IJ on 64-bit Vista: nonAdmins get 32-bit JRE

[Michael Doube]

Hi all

My department recently purchased a dual quad-core PC with 32GB RAM and
in their infinite bureaucracy, installed Vista rather than XP (no
support here for 64-bit XP, it seems...)

So, to give IJ access to all that RAM I have installed a 64-bit JRE, and
told IJ to look for it in imagej.cfg.  This machine also has a 32-bit
JRE installed, for some backwards compatibility presumably.

When I run IJ 'as Administrator', I get a 64-bit JRE.  But if I run it
as an ordinary user, I get a 32-bit JRE (despite the contents of
imagej.cfg).  So this means that the other, unprivileged users of the
machine can't open their 10 GB microCT stacks straight into RAM.

Any ideas why my unprivileged users get a 32-bit JRE rather than the
64-bit JRE that I specified?

Cheers,

Mike

p.s. I am unfamiliar with Vista & its weirdness: didn't like it on my
Vaio so replaced it after 2 weeks with Ubuntu.

[Wayne Rasband]

> Hi all
>
> My department recently purchased a dual quad-core PC with 32GB RAM and
> in their infinite bureaucracy, installed Vista rather than XP (no
> support here for 64-bit XP, it seems...)
>
> So, to give IJ access to all that RAM I have installed a 64-bit JRE,
> and told IJ to look for it in imagej.cfg.  This machine also has a
> 32-bit JRE installed, for some backwards compatibility presumably.
>
> When I run IJ 'as Administrator', I get a 64-bit JRE.  But if I run it
> as an ordinary user, I get a 32-bit JRE (despite the contents of
> imagej.cfg).  So this means that the other, unprivileged users of the
> machine can't open their 10 GB microCT stacks straight into RAM.
>
> Any ideas why my unprivileged users get a 32-bit JRE rather than the
> 64-bit JRE that I specified?

I don't know why the unprivileged users are getting a 32-bit JRE but
they can work around the problem by installing the Windows version of
ImageJ that is bundled with 64-bit Java into a directory they have
access to, such as Documents.

-wayne