Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
[Or even 128-bit (-:]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I want to know who would mow Wales if we lost all the sheep. - Penny in
uk.media.radio.archers (in an environmental/ecological thread), 2020-1-1

In article <L6ai1khUkT2gFw4c@255soft.uk>, J. P. Gilliver (John)
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?

it requires a 64 bit cpu and can run 32 bit apps.

On 6/27/2021 10:54 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article<L6ai1khUkT2gFw4c@255soft.uk>, J. P. Gilliver (John)
> <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
>
> it requires a 64 bit cpu and can run 32 bit apps.

So no 32 bit version?

In article <sbbg6o$c16$2@dont-email.me>, Michael Trew
<mt999999@ymail.com> wrote:

> >
> >> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
> >
> > it requires a 64 bit cpu and can run 32 bit apps.
>
> So no 32 bit version?

no need.

J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 6/27/2021 7:51 PM:
> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
> [Or even 128-bit (-:]

Many will need a whole new setup, apparently.

//
That potentially rules out millions of existing Windows 10 devices from
upgrading to Windows 11 with full support, and even devices like
Microsoft’s own Surface Studio 2 which the company is still selling
right now for $3,499. Older devices that aren’t officially supported
will be met with a warning during the Windows 11 install that the
upgrade is not recommended, but the OS should still install.
//
https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/25/22549725/microsoft-windows-11-cpu-support-tpm-hardware-requirements

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

nospam wrote:

> In article <sbbg6o$c16$2@dont-email.me>, Michael Trew
> <mt999999@ymail.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
>>>
>>> it requires a 64 bit cpu and can run 32 bit apps.
>>
>> So no 32 bit version?
>
> no need.

unless you run 16 bit software (such as turnpike?) may cause John an
issue ...

On Mon, 28 Jun 2021 03:51:00 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
> [Or even 128-bit (-:]

Low priority, I think. Microsoft still think forcing service based OS and
controlling users' PC are more important. Moreover, I think 32-bit is still
dominant in embedded systems. So, 32-bit embedded edition of Windows is
still needed. And if it's still needed, then might as well make 32-bit
available in non embedded editions, considering that they share the same
kernel and most system components.

128-bit? I think it would be a long time before it's actually needed.
Otherwise, we would have complete 128-bit integer functions in all major
software development runtime libraries - including 128-bit calculator
softwares (instad of string based number calculators).

On Sun, 27 Jun 2021 22:54:33 -0400, nospam wrote:
> In article <L6ai1khUkT2gFw4c@255soft.uk>, J. P. Gilliver (John)
> <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
>
> it requires a 64 bit cpu and can run 32 bit apps.

So, no more support for 32-bit embedded hardwares?

In article <ijti69Fpf1hU2@mid.individual.net>, Andy Burns
<usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

> >>>
> >>>> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
> >>>
> >>> it requires a 64 bit cpu and can run 32 bit apps.
> >>
> >> So no 32 bit version?
> >
> > no need.
>
> unless you run 16 bit software (such as turnpike?) may cause John an
> issue ...

long overdue to upgrade that.

64-bit cpus have been around for nearly 20 years.

In article <xnsrp40tp9qy.1k1ddzg36ty9m.dlg@40tude.net>, JJ
<jj4public@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
> >
> > it requires a 64 bit cpu and can run 32 bit apps.
>
> So, no more support for 32-bit embedded hardwares?

win11 isn't for embedded devices.

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
> [Or even 128-bit (-:]

"64-bit only

Windows 11 will come only in a 64-bit edition, unlike Windows 10,
which has been available in both 32- and 64-bit versions.

32-bit applications will continue to run and work on Windows 11,
but devices with a 32-bit processor will not be able to install
the operating system. That shouldn't be much of a burden, seeing
that those CPUs fell by the wayside a decade and more ago.
"

There's no reason for a 128 bit processor quite yet.

If you want awe inspiring features, try this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVX-512

There is a 32 register bank, of 512 bit wide registers in there.

I'm hoping Intel will keep making that wider, so if
people ask "has Intel invented anything new", we can
point to the new width as proof :-) I want to see
how wide they can make it, before they run out of wires.

