Re: Anyone have access to 64-bit Vista?

[Steven Noonan <steven@uplinklabs.net>]

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Johannes Schindelin
<Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 27 Jan 2009, Steven Noonan wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Johannes Schindelin
>> <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, 27 Jan 2009, Geoffrey Lee wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Stephen Haberman
>> >> <stephen@exigencecorp.com> wrote:
>> >> > It kind of works on my Vista 64-bit system--I do not see the shell
>> >> > extensions in the native Windows Explorer (which is 64 bit), but I
>> >> > do see the shell extensions in an Explorer replacement I use
>> >> > (Xplorer2) that is 32-bit.
>> >> >
>> >> > I've seen other oddities in 32-bit vs. 64-bit programs--e.g. my alt
>> >> > tab replacement (Joe), which is 32-bit, works great with 32-bit
>> >> > programs but cannot remove focus from 64-bit programs (IE, Windows
>> >> > Explorer, etc.). Ironically, very few of the programs I use are
>> >> > 64-bit, so I get by with the alt tab replacement.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks! It seems that 64-bit explorer.exe will not load 32-bit shell
>> >> extensions. At least now I know I'm not going crazy. :)
>> >
>> > How could it?  You cannot have 32-bit code and 64-bit code running in the
>> > same process.  At least not with x86_64 (AFAIK).
>>
>> Correct, this is also my biggest gripe with how x86_64 is implemented.
>> Thank you, AMD!
>
> Come on, at least it is not Itanium.
>
True, but x86_64 had so much potential, and Itanium was doomed from the start.

http://www.emulators.com/docs/nx05_vx64.htm -- This guy has it right.

- Steven