Bug 2131 - 16-bit support?
mstefani at redhat.com
Sun May 8 17:41:47 CDT 2005
Dustin Navea wrote:
> Andreas Mohr wrote:
>> Do we want to throw out the baby with the bath water?
>> In this case it's an obvious conflict between 16bit and 32bit, and
>> note that
>> it's even with a very rarely used DLL, thus it's easy to give up on it.
>> In all other cases in which 16bit and 32bit can happily co-exist I
>> don't see
>> much reason why we should discard 16bit support.
> hmm. I see your point, but at the same time, if we are trying to mimic
> windows, while still keeping the 16-bit code in there, shouldnt we just
> not work on it as much (like we are doing currently)?
> Basically, the way I see it, vendors are stressing themselves with
> making 64-bit versions of their programs, as well as keeping their
> 32-bit versions going, so they are probably going to scrap 16-bit
> support in the near future, if they haven't already. Why should we
> continue developing something that is being phased out by the guys that
> create the need for this project in the first place?
Because there are still a lot of Win16 out there that continue to just
do their job. Vendors are trying to convince you that you need the
latest wizbang because they need to sell. But that's not necessary in
the best interest of the customer. With Wine you can still use the old
software on modern computer hardware in case your old one dies.
Michael Stefaniuc Tel.: +49-711-96437-199
System Administration Fax.: +49-711-96437-111
Red Hat GmbH Email: mstefani at redhat.com
Hauptstaetterstr. 58 http://www.redhat.de/
More information about the wine-devel