Talk:Windows XP 64-bit Edition

(I apologise if it becomes too apparent that I don't know how I should have started this page.)

The article says "Additionally, many old technologies were removed, including NTVDM, so consequently support for MS-DOS, Posix, OS/2, and Win16 applications (which relied on NTVDM) is absent". I believe POSIX and OS/2 are separate subsystems that are missing/unavailable for IA-64, they do not, however, rely on NTVDM as MS-DOS and Win16 applications do.

The OS/2 subsystem relies on thunking, but not NTVDM. The POSIX subsystem had been removed in Windows 2000/x86 and replaced by the downloadable Services for UNIX. Similarly the OS/2 subsystem had been removed from Windows XP/x86 and is no longer present in any version of Windows. (Microsoft recommend using Virtual PC to run OS/2 programs.)

The article says "Unlike previous alternate architecture ports of Windows (Windows NT 4.0 for PowerPC, MIPS R4x00, and Alpha) Windows XP 64-bit Edition can run standard x86 32-bit applications through WOW64 (Windows on Windows) emulation layer.". Windows NT 4.0/Alpha could execute x86 32 bit applications via FX!32 (or whatever the name was). It worked a lot like IA-32 EL, the software Intel made available for running x86 code on IA-64.

Andrew Brehm.

Why is it unsupported? Is there an itanium version of Vista in the wrok? 70.52.19.198 01:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The 64-bit version of Windows Vista is for the same architecture as Windows XP Professional x64 Edition (AMD64/EM64T/x64/x86-64). --Evice 02:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article could explain this in more detail. Porting Windows to x86-64 doesn't necessaly imply that Microsoft has to stop supporting the Itanium. They are not aimed at the same market... There should also be someting about the future of Windows Server on Itanium or a reference to the revelant article. 70.52.8.215 00:50, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Windows XP Itanium logo.png[edit]

Image:Windows XP Itanium logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]