64-bit Visual Studio - by Asesh

Status : 

  By Design<br /><br />
		The product team believes this item works according to its intended design.<br /><br />
		A more detailed explanation for the resolution of this particular item may have been provided in the comments section.

Sign in
to vote
ID 611778 Comments
Status Closed Workarounds
Type Suggestion Repros 0
Opened 10/8/2010 8:08:55 AM
Access Restriction Public


I was really disappointed to see Visual Studio x86 only. Why not provide 64-bit Visual Studio for 64-bit operating systems? And please improve the performance of Visual Studio 2010, it's too slow, reminds me of Vista
Sign in to post a comment.
Posted by Microsoft on 10/8/2012 at 1:17 PM
Hi Folks,

We're tracking the topic of moving Visual Studio to 64-bit under this suggestion on UserVoice: http://visualstudio.uservoice.com/forums/121579-visual-studio/suggestions/2255687-make-vs-scalable-by-switching-to-64-bit. Please feel free to commment on this suggestion or add your votes to the topic.

IDE Experience Team, Visual Studio
Posted by Asesh on 12/12/2010 at 6:53 AM
@ David A Nelson: 64-bit applications run comparitively faster than 32-bit applications on 64-bit operating system, there are technical reasons behind that. As far as developments costs goes, do we really care how much Microsoft spends for the development of Windows? No we don't. We just care about security, features, stability and so on. Anyways, as far as I know and have seen, all the Windows 7 machines sold are 64-bit. I recently bought a laptop and it came pre loaded with Windows 7 64-bit. If I have to think in your way, Microsoft shouldn't be developing 64-bit versions of Windows either. They should just concentrate on 32-bit versions and so on...

@Daneil Smith: completely agree with you
Posted by David A Nelson on 10/13/2010 at 7:48 AM
Of course there are benefits. There are also downsides, including the enormous development cost just to get to 64-bit. And while there might be a lot of 64-bit users, there are also still a ton of 32-bit users. I don't have any hard numbers, but I know that my company is still entirely 32-bit, and I know a lot of other companies are the same. If Microsoft changed the IDE to only be 32-bit, we would be forced to:

A) Upgrade all of our software developers to 64-bit, at significant cost and effort. Then we would have to deal with the troubleshooting issues that come from developing on 64-bit and deploying to 32-bit.
B) Upgrade our entire company to 64-bit, at enormous cost and effort, and deal with the troubleshooting issues that come from deploying other necessary applications which were designed for 32-bit onto 64-bit.
C) Abandon Visual Studio.

Not an appealing choice, and not one that I think Microsoft is short-sighted enough to force on its customers.
Posted by Daniel Smith on 10/13/2010 at 2:33 AM
@David - Most new PCs are 64-bit these days. There are a lot more 64-bit users now than you might think, especially higher end developer machines where the user is likely want full use of their available RAM.

There are loads of other benefits to moving the IDE to 64-bit only:

* Reduced costs of not having to code, maintain and test an additional 32-bit version of the IDE.
* Improved user experience for users hitting the 32-bit memory limits which is causing IDE crashes.
* Reduced support costs for Microsoft by fixing the limitations.
* Full use of the available memory on the machine.
* Developers would still be able to target 32-bit platforms and debug 32-bit code as before, so no one is excluded.
Posted by David A Nelson on 10/12/2010 at 7:40 AM

What would Microsoft possibly have to gain by making their primary IDE impossible to use for a majority of their customer base?
Posted by Microsoft on 10/11/2010 at 1:46 PM
Yes, I would read Rico's article that Greg linked to below. We aren't ready to reveal details about the platform decisions for the next version of VS yet.

Visual Studio Platform Team
Posted by Daniel Smith on 10/11/2010 at 7:27 AM
I hope the next version of the VS IDE goes 64-bit only.

It would also be an excellent opportunity to ditch all the legacy COM interfaces too. It would be such a weight off the teams shoulders to simplify the product by removing all the interop. Wish they'd done that for VS2010. It probably would've saved a lot of headaches.
Posted by GregM on 10/10/2010 at 12:40 PM
Reasons and lots of discussion here

Posted by Microsoft on 10/8/2010 at 8:22 AM
Thank you for your feedback, we are currently reviewing the issue you have submitted. If this issue is urgent, please contact support directly(http://support.microsoft.com)