Click to expand.John is correct, but, since many more users are now seeing 64-bit Windows for the first time, a fuller explanation might be in order. Those TWO folders are in all 64-bit Windows versions. They are NOT in 32-bit Win7 or other 32-bit Windows. They were introduced in Windows XP x64, and also appear in Vista x64 and Windows 7 x64.
We've had the Program Files folder since Windows 9x, of course, long before 64-bit Windows first appeared. There was no thought of 64-bit applications until WinXP x64. But when 64-bit Windows arrived, there was a need to separate 64-bit operations and applications from 32-bit. Differences in the operating system itself were handled by creating separate editions of the OS: Windows XP Professional continued as 32-bit, and Window XP x64 was introduced almost as a 'behind-the-curtain' product that never appeared as a retail package.
But it established some patterns that have continued in 64-bit Vista and Win7. To keep 32-bit and 64-bit apps separate in Win64 (my collective term for all 64-bit versions of Windows), MSFT could have created a new 'Program Files (x64)' folder and left 32-bit apps in the familiar 'Program Files'.
But they did not. Instead, they decided that Win64 would use 'Program Files' for 64-bit apps only; 32-bit apps in Win64 would go into the newly-created 'Program Files (x86)'.
That decision created the confusion that has existed ever since WinXP x64 but never got much attention until Windows 7. Almost all new computers are using CPUs and other hardware that are 64-bit capable, and many (most?) new computers are being delivered with 64-bit Windows 7 installed. So many more users are becoming aware of 'Program Files (x86)' for the first time - and are asking the question that you have posted. When I first encountered PF86 (my abbreviation) in WinXP x64 in about 2005, I assumed that it was for 64-bit apps, since it existed only in 64-bit Windows. It took me several months to realize that the 'x86' label derived from the 'x86' line of Intel 32-bit CPUs (8086, 80286, 80486, etc.) and applied to 32-bit Windows and apps, not 64-bit. By that time, I had hopelessly jumbled my 32-bit and 64-bit apps in my PF and PF86 folders. So I certainly understand your confusion, Dabbler, and I'm sure that it is widespread among users who are having their first introduction to 64-bit Windows with their new Win7 x64 computers.
The reason for separating 32-bit apps from 64-bit versions is not just cosmetic. I'm not a techie, so I can't give a technical explanation. But my understanding is that 64-bit apps require different supporting files, such as DLLs and drivers, and that 32-bit apps on Win64 need to use a 'transition layer' called WOW (Windows on Windows). Having the app files separated by 'bitness' into different PF folders allows Win64 to know which supporting services to use for each version of each app. One example of all this is Internet Explorer. Win7 x64 comes with TWO versions of IE8 installed; 32-bit Win7 has only the 32-bit version. In Win7 x64, you will find the two versions at: 32-bit version: C: Program Files (x86) Internet Explorer iexplore.exe 64-bit version: C: Program Files Internet Explorer iexplore.exe When you click the big blue 'e', the 32-bit version of IE8 runs, by default.
You can run the 64-bit version by browsing to it in the PF folder, as usual for any application. Or, like any other app, you can create a shortcut or an icon or pin it to your Taskbar, etc.
The two versions perform ALMOST identically. But, for example, Adobe Flash Player will not run in the 64-bit IE8 because Adobe has not yet updated Flash for 64-bit. Flash will run in 32-bit IE8 on Win64.
(To see which version of IE you are currently running, click Help About Internet Explorer; the 32-bit edition does not mention 'bitness', but the 64-bit Edition says '64-bit Edition' on the Version line. And, yes, you can have both versions open at the same time.) I hope this helps others who may be 'reading over our shoulders'. In a newsgroup, 'lurking' is A Good Thing. John is correct, but, since many more users are now seeing 64-bit Windows for the first time, a fuller explanation might be in order. Those TWO folders are in all 64-bit Windows versions. They are NOT in 32-bit Win7 or other 32-bit Windows.
They were introduced in Windows XP x64, and also appear in Vista x64 and Windows 7 x64. We've had the Program Files folder since Windows 9x, of course, long before 64-bit Windows first appeared. There was no thought of 64-bit applications until WinXP x64. But when 64-bit Windows arrived, there was a need to separate 64-bit operations and applications from 32-bit. Differences in the operating system itself were handled by creating separate editions of the OS: Windows XP Professional continued as 32-bit, and Window XP x64 was introduced almost as a 'behind-the-curtain' product that never appeared as a retail package. But it established some patterns that have continued in 64-bit Vista and Win7. To keep 32-bit and 64-bit apps separate in Win64 (my collective term for all 64-bit versions of Windows), MSFT could have created a new 'Program Files (x64)' folder and left 32-bit apps in the familiar 'Program Files'.
