have to use these libraries, use whatever language you want 2) metro is the .net framework as an operating system (not limited by OS), .net framework is an add on to the desktop (limited by OS) 3) in windows 8 the desktop is an application of the metro memory address space. The desktop is a piece of shit.
You're either really confused or I've just been trolled :)
-
You're either really confused or I've just been trolled :)
I program Microsoft technologies.
-
I program Microsoft technologies.
I think your obvious enthusiasm for metro is great, but I'm not sure you fully get how the pieces go together. I guess we'll have to just agree to disagree :)
-
I think your obvious enthusiasm for metro is great, but I'm not sure you fully get how the pieces go together. I guess we'll have to just agree to disagree :)
I am telling you how it works.
-
Buddy first off, when someone starts a sentence with I it is indeed about themselves, and secondly this thread is something I started, so when I say I don't care, it isn't an ego trip. What you are doing is being a self righteous ass.
What you are being is an idiot who refuses to see a joke when it smacks him squarely in the face. Your initial comment ("I don't care if you purchase it", in case you've forgotten your ingenious reply) was so pointlessly rude that I didn't bother to reply to it, but instead made fun of the misuse of the word "could" in the incorrect statement of "I could care less", which is used only and exclusively by the set of Americans who are illiterate (do the venn diagram, if you wish to confirm this -- the illiterati in other English-speaking countries say "couldn't"). That joke was of far more value to the forum than your ill-mannered comment ("I don't care if you purchase it", in case you've forgotten it again), because it at least contained good humour, rather than snide arrogance. If, as it seems to be the case, you wish to have an ill-natured argument with someone, take it elsewhere -- CP doesn't need that kind of behaviour, and I'll just take the piss, so you'll just get all indignant and bad-tempered to no purpose.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
What you are being is an idiot who refuses to see a joke when it smacks him squarely in the face. Your initial comment ("I don't care if you purchase it", in case you've forgotten your ingenious reply) was so pointlessly rude that I didn't bother to reply to it, but instead made fun of the misuse of the word "could" in the incorrect statement of "I could care less", which is used only and exclusively by the set of Americans who are illiterate (do the venn diagram, if you wish to confirm this -- the illiterati in other English-speaking countries say "couldn't"). That joke was of far more value to the forum than your ill-mannered comment ("I don't care if you purchase it", in case you've forgotten it again), because it at least contained good humour, rather than snide arrogance. If, as it seems to be the case, you wish to have an ill-natured argument with someone, take it elsewhere -- CP doesn't need that kind of behaviour, and I'll just take the piss, so you'll just get all indignant and bad-tempered to no purpose.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
yeah self rightous