2 copies of internet explorer???!!!

when i upgraded to XP x64 edition i noticed to my disgust that there are 2
versions of ie. a 32 bit and a 64 bit one.

If i'd wanted a 32 bit copy i'd have stuck with XP x86!

So what i'd like to know is...

1. is there any reason why internet explorer had to have 2 copies, x64 and
x86? whereas outlook express, notepad, and nearly every other application
bundled managed to get by with just the one (x64) copy?

2. is there any way i can get rid of the x86 version as windows keeps using
it as my default web browser and i hate having 2 programs for the same jjob
on my computer... to me its just messy

thanks

stan
Sat Jun 04 09:59:39 CDT 2005


"Chris" <Chris@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DF6A13D6-FC81-43B6-874A-CFBB014C1803@microsoft.com...
> when i upgraded to XP x64 edition i noticed to my disgust that there are 2
> versions of ie. a 32 bit and a 64 bit one.
>
> If i'd wanted a 32 bit copy i'd have stuck with XP x86!
>
> So what i'd like to know is...
>
> 1. is there any reason why internet explorer had to have 2 copies, x64 and
> x86? whereas outlook express, notepad, and nearly every other application
> bundled managed to get by with just the one (x64) copy?
>
> 2. is there any way i can get rid of the x86 version as windows keeps
> using
> it as my default web browser and i hate having 2 programs for the same
> jjob
> on my computer... to me its just messy
>
> thanks
Not all websites are compatable with ie64.

Jud
Sat Jun 04 09:50:37 CDT 2005

On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 07:29:01 -0700, "Chris"
<Chris@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>1. is there any reason why internet explorer had to have 2 copies, x64 and
>x86? whereas outlook express, notepad, and nearly every other application
>bundled managed to get by with just the one (x64) copy?

The IE-plugins, which are usually still 32-bits, won't run on IE64.

jud

Chris
Sat Jun 04 10:11:01 CDT 2005

i find it incredibly poor that microsoft went to all the trouble of making
sure it was backwards compatible with most x86 based apps but when it came to
ie, just bundled in an old version as well as the x64 copy.

but this aside, is there anyway to remove it, or at the very least force
windows to use the x64 copy by default rather than the x86 version?

"stan bogert" wrote:

>
> "Chris" <Chris@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:DF6A13D6-FC81-43B6-874A-CFBB014C1803@microsoft.com...
> > when i upgraded to XP x64 edition i noticed to my disgust that there are 2
> > versions of ie. a 32 bit and a 64 bit one.
> >
> > If i'd wanted a 32 bit copy i'd have stuck with XP x86!
> >
> > So what i'd like to know is...
> >
> > 1. is there any reason why internet explorer had to have 2 copies, x64 and
> > x86? whereas outlook express, notepad, and nearly every other application
> > bundled managed to get by with just the one (x64) copy?
> >
> > 2. is there any way i can get rid of the x86 version as windows keeps
> > using
> > it as my default web browser and i hate having 2 programs for the same
> > jjob
> > on my computer... to me its just messy
> >
> > thanks
> Not all websites are compatable with ie64.
>
>
>
>

Charlie
Sat Jun 04 10:11:45 CDT 2005

You'll find you need the 32-bit IE, I'm afraid, until such time as web sites
are updated to properly support 64-bit IE. Right now, you'd have problems
with just the 64-bit.

--
Charlie.

Chris wrote:
> when i upgraded to XP x64 edition i noticed to my disgust that there
> are 2 versions of ie. a 32 bit and a 64 bit one.
>
> If i'd wanted a 32 bit copy i'd have stuck with XP x86!
>
> So what i'd like to know is...
>
> 1. is there any reason why internet explorer had to have 2 copies,
> x64 and x86? whereas outlook express, notepad, and nearly every other
> application bundled managed to get by with just the one (x64) copy?
>
> 2. is there any way i can get rid of the x86 version as windows keeps
> using it as my default web browser and i hate having 2 programs for
> the same jjob on my computer... to me its just messy
>
> thanks

