16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

[Guest Zootal]

So, here is a question - I'm running XP64 (yeah, still...). I can't run any

of my 16 bit apps. However, today I installed VirtualPC2007, and installed

Win2000. From there, 16 bit apps work. Why? What is it about XP64 that 16

but apps don't run, yet I can run them from a virtual pc running in XP64?

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

The addressible range of x64 requires greater than 16bits so 16-bit software

cannot run. Since the Win2000 vm is a 32-bit system the 16-bit apps can

work.

 

"Zootal" <msnews@zootal.nospam.com> wrote in message

news:ul%23rrYxXIHA.5208@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> So, here is a question - I'm running XP64 (yeah, still...). I can't run

> any of my 16 bit apps. However, today I installed VirtualPC2007, and

> installed Win2000. From there, 16 bit apps work. Why? What is it about

> XP64 that 16 but apps don't run, yet I can run them from a virtual pc

> running in XP64?

>

[Guest Tom Ferguson]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

To put it another way, neither XP64 nor Vista 64 include a

Windows-on-Windows (WoW) 16 system that would provide the support needed for

16 bit applications to run on the 64 bit OS. They do include a WoW 32

system. VPC 2007 or similar provides support.

 

Tom

MSMVP 1998-2007

 

"Zootal" <msnews@zootal.nospam.com> wrote in message

news:ul%23rrYxXIHA.5208@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> So, here is a question - I'm running XP64 (yeah, still...). I can't run

> any of my 16 bit apps. However, today I installed VirtualPC2007, and

> installed Win2000. From there, 16 bit apps work. Why? What is it about

> XP64 that 16 but apps don't run, yet I can run them from a virtual pc

> running in XP64?

>

[Guest jorgen]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

Tom Ferguson wrote:

> To put it another way, neither XP64 nor Vista 64 include a

> Windows-on-Windows (WoW) 16 system that would provide the support needed

> for 16 bit applications to run on the 64 bit OS. They do include a WoW

> 32 system. VPC 2007 or similar provides support.

>

> Tom

> MSMVP 1998-2007

>

 

To add a bit. If Microsoft wanted, they could make such a subsystem.

Both amd and intel has support for it

[Guest S.SubZero]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

On Jan 24, 10:45 pm, jorgen <na@invalid> wrote:

> To add a bit. If Microsoft wanted, they could make such a subsystem.

> Both amd and intel has support for it

 

To add a bit more, Microsoft could choose to support CP/M apps too.

 

WHERE IS THE BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY MICROSOFT??!

 

Sometimes ya just gotta let to. 16-bit was good while it lasted, now

it's time to go.

[Guest Tom Ferguson]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

Actually, there are emulators to run cp/m on a VM which virtualizes a Zilog

80.

http://www.dcast.vbox.co.uk/cpm_over.html

for one.

"MyZ80 is a high performance Z80 CPU software emulator for PCs. Thanks to

some very serious optimisation, it is the fastest and most accurate Z80

emulator available."

 

I suggest you run this emulator in VirtualPC 2007 on Vista.

 

Tom

MSMVP 1998-2007

 

"S.SubZero" <ssubzero@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:7ef23c08-635f-4504-9726-21807bf500aa@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

> On Jan 24, 10:45 pm, jorgen <na@invalid> wrote:

>

>> To add a bit. If Microsoft wanted, they could make such a subsystem.

>> Both amd and intel has support for it

>

> To add a bit more, Microsoft could choose to support CP/M apps too.

>

> WHERE IS THE BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY MICROSOFT??!

>

> Sometimes ya just gotta let to. 16-bit was good while it lasted, now

> it's time to go.

[Guest Charlie Russel - MVP]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

Yes. MS made a deliberate decision here, and it's a wise one I think. In

order to support 16 bit applications, they'd have had to do things that

would compromise both stability and security. Instead, they drew a line in

the sand, and I think it makes sense in the long run. If you need to run 16

bit apps, Virtual Server/Virtual PC are viable options to do so.

 

--

Charlie.

http://msmvps.com/xperts64

http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

 

 

"S.SubZero" <ssubzero@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:7ef23c08-635f-4504-9726-21807bf500aa@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

> On Jan 24, 10:45 pm, jorgen <na@invalid> wrote:

>

>> To add a bit. If Microsoft wanted, they could make such a subsystem.

