Why Programs (x86)

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

hatter

Galvanizer
This Vista 64-bit that I have has two folder for programs. One is called 'Programs' and another is Programs (x86). Now, I know this is probably because all the 32-bit programs go in the second folder.

But does it not defeat the whole purpose of having 64-bit OS? My question is, if somebody wants 32-bit OS and computing they will not get 64-bit OS. If people are getting 64-bit OS why then force 32-bit computing on them.

And most importantly, I like to keep my OS clean and simple. I hate it when i see two folders, both storing the program details. :@ :@

I would rather have an error saying "this program is not supported by Vista 64-bit".

Also, I want to know from the people who have 64-bit OS: Does this system of having two folders for 64-bit and 32-bit programs affect computer stability or it works flawless?
 
Yamaraj said:
I'm glad you're not in any systems design and maintenance team.
Click to expand...
Lol. That was rather rude, Yamraj-ji. Even though you are pretty right :).
Morgoth, Windows has to provide x86 support. Very few programs(windows especially) have native 64-bit binaries. How is Vista x64 supposed to run them? Vista runs them through the WoW64(Windows on Windows 64) emulation wrapper.

If Vista x64 had not x86 support, your box would be useless.
 
Yamaraj said:
I'm glad you're not in any systems design and maintenance team.
Click to expand...

^^^:rofl:

@morgoth: Not all programs may be available in 64-bit format. In such cases, 64-bit windows is also able to run 32-bit programs when required. There is sometime called backward compatibility without which MS would end up shooting itself in the foot. Not to mention all the companies who are on older systems and would never upgrade, ever :bleh:

What if you need a very good program which is no longer under development and so only a 32-bit binary is available. Wouldnt you want to be able to run it?

Different folders probably because different libraries (dlls?) would be required for 32bit/64bit apps. This probably make the demarcation simpler for the OS :)

Hope that clears it up.
 
Yamaraj said:
I'm glad you're not in any systems design and maintenance team.
Click to expand...

Yep, I am not an IT guy :)

@Sahilm, techie_007: I fully understand the reason behind this thing but I would have still preferred if MS could have somehow kept this support behind the curtains. The way they support DX9 applications or legacy programs on Vista 32-bit (in options, you get this compatibility thing). Making two separate folders is just plain ugly way to do it.

Moreover, if there are people who use 32-bit programs, they will get 32-bit OS. Why would they get the 32-bit OS in the first place?
 
morgoth said:
Yep, I am not an IT guy :)

@Sahilm, techie_007: I fully understand the reason behind this thing but I would have still preferred if MS could have somehow kept this support behind the curtains. The way they support DX9 applications or legacy programs on Vista 32-bit (in options, you get this compatibility thing). Making two separate folders is just plain ugly way to do it.
Click to expand...

It's just a folder, live with it.

Moreover, if there are people who use 32-bit programs, they will get 32-bit OS. Why would they get the 32-bit OS in the first place?
Click to expand...

You are using 32-bit programs right now, why did you get a 64-bit OS?

You just pwned yourself, Morgoth.
 
Yamaraj said:
I'm glad you're not in any systems design and maintenance team.
Click to expand...

sahilm said:
It's just a folder, live with it.

You are using 32-bit programs right now, why did you get a 64-bit OS?

You just pwned yourself, Morgoth.
Click to expand...

I got 64-bit OS because I have 4Gb RAM and I want to make use of it. With 32-bit OS and 4GB Dual Channel RAM, my memory score in VIsta Experience Index was 3.8. With same OS but with 2Gb RAM, the score was 5.2. With 64-bit OS but 4GB Dual Channel RAM, my score is 5.9

I am using the programs because they have been forced on me.

Most of the utilities supplied with my mobo have settled themselves in Programs (X86) because Gigabyte knows that even if the mobo and CPU support 64-bit computing, they can get away with supplying 32-bit programs because Vista will not reject the disk.

And it is true for most programs out there.

@ hammerhead, and it won't affect the stability? If no, then great tip!!
 
^I dont think there should be any effect on stability (I may be wrong) as its just a folder where you install programs. If you want to extract the best of your system install 64bit programs/drivers whenever there is an alternative between 64bit and 32 bit. If you are using a outdated software that is only 32 bit then you have no option but to install it. You see, MS had to give 32 bit support if they would not have I doubt vista would have sold more than 100 copies.

In short 32 bit support is not a bad thing its good. Just give 64 bit a few years and it will be obsolete.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Height of ranting..

Microsoft did you a favour by providing 32bit compatiblity..haha
If you dont want to, uninstall all the 32bit softs..
If you want to be more adventurous delete the damn folder..
And i really dont understand how one folder clutters your drive..
Yet again..height of ranting..:lol:
 
Yamaraj said:
I'm glad you're not in any systems design and maintenance team.
Click to expand...

Im glad you are an expert in all the tech sectors and you dont have to ask any questions. :)
 
Dude, common, you cannot expect them to port the complete OS to x64 when the market share for the OS was in the lower end of the single digits.
They have been making gradual progress in this department, and as compared to XP x64, Vista x64 is much much better.

As for the x86 folder, as mentioned above, they cannot force the developers to code in x64, does not make a sound business move. Instead, they are providing you with the next best alternative - a seamless platform to run you x86 apps so that you can enjoy the maximum on you x64 machine.

If you dislike that folder so much, why don't you just hide it? And don't install any app which does not offer native x64 support.

MS would be better off pleasing the majority of the minority userbase instead of the minority of the minority i.e You.
 
..:: Free Radical ::.. said:
yeah and i hate that WinSXS folder too :rofl:
Click to expand...

Thats the way things are! I hate exercising and healthy food and medicines and studying. Sad that i cannot do without them :bleh:
 
morgoth said:
This Vista 64-bit that I have has two folder for programs. One is called 'Programs' and another is Programs (x86). Now, I know this is probably because all the 32-bit programs go in the second folder.

But does it not defeat the whole purpose of having 64-bit OS? My question is, if somebody wants 32-bit OS and computing they will not get 64-bit OS. If people are getting 64-bit OS why then force 32-bit computing on them.

And most importantly, I like to keep my OS clean and simple. I hate it when i see two folders, both storing the program details. :@ :@

I would rather have an error saying "this program is not supported by Vista 64-bit".

Also, I want to know from the people who have 64-bit OS: Does this system of having two folders for 64-bit and 32-bit programs affect computer stability or it works flawless?
Click to expand...

Well this is actually good in a lot of ways ... u can install both 32 bit and 64 bit apps in single directory or folders, i install all the apps on D:\ irrespective of the bit :bleh: .. certain things will still install in the respective program files directory, due to the way it works, and i don't find any reason why i would even say that it doesn't stay organized ;) ... Its not hte OS it's in u're head :P ..

But on the point u mentioned, u think about it .. if indeed MS made sure that u need native 64 bit apps for Vista x64 .. how many apps,plugins etc. etc. would u end up using ??? :tongue:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom