Ted Roche wrote: > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Paul McNett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I don't think it will run in 64bit Vista though. Can anyone confirm this? >> I think it would. > > I would think it _could_, but that MS might not have a lot of interest > in maintaining a 16-bit system that's vulnerable to 15-year-old > malware. > > "As mentioned in the cookbook, 16 bit applications are not going to > work on 64 bit Vista. " > > Cite: > http://blogs.msdn.com/vistacompatteam/archive/2007/01/24/icons-in-16-bit-applications-on-vista.aspx > >> If they can put a 16-bit subsystem in a 32-bit OS, >> they can put a 16-bit subsystem in a 64-bit OS. Or maybe it'll be a >> 32-bit subsystem with a 16-bit sub-subsystem. > > The _can_, but from their POV, there's not a lot of reason to want to.
So... what to do to avoid this situation in the future? For FPW apps, you can at least compile them in VFP to make them 32-bit. But what do we do with our 32-bit VFP apps when 128-bit Windows 2012 won't run 'em? I guess there's always virtual computing solutions. Install 32-bit Vista as a guest OS inside 64-bit Vista, and run the 16-bit FPW program there. But you are paying for 2 Windows licenses and doubling your admin headaches. Time to make a choice. Converting the app to some other technology is a given. Now you need to decide what technology to convert it to. Your decisions generally break down between proprietary and open. If Microsoft has treated you well in the past, you might choose .NET. Paul _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
