Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncementsFree MagazinesWhite PapersSubmit Content
Discussion GroupsASP.NETWindows FormsLanguages.NET FrameworkVisual Studio.NET
Articles.NET FrameworkASP.NETToolsWindows Forms
.NET DirectoryOpen Source ProjectsUser GroupsWeb Resources
Related Topics
Visual Basic 6SQL ServerMS AccessOther DB ProductsMS Server ProductsMore Topics ...

.NET Forum / .NET Framework / New Users / January 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

.NET Framework 2 & SyncToys

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Kate - 07 Dec 2007 18:46 GMT
I need to download .NET Framework 2.0.50727 to run SyncToys v1.4 but
am given three choices, namely : x86 version, x64 version and xIA64
version.  Can someone tell me which one I need please?  I have Win XP
Home.

Many thanks
Kate
Jerry - 07 Dec 2007 20:54 GMT
x86 version

>I need to download .NET Framework 2.0.50727 to run SyncToys v1.4 but
> am given three choices, namely : x86 version, x64 version and xIA64
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Many thanks
> Kate
Kate - 07 Dec 2007 21:14 GMT
Thank you very much.  I would like to learn a bit more,  for example,
why "x86" for 32 bit?  86 = 32?  Seems rather cryptic to me.  Can you
suggest a website for further information, please?

Thanks again
Kate

> x86 version
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>> Many thanks
>> Kate
Jack Jackson - 07 Dec 2007 22:05 GMT
The original 32-bit Intel CPU used in PCs was the 80386, which was
followed by the 80486 and Pentium (sometimes called the 586).  The
architecture used in the 80386 and later 32-bit CPUs (including the
AMD versions) is often referred to as x86.

CPUs that build on the x86 architecture but support 64 bit data are
referred to as x64.

A separate 64-bit Intel CPU architecture is used by the Itanium chips,
called xIA64.

Wikipedia has a lot of info on all of these.

>Thank you very much.  I would like to learn a bit more,  for example,
>why "x86" for 32 bit?  86 = 32?  Seems rather cryptic to me.  Can you
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>>> Many thanks
>>> Kate
Kate - 07 Dec 2007 22:58 GMT
That explains the "x86", but I`m even more intrigued now.  Was the
number 80386 chosen at random, or does it have some significance?
After all, it`s not divisible by 32.  I can see I shall have to have a
search of Wikipedia. Thanks for putting me on the trail :-)

Kate

> The original 32-bit Intel CPU used in PCs was the 80386, which was
> followed by the 80486 and Pentium (sometimes called the 586).  The
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
>>>> Many thanks
>>>> Kate
Peter Duniho - 07 Dec 2007 23:37 GMT
> That explains the "x86", but I`m even more intrigued now.  Was the
> number 80386 chosen at random, or does it have some significance?
> After all, it`s not divisible by 32.  I can see I shall have to have a
> search of Wikipedia. Thanks for putting me on the trail :-)

Wikipedia may elaborate for you.  I think this article is a decent  
starting point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8086

Jack's explanation isn't really complete, as the 32-bit-ness of the CPU is  
irrelevant to the actual origin of x86.  The "original" x86 CPU was the  
8086, a 16-bit CPU.  The original IBM PC used the 8088, an 8-bit version  
of the 8086 (well, it had an 8-bit data bus, anyway).  "x86" is used to  
describe the entire line of CPUs that evolved from that beginning, and/or  
the instruction set (e.g. AMD, Cyrix x86-compatible CPUs).

In other words, x86 isn't used to refer to 32-bit.  It's used to refer to  
an entire class of CPUs and their instruction sets.  The marketing  
genuises have simply complicated the issue by using x64 to refer to the  
64-bit iteration of the x86 line.  This has led to a sort of retro-active  
re-definition of x86 as meaning 32-bit, but that's not really what it  
means.

Kind of dumb, IMHO, but then I find most marketing kind of dumb (including  
the term ".NET" :) ).

Pete
Jack Jackson - 08 Dec 2007 07:15 GMT
The initial Intel CPU with a 16-bit bus was the 8086, then came the
80186, 80286, 80386, 80486 and the Pentium, which was sometimes called
the 80586.  So essentially the number before the 86 is just a version
number.

>That explains the "x86", but I`m even more intrigued now.  Was the
>number 80386 chosen at random, or does it have some significance?
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
>>>>> Many thanks
>>>>> Kate
Kate - 08 Dec 2007 15:31 GMT
Thank you Jack and Peter for the extra info.  I am still going to
follow up the Wikipedia article, but now that I know the numbers
before the 86 have no esoteric significance, I shall not waste time
trying to find out.

Kate

> The initial Intel CPU with a 16-bit bus was the 8086, then came the
> 80186, 80286, 80386, 80486 and the Pentium, which was sometimes
[quoted text clipped - 53 lines]
>>>>>> Many thanks
>>>>>> Kate
Peter van der Goes - 03 Jan 2008 18:01 GMT
> I need to download .NET Framework 2.0.50727 to run SyncToys v1.4 but
> am given three choices, namely : x86 version, x64 version and xIA64
> version.  Can someone tell me which one I need please?  Ir XP  Home.
>
> Many thanks
> Kate

For XP Home, you need the x86 version.

Free Magazines

Get these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...

Oracle MagazineNetwork ComputingComputer WorldBio-IT WorldeWeekInformation WeekInfosecurity
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.