up vote -2 down vote favorite
share [g+] share [fb]

Original link: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/02/21/windows-7-64-bit-now-even-suckier/

Basically, he can't get his 32 bit app to run under x64. He has tried XP compat mode.

Is there any alternative besides buyint the very expensive x64 version?

link|improve this question
4  
Voted to close as off-topic. Have the OP post his own question on SU if he really needs help. – ErikA Feb 22 '11 at 4:50
feedback

closed as off topic by ErikA, MDMarra, Jason Berg, Zypher♦ Feb 22 '11 at 6:10

Questions on Server Fault are expected to generally relate to servers, networking, or desktop infrastructure, within the scope defined in the faq.

1 Answer

up vote 4 down vote

My experience with x64 compatibility issues generally boils down to one thing: a bug in .Net software compiled in the "Any CPU" mode that pulls in a 32-bit unmanaged dll.

When running on x64 systems, the .Net framework isn't smart enough by itself to know at app startup time that a dynamically loaded library needs 32bit mode, and so it starts up"Any CPU"-compiled programs with a 64bit process. Of course, this 64bit process cannot load a 32bit dll. It's about a 10 second fix on the part of the software developer to change the app over from "Any CPU" to "x86" and then rebuild, but you have to convince them that they need to do that.

This is actually a very common scenario, as a lot of apps these days (especially in categories like video processing that provide a front-end for cpu intensive tasks) will use .Net to build a windows interface that just calls out to a more-performant library written in C or C++.

I remember a discussion (possibly among MS MVP's) about potentially changing the default compile mode in Visual Studio from "Any CPU" to "x86" to address this issue, but I don't remember what ever came of it.

link|improve this answer
You're making a massive assumption that this software is incompatible due to a .NET problem. -1 for you. – Randolph West Feb 22 '11 at 5:01
+1 Regardless of the assumptions about the original problem, this answer makes a point worth noting, and may explain a pending issue I have with a .NET application after moving everything from 32-bit XP to 64-bit Win7 recently.... – RBerteig Feb 22 '11 at 6:56
1  
@Randolph, given you know no more about the software than Joel, what puts you in the position to presume the answer is wrong?! – Chris S♦ Feb 22 '11 at 13:44
1  
@Randolph - I think you're being unfair to Joel - he's not saying the OP's problem must be down to .net, he's instead saying "My experiences are..." - sharing one's own experiences of when you have seen an issue is not the same as assuming that everyone else is having the same problem you are. – DJ Pon3 Feb 22 '11 at 13:45
Given that the original article states that there is a specific version for a 64-bit platform that the complainant is not willing to upgrade to, I'm disinclined to change my opinion. – Randolph West Feb 22 '11 at 21:04
show 1 more comment
feedback

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.