>> Both amd and intel has support for it

>

> To add a bit more, Microsoft could choose to support CP/M apps too.

>

> WHERE IS THE BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY MICROSOFT??!

>

> Sometimes ya just gotta let to. 16-bit was good while it lasted, now

> it's time to go.

[Guest Zootal]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

 

"S.SubZero" <ssubzero@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:7ef23c08-635f-4504-9726-21807bf500aa@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

> On Jan 24, 10:45 pm, jorgen <na@invalid> wrote:

>

>> To add a bit. If Microsoft wanted, they could make such a subsystem.

>> Both amd and intel has support for it

>

> To add a bit more, Microsoft could choose to support CP/M apps too.

>

> WHERE IS THE BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY MICROSOFT??!

>

> Sometimes ya just gotta let to. 16-bit was good while it lasted, now

> it's time to go.

 

When I have to. I still use an old DOS editor called Brief every now and

then, and I think Symantec Visual Page is either 16 bit, or is otherwise

non-compatible with XP64. However, the main reason I setup a virtual PC was

so I could run the stuff that won't work in XP64, such as the VPN clients -

neither Cisco nor CheckPoint support XP64, and I have to use them. So, I run

a Win2000 VM, and in it I install the CheckPoint VPN client, which works

just fine even though it won't install in XP64. And within the Win2000 VM I

remote into my hosts. Works good, actually

[Guest Charlie Russel - MVP]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

Makes perfect sense to me. (And I remember Brief. But I abandoned it for vi,

and now use GVim as my primary editor on all platforms. )

 

--

Charlie.

http://msmvps.com/xperts64

http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

 

 

"Zootal" <msnews@zootal.nospam.com> wrote in message

news:%23PP0Ap5XIHA.5816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>

> "S.SubZero" <ssubzero@gmail.com> wrote in message

> news:7ef23c08-635f-4504-9726-21807bf500aa@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

>> On Jan 24, 10:45 pm, jorgen <na@invalid> wrote:

>>

>>> To add a bit. If Microsoft wanted, they could make such a subsystem.

>>> Both amd and intel has support for it

>>

>> To add a bit more, Microsoft could choose to support CP/M apps too.

>>

>> WHERE IS THE BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY MICROSOFT??!

>>

>> Sometimes ya just gotta let to. 16-bit was good while it lasted, now

>> it's time to go.

>

> When I have to. I still use an old DOS editor called Brief every now and

> then, and I think Symantec Visual Page is either 16 bit, or is otherwise

> non-compatible with XP64. However, the main reason I setup a virtual PC

> was so I could run the stuff that won't work in XP64, such as the VPN

> clients - neither Cisco nor CheckPoint support XP64, and I have to use

> them. So, I run a Win2000 VM, and in it I install the CheckPoint VPN

> client, which works just fine even though it won't install in XP64. And

> within the Win2000 VM I remote into my hosts. Works good, actually

>

[Guest Jason Gurtz]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

Charlie Russel - MVP wrote:

> But I abandoned it for vi, and now use GVim as my primary editor on

> all platforms. )

 

Damn that's sweet...I am not alone! =)

 

~JasonG

 

--

[Guest Charlie Russel - MVP]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

Nope. And there's even a native 64-bit Windows port available.

 

--

Charlie.

http://msmvps.com/xperts64

http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

 

 

"Jason Gurtz" <jasonNOgurtz@npuSPAMmail.com> wrote in message

news:ezLsL15XIHA.4532@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Charlie Russel - MVP wrote:

>> But I abandoned it for vi, and now use GVim as my primary editor on

>> all platforms. )

>

> Damn that's sweet...I am not alone! =)

>

> ~JasonG

>

> --

[Guest R. C. White]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

Hi, Tom.

