32/64 bit compatibility issue

I've puzzled over this question myself, and I don't have any really good answers (I, too, hope someone with better information might post in your thread).

What I can answer on the subject is this:

Vista itself isn't all that popular. So far I've found hardly 2% of customers care about Vista compliance, and those that do are usually of the mindset that they have simply found yet another reason not to like their choice of Vista.

Even in that set that choose and for whatever reason prefer Vista over XP, they are predominantly 32bit users. The 64 bit user is rare, and are usually tech savvy by comparison to the general public (though there are a few 'non-tech-savvy' that thought they should go for the 'big version', and regret it). Generally, those that have a 64bit Vista (or XP) that won't run a 32bit application already have that problem with a wide range of 'other' software.

Still, from the standpoint of market coverage, we have to consider future usage patterns. If the 64 bit driver issues are ever resolved then the difference between 32 and 64 bit users will be the application domain only, and they'll want 64 bit builds, so it makes sense to prepare (and generate) both targets. There will never be a one size fits all solution (and never has been except for very short timeframes). All developers should keep an eye on portability, designing a means of indirection for such diverse concepts as OS versions, OS platforms (Linux may yet become important, and is already in certain markets), human languages and display types (ever noticed how your applications look on a wide format display?).

Usually the performance difference between 32 and 64 bit builds is small, but the memory requirements of a 64 bit build are marginally larger, depending on the application design. Obviously there will be a performance gain in 64 bit builds IF the application is built to take advantage of the feature (and the target CAN gain advantage from it).

My personal prediction is that while Vista is currently a dog, a technical flop in many ways, it won't stay that way. SP1 is probably held up because they know they must fix the OS, and I expect an SP2 with even more dramatic alterations that may cause us, as developers, to view Vista as 2 or 3 versions with respect to application design and that long list of 'gotchas' we've discovered. I have no idea how long that might take, but the longer it does take the more customers will either insist on XP, or seriously consider Linux. If only Linux were better prepared to take advantage of this misstep! It is so close, and yet - just not really there, for the desktop general consumer anyway.

What exactly is the kernel?

Thanks,

I've come to the conclusion that the 16/32 bit shift was far more significant than the 32/64 bit shift. The former was almost a revolution for applications whereas the latter is hardly worth mentioning.

...

So it seems classic C++ can look forward to a new spring as a development language for Windows. I wellcome that.

Well put!

It seems MS is trying to reposition technologies for web development, and .NET plays a bit part in THAT strategy. I've been working on a website for a friend/client (and I know not to do that - nice to have friendly clients, but friends as clients?) - anyway, it has me thinking about the existing, entrenched decades old web technologies and indeed, THAT mess does need cleaning up. AJAX is a mess. Mixing so many paradigms and languages; it's worse, as a study complexity, than C! (Obviously without the pointer disadvantages).

Your right, though, .NET has virtually no good impact on the customer's experience. From what I can tell, those committed to C# are very satisfied with the language's features. Exposing the operating system as a set of objects is a great idea. I've had some people insist that application development is 1/3 the time.

I pause every time I hear that and think to myself, well, maybe if you've written in C# about as long as you've written in C++, sure. If you're running a staff of hired guns, I can see it. An old hand like myself, though - not so much.

I think any C++ developer who has 'visited' either Java or C# comes away a little better at C++, appreciative of the features those languages provide, which can be (around 90% or better) provided by objects and libraries.

The 'next' C++ sounds like a significant advancement to me (and I don't mean VS2008). The language is about to take a good jump forward in expressive power, and THAT will probably usher in a round of interest.

I see that C# and Java developers like the virtual machine, and the sandbox that plays in. It's just not the kind of target my customer's want, and if I read your post correctly, neither are you.

I see that C# and Java developers like the virtual machine, and the sandbox that plays in. It's just not the kind of target my customer's want, and if I read your post correctly, neither are you.

I went from C to Java and then to C++. Java was a good introduction to OO concepts which I now apply to C++. And the Java experience also made it very easy to understand the CLI extensions in C++/CLI.

I'm a long time user of Java and it works very well (at least since version 5) for many applications. But it's not that. I'm increasingly convinced C++ is a much sounder language than both Java and C#. I'm sure C++ will regain lost territory over the coming years, especially when it too gets built-in multi-threading and garbage collection. Right now the lack is a drawback.

I can understand that MS must meet the Java challange, and it has done so with .NET. What I cannot understand is why .NET has to root out everything native. If there's a company with a highly educated and experienced work force of C++ programmers churning out excellent native applications for Windows how on earth could it become in MSs interest to prevent them from continuing by slapping them in the face saying no, no, no you got to use .NET to be wellcome on Windows?

Fortunately MS seems to have come to their senses by letting Visual C++ go more native, and even Sun has started to play down Java a notch. They're no longer hiding the fact that they sport a C++ compiler for Solaris and that they won't shoot you if you use it. So maybe we're experiencing the peak of the managed code fad right now and that it will decline from here on. :)