Christian
Sat Jun 04 10:32:11 CDT 2005

Charlie Russel - MVP <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote:
> You'll find you need the 32-bit IE, I'm afraid, until such time as
> web sites are updated to properly support 64-bit IE. Right now, you'd
> have problems with just the 64-bit.
>
>
> Chris wrote:
>> when i upgraded to XP x64 edition i noticed to my disgust that there
>> are 2 versions of ie. a 32 bit and a 64 bit one.
>>
>> If i'd wanted a 32 bit copy i'd have stuck with XP x86!
>>
>> So what i'd like to know is...
>>
>> 1. is there any reason why internet explorer had to have 2 copies,
>> x64 and x86? whereas outlook express, notepad, and nearly every other
>> application bundled managed to get by with just the one (x64) copy?
>>
>> 2. is there any way i can get rid of the x86 version as windows keeps
>> using it as my default web browser and i hate having 2 programs for
>> the same jjob on my computer... to me its just messy
>>
>> thanks

Just try Windows Update with your 64bit version :(

--
Christian Hougardy (MS XP MVP)
Johannesburg - South Africa
http://msmvps.com/xpditif

Mike
Sat Jun 04 10:57:52 CDT 2005

"Chris" <Chris@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:65FD1F52-49A7-4810-83F4-B9F9619D7AEE@microsoft.com...
>i find it incredibly poor that microsoft went to all the trouble of making
> sure it was backwards compatible with most x86 based apps but when it came
> to
> ie, just bundled in an old version as well as the x64 copy.
>
> but this aside, is there anyway to remove it, or at the very least force
> windows to use the x64 copy by default rather than the x86 version?

We HAD to provide you with a 32-bit IE since all of the plugs ins you use
such as the macromedia flash and many other will not run in a 64-bit IE due
to all the issue that you have with the inability to run a 32-bit DLL in a
64-bit process space. (nothing to do with application compatibility you just
cannot mix 32-bit and 64-bit application components in one 64-bit
application)
We could have only given you a 64-bit IE and then had to listen to the
thousands of people reporting that all there favourites sites do not work or
that the plugs and controls do not work.
Which would you rather have had?
If you wish to complain to anyone do so to all the plug in writers that have
yet to provide you with a 64-bit version.

As regards the default browser again this was for the same reason as above
to give you the least hassle experience.
We may switch this functionality at a late date through a patch once
critical mass has been built in the plugs and site support for the 64-bit
IE.
--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"Chris" <Chris@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:65FD1F52-49A7-4810-83F4-B9F9619D7AEE@microsoft.com...
>i find it incredibly poor that microsoft went to all the trouble of making
> sure it was backwards compatible with most x86 based apps but when it came
> to
> ie, just bundled in an old version as well as the x64 copy.
>
> but this aside, is there anyway to remove it, or at the very least force
> windows to use the x64 copy by default rather than the x86 version?
>
> "stan bogert" wrote:
>
>>
>> "Chris" <Chris@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:DF6A13D6-FC81-43B6-874A-CFBB014C1803@microsoft.com...
>> > when i upgraded to XP x64 edition i noticed to my disgust that there
>> > are 2
>> > versions of ie. a 32 bit and a 64 bit one.
>> >
>> > If i'd wanted a 32 bit copy i'd have stuck with XP x86!
>> >
>> > So what i'd like to know is...
>> >
>> > 1. is there any reason why internet explorer had to have 2 copies, x64
>> > and
>> > x86? whereas outlook express, notepad, and nearly every other
>> > application
>> > bundled managed to get by with just the one (x64) copy?
>> >
>> > 2. is there any way i can get rid of the x86 version as windows keeps
>> > using
>> > it as my default web browser and i hate having 2 programs for the same
>> > jjob
>> > on my computer... to me its just messy
>> >
>> > thanks
>> Not all websites are compatable with ie64.
>>
>>
>>
>>

Andre
Sat Jun 04 11:22:35 CDT 2005

Chris, think IE 64-Bit as a developer targetted release.
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

"Chris" <Chris@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DF6A13D6-FC81-43B6-874A-CFBB014C1803@microsoft.com...
> when i upgraded to XP x64 edition i noticed to my disgust that there are 2
> versions of ie. a 32 bit and a 64 bit one.
>
> If i'd wanted a 32 bit copy i'd have stuck with XP x86!
>
> So what i'd like to know is...
>
> 1. is there any reason why internet explorer had to have 2 copies, x64 and
> x86? whereas outlook express, notepad, and nearly every other application
> bundled managed to get by with just the one (x64) copy?
>
> 2. is there any way i can get rid of the x86 version as windows keeps
> using
> it as my default web browser and i hate having 2 programs for the same
> jjob
> on my computer... to me its just messy
>
> thanks

Rick
Sat Jun 04 11:50:16 CDT 2005

Because currently there few, if any plug-ins for I.E.64. There isn't
even Java support for the 64-bit I.E.