Program Files X86 Folder Missing
But they did not. Instead, they decided that Win64 would use 'Program Files' for 64-bit apps only; 32-bit apps in Win64 would go into the newly-created 'Program Files (x86)'. That decision created the confusion that has existed ever since WinXP x64 but never got much attention until Windows 7. Almost all new computers are using CPUs and other hardware that are 64-bit capable, and many (most?) new computers are being delivered with 64-bit Windows 7 installed. So many more users are becoming aware of 'Program Files (x86)' for the first time - and are asking the question that you have posted. When I first encountered PF86 (my abbreviation) in WinXP x64 in about 2005, I assumed that it was for 64-bit apps, since it existed only in 64-bit Windows. It took me several months to realize that the 'x86' label derived from the 'x86' line of Intel 32-bit CPUs (8086, 80286, 80486, etc.) and applied to 32-bit Windows and apps, not 64-bit.
By that time, I had hopelessly jumbled my 32-bit and 64-bit apps in my PF and PF86 folders. So I certainly understand your confusion, Dabbler, and I'm sure that it is widespread among users who are having their first introduction to 64-bit Windows with their new Win7 x64 computers. The reason for separating 32-bit apps from 64-bit versions is not just cosmetic. I'm not a techie, so I can't give a technical explanation. But my understanding is that 64-bit apps require different supporting files, such as DLLs and drivers, and that 32-bit apps on Win64 need to use a 'transition layer' called WOW (Windows on Windows). Having the app files separated by 'bitness' into different PF folders allows Win64 to know which supporting services to use for each version of each app.
One example of all this is Internet Explorer. Win7 x64 comes with TWO versions of IE8 installed; 32-bit Win7 has only the 32-bit version. In Win7 x64, you will find the two versions at: 32-bit version: C: Program Files (x86) Internet Explorer iexplore.exe 64-bit version: C: Program Files Internet Explorer iexplore.exe When you click the big blue 'e', the 32-bit version of IE8 runs, by default.
You can run the 64-bit version by browsing to it in the PF folder, as usual for any application. Or, like any other app, you can create a shortcut or an icon or pin it to your Taskbar, etc. The two versions perform ALMOST identically. But, for example, Adobe Flash Player will not run in the 64-bit IE8 because Adobe has not yet updated Flash for 64-bit.
Flash will run in 32-bit IE8 on Win64. (To see which version of IE you are currently running, click Help About Internet Explorer; the 32-bit edition does not mention 'bitness', but the 64-bit Edition says '64-bit Edition' on the Version line. And, yes, you can have both versions open at the same time.) I hope this helps others who may be 'reading over our shoulders'. In a newsgroup, 'lurking' is A Good Thing. Click to expand.Thanks for the historical background for naming those two PF files. Though I did not mention I was running the 64-bit version of W7, I thought it was implied by the occurance of those two PF folders.
To me it kinda' makes sense that in a 64-bit version they use the X86 suffix for 32-bit programs when I view it this way: use the plain 'Program Files' for those programs that are built with the OS bit size; 32-bit programs for 32-bit OS, 64-bit programs for 64-bit OS. Thus, using the x86 suffix makes sense for PF folder name where programs are installed that are not native for that OS.
This also explains why there was no need for two different PF folders for 32-bit OS's, except when they could have run 16-bit programs. But I don't remember how 32-bit OS's handled 16-bit programs.
RC, Thanks for you excellent clarification of the two folders. Some 32 bit apps work fine with Win7 64 bit, especially if they are advertised as compatible. Some apps seem to work fine even if they aren't advertised as compatible. Occasional I see something like this: 'I tried xyz legacy program on Win7 64 bit, and it works for me.'
Two questions: is there some way to tell whether a 32 bit app (not advertised as compatible) will work with Win7 64? Is there any chance of damaging the system by installing a 32 bit app to see if it works? Thanks again for helping us to understand. Click to expand.I don't know.
You'll have to ask a techie. I haven't tried every program out there, of course, but I've been running Win64 (WinXP x64, Vista x64 and now Win7 x64) for about 5 years and everything I've tried has worked - with just a couple of hassles, both from Adobe. First, Photoshop Elements 4.0 (I later updated to 6.0 and now 8.0, which are compatible) would not work well during the Vista beta, but that was ironed out by the time Vista went RTM in late 2006; I don't recall if the incompatibility was with Vista itself or with x64.
Second, as I may have mentioned and as widely reported, Adobe's Flash Player will work in 32-bit IE on Win64, but not in 64-bit IE. John is correct, but, since many more users are now seeing 64-bit Windows for the first time, a fuller explanation might be in order.
Those TWO folders are in all 64-bit Windows versions. They are NOT in 32-bit Win7 or other 32-bit Windows. They were introduced in Windows XP x64, and also appear in Vista x64 and Windows 7 x64. We've had the Program Files folder since Windows 9x, of course, long before 64-bit Windows first appeared.
