Slashdot Mirror
Why Does Microsoft Still Offer a 32-bit OS? (backblaze.com)
Brian Wilson, a founder of cloud storage service BackBlaze, writes in a blog post: Moving over to a 64-bit OS allows your laptop to run BOTH the old compatible 32-bit processes and also the new 64-bit processes. In other words, there is zero downside (and there are gigantic upsides). Because there is zero downside, the first time it could, Apple shipped with 64-bit OS support. Apple did not give customers the option of "turning off all 64-bit programs." Apple first shipped 64-bit support in OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard in 2009. This was so successful that Apple shipped all future Operating Systems configured to support both 64-bit and 32-bit processes. All of them. But let's contrast the Apple approach with that of Microsoft. Microsoft offers a 64-bit OS in Windows 10 that runs all 64-bit and all 32-bit programs. This is a valid choice of an Operating System. The problem is Microsoft ALSO gives customers the option to install 32-bit Windows 10 which will not run 64-bit programs. That's crazy. Another advantage of the 64-bit version of Windows is security. There are a variety of security features such as ASLR (Address Space Layout Randomization) that work best in 64-bits. The 32-bit version is inherently less secure. By choosing 32-bit Windows 10 a customer is literally choosing a lower performance, LOWER SECURITY, Operating System that is artificially hobbled to not run all software. My problem is this: Backblaze, like any good technology vendor, wants to be easy to use and friendly. In this case, that means we need to quietly, invisibly, continue to support BOTH the 32-bit and the 64-bit versions of every Microsoft OS they release. And we'll probably need to do this for at least 5 years AFTER Microsoft officially retires the 32-bit only version of their operating system.
I don't know why they offer a 32 bit still, but it sure is annoying
my gaming machine threw a rod or something, I had to re-install, but bla bla bla the only license I could find in my big bin o' parts was for 32 bit windows 7, but they offered free win10 upgrade so what the hell I tried.
Anyway long story short, even though I had 64 bit selected it ended up installing 32 bit windows 10.
I ended up using my stupid 32 bit windows 10 to download 64 bit windows 10 installation media after extracting my CD-key from the registry I had to wipe the computer for like the 5th time in a row, and re-install 64 bit from scratch via a thumb drive.
Some computers still run on 32 bit processors. In many businesses you have the need to update software for security reasons but are unable to update hardware.
and Apple doesn't.
Now you can run old custom 32 bit programs in a newer 64 bit OS and mostly it will run fine, but why replace "100% guaranteed to run" with "most likely will run"? Especially with old funky device drivers that were fine-tuned for the old setup?
64-bit versions of Windows do not support 16-bit components, 16-bit processes, or 16-bit applications
That's why. There is still a TON of legacy apps out there in use that won't function properly. I don't have that problem. But it exists. And that's only one of the reasons. I'm sure there are other reasons.
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
It's not rocket science - many people still use PCs that have 32-bit processors.
This sig left unintentionally blank.
Some software packages (stupidly) check to see if a WIndows OS is 32 bit or 64 bit before running or installing and if it's not 32 bit, they don't start. How do I know this? I know a person who runs their business on an outdated software package with exactly that limitation, which is why upgrading their office network was a hell of a challenge to ensure we got 32 bit versions of Win 7 Pro when we bought the equipment.
Why don't they get a new version? Because the company that makes the software is out of business
Why don't they use something else? Because they LIKE this package and for what it does, it works well.
Also, don't device drivers for 64-bit Windows need to be signed? I.e. they need to be current device drivers in active development, which won't be the case for a lot of legacy hardware.
Breakfast served all day!
That's the general answer. There is also a very specific answer in the case of Windows: 64-bit editions of Windows cannot run Win16 apps. There are still (FML) significant chunks of Win16 code out there, which everyone can agree is a pain in the ass but it's still a reality for some verticals. There may be some other compatibility considerations, too - right now I'm too drunk to check, but DOS emulation is different between the 32 and 64 bit editions.
You can still install the drivers. You just need to set the permission level using this:
/set nointegritychecks ON
bcdedit
damn I have been running 7 thermal chambers over RS232 for like 6 years now on windows 7 64 pro, and I never knew they were not working...
I can't tell if most Slashdotters are teenagers, or live in a single office room and never venture outside. Because there are TONS OF BUSINESSES that still use legacy software A DECADE out of "support." The people that wrote the software have left the company. There's no documentation. And the software _still_ _works_.
Whenever you replace software, you have to understand it (a huge task), you have to re-implement it (a huge task), you have to transition it from old-to-new without corrupting data or interrupting business. (sometimes a huge task.)
I'm currently updating a .NET 1.1 / VS2003 application. It's a pain in the ass and even throwing C++ EXCEPTIONS even though its a C# program. A google of the error message returns... no results. Yay!
Meanwhile, in the last three years I've met not one, but TWO, different companies that still run their internet-connected AS/400 (Google it.) in a live, critical environment. And last year I found the reason a lab was running so slow... it funneled everything (including 150MBit wireless) through a 10 MBit ethernet... hub. (Not a switch.)
Legacy exists everywhere. It's a real problem. Hell, look at the B-52's that were designed in 1955, and we're STILL FLYING THEM as part of our essential air force. (I'm guessing because they cost a 100x less to fly than the billion dollar B-2's.) When was the last time you went to Radioshack (ha!) and bought a bunch of VACUUM TUBES to fix your multi-million dollar airplane. Well, the military has that exact problem.
I'm in the private sector and I still see the software equivalent every month.
First we bitch at Apple because they stopped supporting 32-bit machines after 10.8. Now we bitch at Microsoft because they *still* support 32-bit machines.
Please make up your mind, people.
Some software just won't run in a 64 bit environment, regardless of WoW64 and thunking. Most of the software that is the most rigidly tied to a 32 bit environment is the kind of software that is also the most mission critical. The kind of software that operates radar ARPAs, hospital respirators, navigation systems, and MRIs. Apple, as pretty as it is, just doesn't have the presence in the industrial side of things that Microsoft does - in fact they don't have any industrial presence to speak of. As a desktop only computer, they are more free to adopt new OS features that render old software incompatible. Many beloved programs from the past have been rendered inoperable by a MacOS upgrade. While inconvenient for the user, it is hardly catastrophic.
Now, no one is going to perform an OS upgrade on an existing MRI of course. But there are many reasons why an MRI vendor would want to bring out a new model with a new (perhaps more secure) version of Windows, but where the software is still tied to 32 bit. Industrial software is far less agile. You just can't recompile for 64 bit, it has to go through very strict verification and rigid change control. That kind of process takes years, and costs far more than most software porting. What about that 80 year old who has had a forgotten metal bit in his shoulder for 40 years who is put into an MRI to have that bit forcibly ripped out of his body by because the magnetic flux feedback detection didn't work properly when the 32-bit driver for it was mis-ported to 64 bit?
So while Microsoft is hardly a company I regularly defend, in this case you just can't compare a company that only puts out pretty ergonomic desktop machines and keeps draconian control of hardware to the extent that you really can't use the OS anywhere else, and a company that produces OSes for everyone's hardware that ranges from embedded microcontrollers, to warship navigation systems, to tablets.
64 bit ms office doesn't work as well as 32 bit. This has been known since at least 2 office versions ago. Also Office plugins don't work because they plugin directly to Office memory space, not something like sockets or other common protocol.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
If they've got to Google the AS/400, then maybe Slashdot isn't really the best place for them to visit/comment?
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Heck I have an AS/400 in my server room right now.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Just another note on EOLed equipment: Intel ONLY stopped producing the i386 in 2007 (nearly 20 years of production for the CPU) because it was that widely used.