So, if you wish to browse the Web while operating in Win x64, you NEED
the 32-bit I.E. so you can enjoy the same functionality you do currently
in XP Pro * Home.


Chris wrote:
> when i upgraded to XP x64 edition i noticed to my disgust that there are 2
> versions of ie. a 32 bit and a 64 bit one.
>
> If i'd wanted a 32 bit copy i'd have stuck with XP x86!
>
> So what i'd like to know is...
>
> 1. is there any reason why internet explorer had to have 2 copies, x64 and
> x86? whereas outlook express, notepad, and nearly every other application
> bundled managed to get by with just the one (x64) copy?
>
> 2. is there any way i can get rid of the x86 version as windows keeps using
> it as my default web browser and i hate having 2 programs for the same jjob
> on my computer... to me its just messy
>
> thanks

Andre
Sat Jun 04 11:57:05 CDT 2005

ok, the point remains, there will be not performance boost using IE 64-Bit,
it just 64-bit because its an integrated part of Windows x64. The web pages
won't load any faster if you are still on dial up using IE 64-Bit, I think
that is what is fooling people.
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

"Rick" <rick@home.net> wrote in message
news:O64M8VSaFHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Because currently there few, if any plug-ins for I.E.64. There isn't even
> Java support for the 64-bit I.E.
>
> So, if you wish to browse the Web while operating in Win x64, you NEED the
> 32-bit I.E. so you can enjoy the same functionality you do currently in XP
> Pro * Home.
>
>
> Chris wrote:
>> when i upgraded to XP x64 edition i noticed to my disgust that there are
>> 2 versions of ie. a 32 bit and a 64 bit one.
>>
>> If i'd wanted a 32 bit copy i'd have stuck with XP x86!
>>
>> So what i'd like to know is...
>>
>> 1. is there any reason why internet explorer had to have 2 copies, x64
>> and x86? whereas outlook express, notepad, and nearly every other
>> application bundled managed to get by with just the one (x64) copy?
>>
>> 2. is there any way i can get rid of the x86 version as windows keeps
>> using it as my default web browser and i hate having 2 programs for the
>> same jjob on my computer... to me its just messy
>>
>> thanks

Morituri-|-Max
Sat Jun 04 12:09:40 CDT 2005


"Chris" <Chris@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DF6A13D6-FC81-43B6-874A-CFBB014C1803@microsoft.com...
> when i upgraded to XP x64 edition i noticed to my disgust that there are 2
> versions of ie. a 32 bit and a 64 bit one.

And yet strangely, no complaints about all the other companies not having
all their programs in 64-bit yet? You better uninstall x64 XP until every
piece of software on your computer gets released as a 64-bit version..

Andre
Sat Jun 04 12:38:22 CDT 2005

Not recommended to everyone, if you are getting negative productivity then
you might not be ready for x64. Thats why I recommend persons who don't
realize the benefits yet but have the 64 bit hardware should continue to
maintain an existing 32 bit Windows environment and gradually migrate to 64
bit Windows.
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

"Morituri-|-Max" <newage@sendarico.net> wrote in message
news:ur8F1gSaFHA.612@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
> "Chris" <Chris@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:DF6A13D6-FC81-43B6-874A-CFBB014C1803@microsoft.com...
>> when i upgraded to XP x64 edition i noticed to my disgust that there are
>> 2
>> versions of ie. a 32 bit and a 64 bit one.
>
> And yet strangely, no complaints about all the other companies not having
> all their programs in 64-bit yet? You better uninstall x64 XP until every
> piece of software on your computer gets released as a 64-bit version..
>
>
>

Andre
Sat Jun 04 13:50:06 CDT 2005

Send a shortcut to your desktop and drag it to your Quicklaunch, there is
not way to make it the default.
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

