Charlie
Mon Sep 04 11:46:10 CDT 2006
All through the beta there were both in there. But it caused corruption
problems, so they had to ship only one. As to why? well, it _is_ part of the
OS, it ought to be 64bit. I'm sure they'd have done both if they hadn't run
into problems. If you look, there is still the appearance of a 32-bit IE in
there, but it just calls the 64bit one.
--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
"Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:%23Crg91D0GHA.772@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Yup, makes perfect sense. By "for some time" I simply meant "until all or
> most applications that might involve such incompatibilities are produced
> in 64-bit versions", <s>.
>
> Though why they bothered to convert OE to 64-bit escapes me, what with
> this being the last OE that will ever be released. Would have been just
> fine to leave it as a 32-bit app. After all, they include a 32-bit version
> of IE.
>
> --
>
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS-MVP Shell/User
>
> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <Charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.com> wrote in message
> news:949137A1-F763-4D6D-A8FA-D726372CCD22@microsoft.com...
>> This is one that isn't going to go away. And, when you actually think
>> about it, makes perfect sense. If you have a process in memory that is
>> 64bit, you wouldn't expect it to be able to call a .DLL that is 32-bit.
>> It can execute a standalone .EXE, however, because an EXE runs entirely
>> in its own space.
>>
>> "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
>> news:%23VS%230XB0GHA.2208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>> Before I forget, thanks for the detailed explanation. I now see it as a
>>> good thing that I didn't find that TechNet article on my own, as I would
>>> never have proceeded to ask about it here and thus not gained this
>>> timely and fundamental insight into what will probably be *the* major
>>> issue in 64-bit Windows systems for some time to come.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>
>>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <Charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.com> wrote in
>>> message news:CD0DF789-9EB7-42CA-B639-4D3BA85FC272@microsoft.com...
>>>> Gary -
>>>> As Pa Bear, et al, have pointed out - you can't get there from here.
>>>> A little background may help in understanding, however. Office is, as
>>>> we both know, a 32-bit application. No problem, it works perfectly well
>>>> in XP x64, except for a couple of mostly minor things like the image
>>>> printer. Outlook Express in XP x64, however, is a 64-bit application.
>>>> In order to do spell checking, OE needs access to the Office spell
>>>> checker, which is a DLL. The catch is, of course, that a 64bit
>>>> application can not call a 32-bit DLL. Just as a 32-bit application can
>>>> not call a 64bit DLL. This means that until there is a 64bit version of
>>>> the Word spell checker, or some third party spell checker that can link
>>>> into 64bit OE, there will not be a spell checker that works in OE.
>>>>
>>>> The good news is that Windows Mail (the successor to OE) in Vista
>>>> does spell checking just fine.
>>>>
>>>> Charlie.
>>>>
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>