On 21 Nov 2005 at 7:43, Phil Daley wrote:

>  > I run Finale 3.7.2 on WinXP without problems.  It does everything I
> > need, why upgrade?
> 
> Actually, as I think about it, I am absolutely amazed that a Windows
> 3.1 (16-bit) program as complicated as Finale still runs without
> problems.

Seems to me that Finale is fairly *non* complicated, compared to many 
applications. My point of view on this is that Finale is self-
contained -- it doesn't depend on outside programs to work. It's only 
dependence is on MIDI, and that's a defined hardware interface that 
basically *can't* change much. And MIDI is, in comparison to many 
modern computer data standards, fairly simple and not at all taxing 
on your CPU by itself -- add GPO and such and all bets are off 
(that's a new outside dependency in Finale and is one of the reasons 
why I'm suspicious of that kind of thing).

> No sound output problems, no graphics redraw problems.  Finale should
> be complimented for their adherence to Windows' standards (at least in
> the past).

So far, Microsoft has done a good job of supporting Win16 in new 
versions of Windows. Hell, I have a client with WinXP running a dBase 
II application that was compiled in 1982, and it still works fine. 
His only limitation is that he has to use a parallel port printer, 
and can't use a USB printer.

> I have been reading about Longhorn and wondering what that means.  A
> 64-bit OS needs to reliably run 32-bit programs. I wonder if it will
> also run 16-bit programs?

I can't imagine that it won't.

> I guess time will tell.  (Fortunately, I am near retirement ;-)

There were rumblings with WinXP that certain DOS programs and Win16 
programs would break because of something or other that was left out 
of WinXP that had been there in previous NT-based versions of 
Windows. But I've never encountered any such problems. Of course, the 
number of my clients running old apps is actually fairly small. 
They've had more problems with Win32 programs that weren't designed 
for user-level security than they've had with DOS and Win16 apps.

I wouldn't be surprised if many older apps are somehow broken by the 
new memory protection model that is being put in place in Windows 
Vista (it's not called Longhorn any more) as a security measure (a 
every important one, in fact, and completely necessary). But, again, 
that's unlikely to be relevant to DOS or Win16 programs, which 
already execute in their own dedicated virtual machine (one per 
application).

-- 
David W. Fenton                        http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
David Fenton Associates                http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Reply via email to