Paul

On Sun, 27 Jun 2021 at 11:11:46, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote
(my responses usually follow points raised):
>nospam wrote:
>
>> In article <sbbg6o$c16$2@dont-email.me>, Michael Trew
>> <mt999999@ymail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
>>>>
>>>> it requires a 64 bit cpu and can run 32 bit apps.
>>>
>>> So no 32 bit version?
>> no need.
>
>unless you run 16 bit software (such as turnpike?) may cause John an
>issue ...
>
That is indeed my concern. Turnpike is actually 32-bit, but is (in part)
a shell extension, requiring the 32-bit shell - at least, that's my
understanding. (Apparently Turnpike 5 is fine on 64-bit systems, as it
doesn't have the shell extension functions that TP6 uses.) So I guess
it's VM time if I ever have to go to W11. (Plenty of time, I think -
seem to be plenty of W7 machines about, and W10 [though W10-32 are
probably rarer, I haven't looked yet].)
>
>
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

As for cooking, what a bore that is. It's such a faff, thinking of what to
have, buying it and cooking it and clearing up, then all you do is eat it -
and have to start all over again next day. Hunter Davies, RT 2017/2/4-10

On 2021-06-28, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> 64-bit cpus have been around for nearly 20 years.

They've been around a lot longer than that, and even ran Windows NT nearly
30 years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEC_Alpha

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DECpc_AXP_150

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Posts from Google Groups killfiled due to excess spam.)

18 Reasons I won't be vaccinated -- https://tinyurl.com/ebty2dx3
Covid vaccines: experimental biology -- https://tinyurl.com/57mncfm5
The fraud of "Climate Change" -- https://RealClimateScience.com
Don't talk to cops! -- https://DontTalkToCops.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Mon, 28 Jun 2021 at 18:19:25, JJ <jj4public@gmail.com> wrote (my
responses usually follow points raised):
>On Mon, 28 Jun 2021 03:51:00 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
>> [Or even 128-bit (-:]
>
>Low priority, I think. Microsoft still think forcing service based OS and
>controlling users' PC are more important. Moreover, I think 32-bit is still
>dominant in embedded systems. So, 32-bit embedded edition of Windows is
>still needed. And if it's still needed, then might as well make 32-bit
>available in non embedded editions, considering that they share the same
>kernel and most system components.

Paul says it's 64-bit only.
>
>128-bit? I think it would be a long time before it's actually needed.
>Otherwise, we would have complete 128-bit integer functions in all major
>software development runtime libraries - including 128-bit calculator
>softwares (instad of string based number calculators).

I said that tongue-in-cheek. (I didn't really understand why they can't
support more than one width back - with [nested!] sandpits or whatever
if necessary.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

As for cooking, what a bore that is. It's such a faff, thinking of what to
have, buying it and cooking it and clearing up, then all you do is eat it -
and have to start all over again next day. Hunter Davies, RT 2017/2/4-10

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

> Turnpike is actually 32-bit, but is (in part)
> a shell extension, requiring the 32-bit shell

I knew there was some reason it didn't run on 64bit machines, and
assumed that was due to lack of 16bit support.

> seem to be plenty of W7 machines about, and W10 [though W10-32 are
> probably rarer, I haven't looked yet].)

I think you could nuke any (activated) win10 64bit machine and install a
32bit version.

On Mon, 28 Jun 2021 at 16:21:04, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote
(my responses usually follow points raised):
>J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>
>> Turnpike is actually 32-bit, but is (in part) a shell extension,
>>requiring the 32-bit shell
>
>I knew there was some reason it didn't run on 64bit machines, and
>assumed that was due to lack of 16bit support.
>
>> seem to be plenty of W7 machines about, and W10 [though W10-32 are
>>probably rarer, I haven't looked yet].)
>
>I think you could nuke any (activated) win10 64bit machine and install
>a 32bit version.
>
Thanks - good thought. I'd need to have the relevant version (like
Home/Pro/whatever) version, yes - and perhaps update (21H1 etc.) - or
could I use any 32-bit W10 .iso? And would I have to extract key(s?)
from the 64bit machine (using something like Belarc) before nuking? And
would it be true even of a preloaded (OEM?) machine?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

