"The 64-bit shell cannot load 32-bit Inproc shell extension."
http://support.microsoft.com/default.as ... -us;282423
It looks like shellext.dll needs to be recompiled into a 64-bit DLL to work properly in XP x64. It would be greatly appreciated if the Textpad development team could work on this. Additionally, a recompiled 64-bit version of 4.7.1 and the latest release would be nice as well, per the posting in the "Known Problems" forum: http://textpad.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4352
It does not appear that the whole app needs to be recompiled, only the DLL extension.
Compatibility with Windows XP x64
Moderators: AmigoJack, bbadmin, helios, Bob Hansen, MudGuard
Editing big files...
I would be nice to be able to edit large files in W32 as well, but I'm really keen on a W64 version mostly for this reason. Plus the "edit binary" suggestion... I deal with large files on our servers a fair bit, and the existing editing solutions suck.
Hello there
We have bought 10 licences for our company and we used 2 of them on winXP x64 PCs. We will soon make full use of x64 winXPs and the shell extensions are absolutely essential. We are very much into SQL scripting and we use Textpad for several Java applets/applications since it is not heavy at all. A x64 shell extensions fix is a must for Textpad.
Thanks in advance.
We have bought 10 licences for our company and we used 2 of them on winXP x64 PCs. We will soon make full use of x64 winXPs and the shell extensions are absolutely essential. We are very much into SQL scripting and we use Textpad for several Java applets/applications since it is not heavy at all. A x64 shell extensions fix is a must for Textpad.
Thanks in advance.
Me too! I shall be changing up to 64 in the new year 8)
I am currently duel booting Redhat Fedora4 and WindowsXP. I want TextPad for both OS's and OF COURSE I would pay.
I don't use Linux because it's free, I use it because it does more. But ... All Linux text editors suck. Some worse than others.
They come in two main types: those like emacs that do EVERYTHING and are fiercely complicated - and the rest that do almost nothing.
TextPad has the perfect balance - it does enough and does it brilliantly and with NO BLOAT!
A TextPad release for Linux would find many users willing to pay for a proper text processor - particularly those who used it on Windows.
It would be reviewed and proselytised by its lovers. Linux users are gossipy and the word would go round pretty rapidly.
Go on - consider compiling it for Linux
There are enough Linux hackers around. It should be easy to find one willing to invest some effort - especially if he used TexPad in Windows.
Julian (^_=)
I am currently duel booting Redhat Fedora4 and WindowsXP. I want TextPad for both OS's and OF COURSE I would pay.
I don't use Linux because it's free, I use it because it does more. But ... All Linux text editors suck. Some worse than others.
They come in two main types: those like emacs that do EVERYTHING and are fiercely complicated - and the rest that do almost nothing.
TextPad has the perfect balance - it does enough and does it brilliantly and with NO BLOAT!
A TextPad release for Linux would find many users willing to pay for a proper text processor - particularly those who used it on Windows.
It would be reviewed and proselytised by its lovers. Linux users are gossipy and the word would go round pretty rapidly.
Go on - consider compiling it for Linux
There are enough Linux hackers around. It should be easy to find one willing to invest some effort - especially if he used TexPad in Windows.
Julian (^_=)