16bit apps on XP64 in virtual pc
in [64 Bits Windows]
|
Prev: 64 bit programs going in x86 folder
Next: DRIVER
From: Charlie Russel - MVP on 25 Jan 2008 18:28 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(a)npuSPAMmail.com> wrote in message news:ezLsL15XIHA.4532(a)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 > > --
From: R. C. White on 25 Jan 2008 23:46 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(a)grandecom.net Microsoft Windows MVP (Running Windows Live Mail 2008 in Vista Ultimate x64) "Tom Ferguson" <tom.newsgroups(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:#$p8S$4XIHA.4696(a)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(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:7ef23c08-635f-4504-9726-21807bf500aa(a)z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... >> On Jan 24, 10:45 pm, jorgen <na(a)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.
From: DP on 26 Jan 2008 05:44 "Zootal" <msnews(a)zootal.nospam.com> wrote in message news:ul%23rrYxXIHA.5208(a)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.
From: Zootal on 26 Jan 2008 11:40 >> 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".....
From: Graham on 26 Jan 2008 23:04
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. |