As for cooking, what a bore that is. It's such a faff, thinking of what to
have, buying it and cooking it and clearing up, then all you do is eat it -
and have to start all over again next day. Hunter Davies, RT 2017/2/4-10

Sailfish wrote:
> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 6/27/2021 7:51 PM:
>> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
>> [Or even 128-bit (-:]
>
> Many will need a whole new setup, apparently.
>
> //
> That potentially rules out millions of existing Windows 10 devices from
> upgrading to Windows 11 with full support, and even devices like
> Microsoft’s own Surface Studio 2 which the company is still selling right
> now for $3,499. Older devices that aren’t officially supported will be met
> with a warning during the Windows 11 install that the upgrade is not
> recommended, but the OS should still install.
> //
> https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/25/22549725/microsoft-windows-11-cpu-support-tpm-hardware-requirements
>
>
>

That article was updated which appears to dispel the 'older device
warning...OS should install'
//
Originally, Microsoft noted that CPU generation requirements are a “soft
floor” limit for the Windows 11 installer, which should have allowed some
older CPUs to be able to install Windows 11 with a warning, but hours
after we published this story, the company updated that page to explicitly
require the list of chips above.
//

--
....w¡ñ§±¤n

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

> would I have to extract key(s?) from the 64bit machine [...] before nuking?

No, one of the improvements in win10, is that (once activated) the
entitlement is stored on MS servers, so the same machine will be
recognised and re-activated by any future Win10 re-install (with the
home/pro level it had before).

....w¡ñ§±¤n graced us with on 6/28/2021 9:06 AM:
> Sailfish wrote:
>> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 6/27/2021 7:51 PM:
>>> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit
>>> only? [Or even 128-bit (-:]
>>
>> Many will need a whole new setup, apparently.
>>
>> //
>> That potentially rules out millions of existing Windows 10 devices
>> from upgrading to Windows 11 with full support, and even devices like
>> Microsoft’s own Surface Studio 2 which the company is still selling
>> right now for $3,499. Older devices that aren’t officially supported
>> will be met with a warning during the Windows 11 install that the
>> upgrade is not recommended, but the OS should still install.
>> //
>> https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/25/22549725/microsoft-windows-11-cpu-support-tpm-hardware-requirements
>
> That article was updated which appears to dispel the 'older device
> warning...OS should install'
> //
> Originally, Microsoft noted that CPU generation requirements are a “soft
> floor” limit for the Windows 11 installer, which should have allowed
> some older CPUs to be able to install Windows 11 with a warning, but
> hours after we published this story, the company updated that page to
> explicitly require the list of chips above.
> //
>
Precisely.

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Andy Burns wrote:
> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>
>> would I have to extract key(s?) from the 64bit machine [...]  before
>> nuking?
>
> No, one of the improvements in win10, is that (once activated) the
> entitlement is stored on MS servers, so the same machine will be
> recognised and re-activated by any future Win10 re-install (with the
> home/pro level it had before).
>
Exception applies (not necessarily in JP's current statecase, but worthy
of mention)
Unless one makes a significant hardware change - primarily the mobo or cpu.
In that case reactivation won't happen automatically unless the device and
license is linked to a MSFT Account which provides(and only provides) the
Troubleshooting option to 'acknowledge the hardware change and reactivate'

--
....w¡ñ§±¤n

In article <20210628111057@news.eternal-september.org>, Roger Blake
<rogblake@iname.invalid> wrote:

> > 64-bit cpus have been around for nearly 20 years.
>
> They've been around a lot longer than that, and even ran Windows NT nearly
> 30 years ago.

i was referring to consumer pcs, and the two below also didn't last
very long. also, most apps at that time weren't 64-bit, so that didn't
make much of a difference.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEC_Alpha

The Alpha architecture was sold, along with most parts of DEC, to
Compaq in 1998. Compaq, already an Intel customer, phased
out Alpha in favor of the forthcoming Hewlett-Packard/Intel Itanium
architecture, and sold all Alpha intellectual property to Intel in
2001, effectively killing the product.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DECpc_AXP_150

Introduced on 25 May 1993, the DECpc AXP 150 was the first
Alpha-based system to support the Windows NT operating system
and the basis for the DEC 2000 AXP entry-level servers. It was
discontinued on 28 February 1994.

