16 is not to 64 as 8 (either 8) is to 16....

re: 16 is not to 64 as 8 (either 8) is to 16....

Michael S. Kaplan — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 22:11:02 GMT

16bit apps are not supported on 64-bit Windows, but non-Unicode apps and especially 32bit apps are; this includes virtually every console app written in the last decade (you cannot build 16bit apps with any modern tool I know of).

Win16 and 64bit are NOT related!

re: 16 is not to 64 as 8 (either 8) is to 16....

Random832 — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 16:27:05 GMT

The point of the original question seems to be that (apart from some aspects of cmd.exe itself), the only use of the OEMCP is by DOS applications (which are nearly univerally 16-bit), and that windows console applications use (or are supposed to use) unicode console functions

Does 64-bit windows actually drop support for DOS applications (as opposed to dropping WoW for Win16) as the person asking the question seems to believe?

re: 16 is not to 64 as 8 (either 8) is to 16....

Doug Ewell — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:59:28 GMT

What's this I'm reading about "6-bit support" and "6-bit units"? Is there some version of Windows that supports ECMA-1 or BCDIC?

That was a typo, Doug. Fixed now. :-)

re: 16 is not to 64 as 8 (either 8) is to 16....

Michael S. Kaplan — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 07:34:27 GMT

Yes, ints and longs are still 32 bits. Strings are the same size on both platforms (8 bit or 6 bit units), and pointers are 32bit on one an 64bit on the other....

But WOW support for 16bit was removed from 64bit platforms.

re: 16 is not to 64 as 8 (either 8) is to 16....

John Cowan — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 07:03:46 GMT

I'm confused. Of course on 64-bit platforms pointers (including pointers to functions) are 64 bits. But I had understood that 64-bit Windows was LLP64 -- that is, ints and longs are both still 32 bits, just as on 32-bit Windows.