GP SoftwareTwitter
Opus FAQsManualCommandsObjects

Surface Pro X: Need ARM64 Build

Can you please add an ARM64 build for those of us on the Surface Pro X?

1 Like

Don't they run the normal build?

The ARM CPU will run the x86 binary, but not perfectly, and at the expense of speed and battery life. For example, double-clicking on the desktop to open a default lister doesn't seem to work.

Up vote - I to have a Surface Pro X and would like to see a native ARM64 build of DOPUS.

Hi Leo,

Also, if you try to do anything involving a file on the desktop on a Surface Pro X, it won't work. For example, double-clicking on a document on the desktop to launch the associated app just opens up a DOpus Lister, not the actual app. There's something very weird going on with file associations involving any file placed on the desktop.

Thanks,

Steve

Also, if you double-click on a folder on the desktop, it doesn't open the folder. DOpus just opens the default Lister. It's as if the double-click was just falling through to the desktop, so that rather than knowing that the user is trying to open a folder on the desktop, DOpus thinks that the user just double-clicked on the desktop, itself, to open a default lister. This isn't how things are supposed to work. This happens on the Surface Pro X. I don't know why DOpus behaves differently on it than on x86/x64 machines.

It's similar to when 64-bit was introduced, except a lot more niche and questionable in terms of if the platform has any future*. (* As in ARM Windows, not ARM generally, obviously. I'm typing this on an ARM phone and couldn't imagine using another CPU for those!)

It's a shame to us that Microsoft are selling ARM machines as a "pro" thing, which runs 32-bit code (or ARM builds no one makes), and without warning people that a third CPU architecture will break a lot of things without special builds.

Doing an ARM build would require a lot of extra work and complexity*, and we don't have the hardware to test on, given how expensive it is, and that we don't want it personally, which could offset that time and money cost. (*Six build targets instead of four, and Microsoft have still done nothing, this many years after 64-bit, to make Visual Studio support multiple build targets for developers who need everything rebuilt at once. Having to install potentially three versions of certain binaries, because in-process DLLs have to match the process that calls them. The installer itself would need to embed three builds of itself instead of two as well. Changing code so it knows which binaries to launch. And a lot of ongoing testing. So it's not just flipping a switch and rebuilding everything.)

It may happen if ARM Windows becomes popular in the future
(something that is very unclear today), but I believe Microsoft have mis-sold these as "Pro" devices without adequately warning customers of their limitations.

1 Like