64-bit pentium was introduced in 2004, 17 years ago, but it wasn't
until core 2 duo in 2006 when it went mainstream, 15 years ago.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_4>
The first Pentium 4-branded processor to implement 64-bit was
the Prescott (90 nm) (February 2004), but this feature was not
enabled. Intel subsequently began selling 64-bit Pentium 4s using
the "E0" revision of the Prescotts, being sold on the OEM market as
the Pentium 4, model F.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_2>
The Core 2 processor line was introduced on July 27, 2006,
comprising the Duo (dual-core) and Extreme (dual- or quad-core
CPUs for enthusiasts), and in 2007, the Quad (quad-core) and
Solo (single-core) sub-brands. Intel Core 2 processors with vPro
technology (designed for businesses) include the dual-core and
quad-core branches.

On 6/27/2021 6:11 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>
>> In article <sbbg6o$c16$2@dont-email.me>, Michael Trew
>> <mt999999@ymail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>> Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit
>>>>> only?
>>>>
>>>> it requires a 64 bit cpu and can run 32 bit apps.
>>>
>>> So no 32 bit version?
>>
>> no need.
>
> unless you run 16 bit software (such as turnpike?) may cause John an
> issue ...
>
>
>

I installed a 32 bit version of Windows 7 on my primary machine in 2015,
still using it today - right now to make this post. I'm sure I'll have
to let go of my 16 bit software eventually, but I'm amused that I can
still run old DOS games and Windows 3.x programs like "My Advance
Brochures" at my leisure. I do both, from time to time.

On Mon, 28 Jun 2021 at 13:25:27, ...w¡ñ§±¤n <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote
(my responses usually follow points raised):
>Andy Burns wrote:
>> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>
>>> would I have to extract key(s?) from the 64bit machine [...]  before
>>>nuking?
>> No, one of the improvements in win10, is that (once activated) the
>>entitlement is stored on MS servers, so the same machine will be
>>recognised and re-activated by any future Win10 re-install (with the
>>home/pro level it had before).

Thanks. So - if it ever comes to it, and I can only find a W10 64-bit
machine, I can (assuming it's showing as activated, authorised, and so
on) install from any W10 32-bit .iso of the same Home/Pro flavour I can
find - no worries about version (2004, 21H1, or whatever) or whether the
64-bit was OEM or not?
>>
>Exception applies (not necessarily in JP's current statecase, but
>worthy of mention)
>Unless one makes a significant hardware change - primarily the mobo or cpu.

In most cases, I don't think I'd consider it the "same machine" if I'd
done that. (Academic anyway - it'd probably be a laptop, and I wouldn't
even consider trying to change mobo or processor on one of those. The
last desktop system I built was '98SElite [though made dual-boot to XP
later].)

>In that case reactivation won't happen automatically unless the device
>and license is linked to a MSFT Account which provides(and only
>provides) the Troubleshooting option to 'acknowledge the hardware
>change and reactivate'
>
Hmm.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Practicall every British actor with a bus pass is in there ...
Barry Norman (on "The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel" [2011]), RT 2015/12/12-18

On Mon, 28 Jun 2021 03:51:00 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
>[Or even 128-bit (-:]

Why be concerned about something that may never happen?

On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 at 07:52:40, Lucifer
<LuciferMorningstar@bigpond.com> wrote (my responses usually follow
points raised):
>On Mon, 28 Jun 2021 03:51:00 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
><G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>>Has there been any indication of whether Windows 11 will be 64-bit only?
>>[Or even 128-bit (-:]
>
>Why be concerned about something that may never happen?

I think it's very likely that Windows 11 will happen.

Paul has quoted us a source that says W11 will be 64-only.

So what are you saying I might be concerned about? [And what (are you
saying) might never happen?]

(The reference to 128-bit was only jocular - hence the smiley - but even
if it wasn't, I gave no indication I was _concerned_ about it,)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The Daily Mail has led the campaign to limit pornography - "it demeans and
belittles women," they explain, "and that's our job." (Sandi Toksvig
[scripted], News Quiz 2013-7-26.)