 

Now you've done it! The Z80 was my first CPU, in the original TRS-80, in

December 1977, 30 years ago last month. There are fond memories, but I

don't think I want to go back there. ;^}

 

RC

--

R. C. White, CPA

San Marcos, TX

rc@grandecom.net

Microsoft Windows MVP

(Running Windows Live Mail 2008 in Vista Ultimate x64)

 

"Tom Ferguson" <tom.newsgroups@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:#$p8S$4XIHA.4696@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> Actually, there are emulators to run cp/m on a VM which virtualizes a

> Zilog 80.

> http://www.dcast.vbox.co.uk/cpm_over.html

> for one.

> "MyZ80 is a high performance Z80 CPU software emulator for PCs. Thanks to

> some very serious optimisation, it is the fastest and most accurate Z80

> emulator available."

>

> I suggest you run this emulator in VirtualPC 2007 on Vista.

>

> Tom

> MSMVP 1998-2007

>

> "S.SubZero" <ssubzero@gmail.com> wrote in message

> news:7ef23c08-635f-4504-9726-21807bf500aa@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

>> On Jan 24, 10:45 pm, jorgen <na@invalid> wrote:

>>

>>> To add a bit. If Microsoft wanted, they could make such a subsystem.

>>> Both amd and intel has support for it

>>

>> To add a bit more, Microsoft could choose to support CP/M apps too.

>>

>> WHERE IS THE BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY MICROSOFT??!

>>

>> Sometimes ya just gotta let to. 16-bit was good while it lasted, now

>> it's time to go.

[Guest DP]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

 

"Zootal" <msnews@zootal.nospam.com> wrote in message

news:ul%23rrYxXIHA.5208@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> So, here is a question - I'm running XP64 (yeah, still...).

 

No need to feel bad about that. I'm sure you'll find lots of users here

committed to XP X64 and don't plan to go to Vista 64.

I have both on my machine.

[Guest Zootal]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

>> So, here is a question - I'm running XP64 (yeah, still...).

>

> No need to feel bad about that. I'm sure you'll find lots of users here

> committed to XP X64 and don't plan to go to Vista 64.

> I have both on my machine.

>

 

My comment was actually a reference to all of the complaining I've done

about XP64 :-). There are a few things that won't run under XP64, and I've

come close to scrapping it and going back to XP32. But now that I've got a

VM running Win2000 (because I don't have any spare XP32 keys), I find that

the things that XP64 won't do seem to work well in the VM.

 

Vista 32/64 really isn't an option for me. It does *nothing* that I need or

want that XP won't do. And I don't need an OS that is likely to ask me "did

you want to click the mouse button?", "Did you really want to click the

mouse button?", "Are you really sure you wanted to click the mouse button?",

"Access denied! Clicking the mouse is a security hazard, and you are not

allowed to do that".....

[Guest Graham]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

Colin Barnhorst wrote:

> The addressible range of x64 requires greater than 16bits so 16-bit

> software cannot run. Since the Win2000 vm is a 32-bit system the 16-bit

> apps can work.

 

I think you'll find you are very confused as to why they don't work.

It's that the operating system isn't allowing the segmented addressing

scheme that 16-bits apps require. Otherwise a 16-bit app could work just

fine within a 64-bit address space, the same as a 32-bit app could.

 

Your explanation would hold water for why you can't run a 64- or 32-bit

app in a 16-bit address space (can't fit 64 bits into 16), not vice versa.

[Guest Zootal]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

> I think you'll find you are very confused as to why they don't work. It's

> that the operating system isn't allowing the segmented addressing scheme

> that 16-bits apps require. Otherwise a 16-bit app could work just fine

> within a 64-bit address space, the same as a 32-bit app could.

 

I'm guessing this is a intentional design, not an inherent limitation?

[Guest Graham]

Re: 16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc

 

Zootal wrote:

>> I think you'll find you are very confused as to why they don't work. It's

>> that the operating system isn't allowing the segmented addressing scheme

>> that 16-bits apps require. Otherwise a 16-bit app could work just fine

>> within a 64-bit address space, the same as a 32-bit app could.

>

> I'm guessing this is a intentional design, not an inherent limitation?

 

I believe this was an operating system design decision, rather than an

actual processor limitation, yes. I believe it was the correct decision,

especially as there are several ways to run 16-bit apps if you really

must, such as virtualization (VPC or VMware) or emulation (Bochs).

 

Graham.