Windows 9

[1775]

The following is from a trade report -

"Few expect Microsoft to unveil the full feature list or even the target arrival date for Windows 9 at Build 2014. Instead, Microsoft officials are likely to discuss at a high level the company’s goal to create a new Windows 9 SKU that would run on Windows Phones, ARM-based Windows tablets/PCs, phablets, and other kinds of devices. According to previous tips, this “modern” SKU might not include a Desktop for running legacy Win32 apps. It would be updated frequently and regularly by Microsoft through the Windows Store."

No desktop for running legacy Win32 apps. This is what is sometimes referred to as "jumping the shark". MS has a new exec at the top. Time will tell.

[obgraham]

At this point I think it's all hot air. An HP rep on the Costco floor told me last week they'd been told Win9 will indeed have the option of a Win7 look for those "legacy" folks, while continuing the touch screen and mobile device functionability.
Pretty much the opposite of what OP says here.
So I think it's all guessware till we see what shows up.

Only thing that's certain: a bunch of us won't like it!

[garym114]

All this means is there will be one operation system for "Windows Phones, ARM-based Windows tablets/PCs, phablets". Don't know why the author included phablets. This just a big Windows Phone.

This comes down to one operating system for Windows Phones and ARM based tablets, the touchscreen devices. The Microsoft Surface 2 and RT are the ARM processor devices this is referring to. Microsoft said last year the Windows Phone and ARM Surface tablets would eventually have a unified store for apps and this will start with the next phone update and the next Surface update.

This is all about decreasing the number of operating systems. Right now there are three. When this is complete there will be two. It has nothing to do with desktop or laptop operating systems.

[1775]

Here is the same story as reported by CNET -

http://www.cnet.com/news/microsoft-build-2014-to-highlight-one-windows-progress/

[Campfire_Time]

Yea, that's the 30%. Most of what I use has had 64 bit versions for several years.

I don't use Acrobat or JAVA. Replace Acrobat with PDF Xchange viewer or something similar. Much less vulnerable, a lot more secure. Java is just a malware magnet.

I don't really use IE that much. The 64 bit browser was a bit buggy so I never used it. I think they keep the browsers on 32 bit because of plug in compatibility. Anyway, we've hijakced the thread enough now...

Getting back to the OP, many 32 bit apps run fine on Windows 64 bit. I don't know what they are doing with Windows 9, but 8 is available as 32 bit if you really need it.

[bwanshoom]

Sure, I update all the time. But most apps don't come in 64-bit flavors. There is no 64-bit Firefox, Chrome, Acrobat, Flash, most Office products, etc. IE10 is now some weird hybrid (64 bit container with 32 bit tabs), but again, there is little benefit to 64 bit user apps for the most part.

[Campfire_Time]

bwanshoom wrote:

Campfire Time wrote:
And unless you are a corporate customer, why are you still running "legacy Win32 apps"? 64 bit apps run far better.

You're kidding, right? 90% of the user apps (not system) that run on your PC are Win32 apps. Just pull up Task Manager and count all the apps that end in *32

64 bit apps do not provide dramatic improvement over 32 bit. Drivers need to be 64 bit and some apps that might require copious amounts of RAM, but the majority of apps do not need to nor do they gain great benefit from being 64 bit.

More like 30% Don't you update anything? And try running Photoshop in 32 bit mode and compare performance to its 64 bit counterpart. Night and day.

[bwanshoom]

Campfire Time wrote:
And unless you are a corporate customer, why are you still running "legacy Win32 apps"? 64 bit apps run far better.

You're kidding, right? 90% of the user apps (not system) that run on your PC are Win32 apps. Just pull up Task Manager and count all the apps that end in *32

64 bit apps do not provide dramatic improvement over 32 bit. Drivers need to be 64 bit and some apps that might require copious amounts of RAM, but the majority of apps do not need to nor do they gain great benefit from being 64 bit.

[Campfire_Time]

What report? From whom?

"Windows Phones, ARM-based Windows tablets/PCs, phablets, and other kinds of devices"

Of course not, Windows 8 does not have a desktop for these devices either. Only for x86/x64 desktop/laptop machines. A "new Windows 9 sku" simply means another product differentiation in their product line. Each service pack of Windows 6 for example has its own sku. Nothing shocking about it.

And unless you are a corporate customer, why are you still running "legacy Win32 apps"? 64 bit apps run far better.