"Chris" <Chris@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:65FD1F52-49A7-4810-83F4-B9F9619D7AEE@microsoft.com...
>i find it incredibly poor that microsoft went to all the trouble of making
> sure it was backwards compatible with most x86 based apps but when it came
> to
> ie, just bundled in an old version as well as the x64 copy.
>
> but this aside, is there anyway to remove it, or at the very least force
> windows to use the x64 copy by default rather than the x86 version?
>
> "stan bogert" wrote:
>
>>
>> "Chris" <Chris@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:DF6A13D6-FC81-43B6-874A-CFBB014C1803@microsoft.com...
>> > when i upgraded to XP x64 edition i noticed to my disgust that there
>> > are 2
>> > versions of ie. a 32 bit and a 64 bit one.
>> >
>> > If i'd wanted a 32 bit copy i'd have stuck with XP x86!
>> >
>> > So what i'd like to know is...
>> >
>> > 1. is there any reason why internet explorer had to have 2 copies, x64
>> > and
>> > x86? whereas outlook express, notepad, and nearly every other
>> > application
>> > bundled managed to get by with just the one (x64) copy?
>> >
>> > 2. is there any way i can get rid of the x86 version as windows keeps
>> > using
>> > it as my default web browser and i hate having 2 programs for the same
>> > jjob
>> > on my computer... to me its just messy
>> >
>> > thanks
>> Not all websites are compatable with ie64.
>>
>>
>>
>>

Morituri-|-Max
Sat Jun 04 14:09:44 CDT 2005


"Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <andred25@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:u7vl3wSaFHA.2444@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Not recommended to everyone, if you are getting negative productivity then
> you might not be ready for x64. Thats why I recommend persons who don't
> realize the benefits yet but have the 64 bit hardware should continue to
> maintain an existing 32 bit Windows environment and gradually migrate to
> 64 bit Windows.

I don't know.. I'll wait till the 128-bit Windows comes out.. heh heh

Andre
Sat Jun 04 15:17:09 CDT 2005

You won't be seeing that until about 2012.
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

"Morituri-|-Max" <newage@sendarico.net> wrote in message
news:ussp6jTaFHA.3132@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
> "Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <andred25@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:u7vl3wSaFHA.2444@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Not recommended to everyone, if you are getting negative productivity
>> then you might not be ready for x64. Thats why I recommend persons who
>> don't realize the benefits yet but have the 64 bit hardware should
>> continue to maintain an existing 32 bit Windows environment and gradually
>> migrate to 64 bit Windows.
>
> I don't know.. I'll wait till the 128-bit Windows comes out.. heh heh
>
>

Morituri-|-Max
Sat Jun 04 18:37:01 CDT 2005


"Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <andred25@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uDL3lJUaFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> You won't be seeing that until about 2012.

That's okay.. that's probably the year XP 64-bit has all its drivers ready.
8 )

Andre
Sat Jun 04 19:43:04 CDT 2005

Couldn't agree more.
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

"Morituri-|-Max" <newage@sendarico.net> wrote in message
news:OZSpR5VaFHA.3280@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
> "Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <andred25@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uDL3lJUaFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> You won't be seeing that until about 2012.
>
> That's okay.. that's probably the year XP 64-bit has all its drivers
> ready. 8 )
>
>

Charlie
Wed Jun 08 01:19:13 CDT 2005

Hah. A known issue.

--
Charlie.

Christian Hougardy wrote:
> Charlie Russel - MVP <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote:
>> You'll find you need the 32-bit IE, I'm afraid, until such time as
>> web sites are updated to properly support 64-bit IE. Right now, you'd
>> have problems with just the 64-bit.
>>
>>
>> Chris wrote:
>>> when i upgraded to XP x64 edition i noticed to my disgust that there
>>> are 2 versions of ie. a 32 bit and a 64 bit one.
>>>
>>> If i'd wanted a 32 bit copy i'd have stuck with XP x86!
>>>
>>> So what i'd like to know is...
>>>
>>> 1. is there any reason why internet explorer had to have 2 copies,
>>> x64 and x86? whereas outlook express, notepad, and nearly every
>>> other application bundled managed to get by with just the one (x64)
>>> copy? 2. is there any way i can get rid of the x86 version as windows
>>> keeps using it as my default web browser and i hate having 2
>>> programs for the same jjob on my computer... to me its just messy
>>>
>>> thanks
>
> Just try Windows Update with your 64bit version :(