There was no thought of 64-bit applications until WinXP x64. But when 64-bit Windows arrived, there was a need to separate 64-bit operations and applications from 32-bit. Differences in the operating system itself were handled by creating separate editions of the OS: Windows XP Professional continued as 32-bit, and Window XP x64 was introduced almost as a 'behind-the-curtain' product that never appeared as a retail package. But it established some patterns that have continued in 64-bit Vista and Win7. To keep 32-bit and 64-bit apps separate in Win64 (my collective term for all 64-bit versions of Windows), MSFT could have created a new 'Program Files (x64)' folder and left 32-bit apps in the familiar 'Program Files'. But they did not.
Instead, they decided that Win64 would use 'Program Files' for 64-bit apps only; 32-bit apps in Win64 would go into the newly-created 'Program Files (x86)'. That decision created the confusion that has existed ever since WinXP x64 but never got much attention until Windows 7. Almost all new computers are using CPUs and other hardware that are 64-bit capable, and many (most?) new computers are being delivered with 64-bit Windows 7 installed. So many more users are becoming aware of 'Program Files (x86)' for the first time - and are asking the question that you have posted. When I first encountered PF86 (my abbreviation) in WinXP x64 in about 2005, I assumed that it was for 64-bit apps, since it existed only in 64-bit Windows.
It took me several months to realize that the 'x86' label derived from the 'x86' line of Intel 32-bit CPUs (8086, 80286, 80486, etc.) and applied to 32-bit Windows and apps, not 64-bit. By that time, I had hopelessly jumbled my 32-bit and 64-bit apps in my PF and PF86 folders. So I certainly understand your confusion, Dabbler, and I'm sure that it is widespread among users who are having their first introduction to 64-bit Windows with their new Win7 x64 computers. The reason for separating 32-bit apps from 64-bit versions is not just cosmetic. I'm not a techie, so I can't give a technical explanation. But my understanding is that 64-bit apps require different supporting files, such as DLLs and drivers, and that 32-bit apps on Win64 need to use a 'transition layer' called WOW (Windows on Windows). Having the app files separated by 'bitness' into different PF folders allows Win64 to know which supporting services to use for each version of each app.
Spyhunter 4 activation. One example of all this is Internet Explorer. Win7 x64 comes with TWO versions of IE8 installed; 32-bit Win7 has only the 32-bit version. In Win7 x64, you will find the two versions at: 32-bit version: C: Program Files (x86) Internet Explorer iexplore.exe 64-bit version: C: Program Files Internet Explorer iexplore.exe When you click the big blue 'e', the 32-bit version of IE8 runs, by default.
You can run the 64-bit version by browsing to it in the PF folder, as usual for any application. Or, like any other app, you can create a shortcut or an icon or pin it to your Taskbar, etc. The two versions perform ALMOST identically. But, for example, Adobe Flash Player will not run in the 64-bit IE8 because Adobe has not yet updated Flash for 64-bit. Flash will run in 32-bit IE8 on Win64.
(To see which version of IE you are currently running, click Help About Internet Explorer; the 32-bit edition does not mention 'bitness', but the 64-bit Edition says '64-bit Edition' on the Version line. And, yes, you can have both versions open at the same time.) I hope this helps others who may be 'reading over our shoulders'. In a newsgroup, 'lurking' is A Good Thing.
My Win10 Home is regularly updated by MS. After a recent update I find I am no longer able to update or completely remove applications. An example: Firstly, I am logged in as an administrator. I recently ran a program that informed me that an update was available. I opted to download and install it. When the install ran, it generated the following message: ' An error occurred while trying to rename a file in the destination directory. MoveFile failed; code 83.
Delete Program Files Folder
Cannot create a file when that file already exists. Click Retry.' I tried first running the install program as Administrator, but the same error is generated. The problem resulting from these attempts to update is that the application no longer runs, probably because some critical files have been deleted/moved/renamed pending newer versions being installed. I then tried uninstalling the application but the same problem occurs when I run the installer. On checking the folder concerned I find that a number of files still exist.
I then attempted to delete these files - the delete operation proceeded without error but the files still remain. On checking the security permissions on the folder I find that ALL APPLICATION PACKAGES, ALL RESTRICTED APPLICATION PACKAGES, CREATOR OWNER, my login, Users, and TrustedInstaller did not have Full Control. I attempted to set this on these folders, and was successful for all except CREATOR OWNER, but each attempt generated an error message concerning the files in the folder. The message was: 'An error occurred while applying security information to: Failed to enumerate objects in the container. Access is denied.' This occurred for each file that wasn't deleted.
