Amazon.com Widgets

First blog from my new 64bit machine...

I got a new desktop machine at work… it is a 64 bit machine from running Windows XP x64 edition.  It is very cool to see IntPtr.Size return 8 rather than 4!  I must say, before I got it I was not convinced that the transition to 64bit would be a fast one for most of us… But after playing around with the machine and reading what AMD and Intel are up to, I’d guess that within a year or so most new workstations will ship with a 64bit processor and OS.  Via  WOW64, X64 chips from AMD and Intel can run 32 bit apps as fast (or faster) than many of today’s 32bit chips, and they do even better on x64 apps.  So the transition seems inevitable.

 

In the next year or so we are likely to be in the world of heterogeneous platform architectures within the mainstream windows world.  How does that affect you?  Well, you’ll have to decide if you do a 32-bit, a 64 bit version of your apps or both… While WOW64 makes this easier (you can run 32bit apps on a 64bit OS), it does cause some issues in hosting scenarios as a given process must be either 64bit or 32bit.  Take for example IE… If you are running the 64bit IE* then all the addins have to be 64 bit as well.. that is everything from the 3rd party toolbars (googles\MSNs, etc) to activex controls hosted in the browser (like the one from WindowsUpdate for example).  So if you are writing an addin, you need to limit your audience or do both a 32 and 64 bit version…

Or (I am sure many of you saw this coming)… Or you write in managed code.  IL is processor architecture agnostic which means the exact same binary can be loaded into a 64 or 32 bit process and work the same.  So if the windows update activex control or the google toolbar where written in managed code they’d work in my 64bit IE, no problems.  Of course if you PInvoke out, to unmanaged code it could get a little more complicated, but the spirit of this is that the managed code insolates you from this the 32 or 64bit transition. 

 

If you are interested in moving forward with 64bit programming with the .NET Framework check out our MSDN site.  VS 7.1 runs under the WOW64 so the bits you have today work great on 64bit… And with VS 2005 (“Whidbey”), you can run easily produce 32bit and 64bit agnostic apps.

 

Anyone else running 64bit OSs?  What are your thoughts on getting 64bit versions of you apps out there?

 

 

*By default, the shell launches the 32 bit IE unless you explicit ask for the 64bit IE, which mitigates this issue somewhat, but there are plenty of other host applications…

Published 07 January 05 10:25 by BradA
Filed under:

Comments

# damien morton said on January 7, 2005 10:42 AM:
So what youre saying is that WOW64 enables one to launch a 64-bit internet explorer that wont be able to install any ad-ware until the ad-ware makers start switching to 64-bit. Id say thats a big win right there.
# Wallym said on January 7, 2005 10:44 AM:
I'm responding from my x64 system running Windows 2003 64bit Server (or something like that) build 1289.

Wally
# Brad Abrams [MSFT] said on January 7, 2005 10:44 AM:
Hey yea... I didn't think of that... I can see Intel\AMD now claiming that you should move to 64bit to prevent adware and spyware! That will work until those guys start using managed code any way ;-)
# Daniel Jin said on January 7, 2005 11:19 AM:
very cool. I just built my amd 64 system a couple weeks ago and been running the lastest XP x64 RC1. one thing I noticed is that when I installed .NET 2.0 beta redist, it took an aweful long time generating native images of the dlls. what's the reason behind that? when I looked in the GAC, everything seemed to have 3 entries.

about releasing 64bit apps, that's the beauty of platform like Java and .NET is that the runtime will do the migration for you.
# Wallym said on January 7, 2005 11:30 AM:
Daniel,

I have noticed the same thing. The 64 bit install seems to take longer than the 32 bit install.

Wally
# RichB said on January 7, 2005 1:08 PM:
Firefox add-ins are pure XUL+Javascript - and are therefore managed plug-ins - ultimately easing the transition to 64bit.

When will IE support a managed plug-in architecture which we can use to implement toolbars?

(I've written add-ins for both IE and Firefox)
# John Cavnar-Johnson said on January 7, 2005 1:23 PM:
You have the best typos. I think you meant agnostic, not agonistic.
# Brad Abrams [MSFT] said on January 7, 2005 1:33 PM:
Thanks.... fixed...
# Brad Abrams [MSFT] said on January 7, 2005 3:47 PM:
On the install time – you are right, and it is something we are aware of. We actually use a different IL-to-native code compiler for the 64bit platform… the one we use for x86 is derived from our JIT codebase which is optimized for JIT time, but the one we use for 64 bit platform is based on the UTC (the backend of the C++ compiler) which is optimized greatly for code quality at the expense of compile time. In addition, for the 64bit platform we NGen each assembly twice: once for 32bit and once for 64bit. This is to support WOW64 managed apps. All that said, we are looking at a couple of ways to address this…. Stay tuned.
# thomas woelfer said on January 7, 2005 4:52 PM:
Brad,

damn - i want one!

WM_JEALOUS
thomas woelfer
# Milan Sodja said on January 8, 2005 11:13 AM:
I'm runing 64-bit Linux (Gentoo) for about a year now on my AMD Athlon 64. And it is working extremely well. Almost all available applications can be compiled in 64-bits. I'm just missing 64-bit OpenOffice.org right now and maybe 64-bit Flash plugin. Extensions for Firefox run great too. The same extension works almost always in Windows or in Linux in 32-bits or 64-bits.
I've tried the customer preview edition of Windows XP x64 but it didn't work very well for me. There is huge lack of good 64-bit drivers and 64-bit apps. I hope this changes very soon.
# Christophe Lauer [MS] said on January 9, 2005 3:04 AM:
Hi Milan,

May be you want to give RC1 (build #1289) a try. It contains much more drivers than the previous CPP buildd (#1218 or #1249). It works like a charm on my Compaq AMD64 laptop
# OdeToCode Links said on January 10, 2005 9:14 PM:
# IUnknown said on January 14, 2005 12:03 AM:
I'm wondering why would PM need a 64 bit machine?
# Brad Abrams [MSFT] said on January 14, 2005 10:29 AM:
Dogfood my friend. Dogfood. I am using the .NET Framework on my x64 box everyday and finding issues. The other benefit is that it helps me look at the problem in a different way… I would have never spent the time to think about our x64 story as deeply without dealing with it everyday getting first hand experience.
# IUnknown said on January 14, 2005 3:19 PM:
Thanks, that explains it. Keep up a great work.
# lakshmanan said on January 18, 2005 4:33 AM:
just to gain knowleged
# David said on January 24, 2005 2:50 PM:
I just got an AMD64/ASUS K8VSE Deluxe, and am contemplating whether or not to install XP Pro X64. Since I am an end user, I don't think there is any reason to run 64bit yet.....but if Photoshop, Flash, and a few other apps become available in 64bit, I guess I am ready, LOL
# Llama said on January 30, 2005 10:50 AM:
I have an Athlon 64 3500+ on a Gigabyte K8NS. Windows XP 64 bit support sucks. So I just use Linux. Its better anyways. Oh wait, this is an msdn forum... Windows still blows.
# Brad Abrams said on March 31, 2005 11:30 AM:
New Comments to this post are disabled

Search

This Blog

Syndication

Page view tracker