I then attempted to check the security permissions on some of the files that couldn't be deleted and was told: 'You must have Read permissions to view the properties of this object. Click Advanced to continue.'
Clicking the Advanced button generates the same message but offers the Continue button to 'attempt the operation with administrative privileges.' Clicking that button generates the message: 'You do not have permission to view or edit this object's permission settings.' On the previous screen the Owner is shown as 'Unable to display current owner.' And the Change link just generates the 'You do not have permission.' Message above. I find this situation intolerable - updates to installed applications should go through without a hiccup.
At this point I am stymied. If anyone has an idea of what to do, I would appreciate your letting me know. This has occurred twice for me now, although the other time I was able to remove the install folder without a problem. Were you logged in as a standard user when you got those errors? My account is an administrator and I can move, copy and delete files in 'Program Files (x86)' with nothing more than a 'you'll need to provide administrator permission.' Clicking 'Continue' completes the operation without further messages.
I haven't needed to change any of the permissions or ownership from their defaults.Thanks for getting back so quickly, Bree. I realized after posting this thread that I hadn't supplied this info - which I have now corrected. I'm the only user on this PC and I am logged in as Administrator. Yes, I too have been getting the 'need to provide administrator permission.' Message up to yesterday/the day before.
A large update was installed late yesterday, so I suspect something has changed to permissions with new installs. These failing updates, however, are to programs that I installed from older downloads only in the last 24 hours. I'm not game to try any other in case I kill it/them too, but since these were installs made before this update, they may go through. (Because I was able to delete fully the install folder in one case, I have been able to get a clean install of the updated app.
This other one just stymies me as I can't do that here.) Paul. Similar Threads Thread Forum Hi, My entire Program Files (x86) folder was cleared out a few days ago, I only noticed because my shortcuts no longer have icons. I have lost 400gb worth of files, and cannot recover all of them. Mostly made up of Steam/GOG downloads, so could. General Support I accidentally dragged and dropped the 'program files (x86)' folder while trying to open it into another folder which caused the folder to become corrupt.
It was placed in the WindowsApps folder below. 96675 When I try to open the program. General Support I cannot seem to delete files when I'm doing a regular search in windows. I can go to any folder and delete files, but I when I see the same files in a search result, pressing del does nothing and when I right click, I have no option to delete them. General Support I need windows store folder from program files/windows app which i deleted Only than i can restore it using powershell Please can someone uplaod the 2 windows store folders in program files windows app Software and Apps I have a strange folder in C: Program Files (x86) called 'My Company Name' and inside it another one called 'My Product Name'. This one is empty.
My ESET Smart Security found nothing. I can't figure it out where it came from. Is this malware? General Support.
To put it simple, its is a system folder and you should leave it alone. Details: he 'Program Files' and 'Program Files (x86)' folders If you have a 64-bit Windows installed on your computer you have probably already noticed that there exists two folders for program files: the Program Files folder and the Program Files (x86) folder. The Program Files folder is intended for 64-bit programs and the Program Files (x86) folder is intended for 32-bit programs. In many cases the program will start and run as expected even if you place the program in wrong folder, but if the program asks Windows for the path to the Program Files folder and want to access installed files in the folder, the wrong folder will be used and the program will likely fail to function. So to be sure that everything always works as expected, you should always install files with a specific bitness to the correct Program Files folder. So on a 64-bit computer with a 64-bit Windows, remember this:. always install a 32-bit program into the Program Files (x86) folder.
always install a 64-bit program into the Program Files folder Best, Andre Windows Insider MVP MVP-Windows and Devices for IT twitter/adacosta groovypost.com.
I have a new laptop PC runing on Windows 7 Ultimate, 64 bit version, with two hard drives, a 60 GB State Solid Drive, and a 500 GB moving drive. I have noticed that every single program I have installed has folders either under the 'Program Files' or '(x86) Program Files', located on the smaller drive (60 GB SSD), which has practically left my smaller drive without any free space by now. This is happening even though whenever I install a new program I select the larger capacity drive as my driver of choice for the installation. Any ideas how I can redirect those folders to the larger drive. Mos of my programs already installed are 64 bit versions.
Why Choose EaseUS Data Recovery Wizard?. Easy-to-use Clear and intuitive user interface directs you to make successful recovery step by step. Quick scan and deep scan ensure to precisely find lost data at most. Files preview ensures successful data recovery Preview common file formats, including BMP, GIF, PNG, JPEG, JPG, TXT, etc.
Flexible & Precise Pause at ease and restart the scanning process later when you have time. 100% safe EaseUS data recovery program recovers lost files 100% safely from different data loss cases on various devices without overwriting original data. Fast scan speed Speed up scanning process and find lost data more accurately through algorithm optimization. Resume Recovery Export and import Scan Results to resume a previous recovery.