I'm for it if for no other reason than to get off 32-bit software. If I remember when Vista 64 came out, couple of sites did reviews of performance, and a 32-bit app running on 64-bit is slower than a native 64-bit app, due to Windows emulation. So there should be some performance gain just going go 64-bit in general. Besides FF/Plug-in containers and games, I don't have any apps that come close to using more than 2GB for itself, so that isn't really an advantage.
- Status
wild9
Distinguished
- May 20, 2007
- 456
- 0
- 18,930
[citation][nom]JOSHSKORN[/nom]Most computer users nowadays aren't even intelligent enough to realized WHY a computer is slowing down while they are browsing. It's because they have multiple applications open (or tabs, windows) and the system is running out of useable memory per the application because it's 32-bit. A 64-bit OS and 64-bit applications/browsers will fix this problem. Software developers need to get with the program and go 64-bit only.[/citation]
Or could it be the juxtaposition of that scenario: some software developers getting even more lazy than they are now..hey, upgrade to Windows 8 with it's Mr. Blobby theme, then run this 64-bit app to get your computer running at the same speed it did 2 years ago under Windows XP.
I sympathise that in some cases having lots of tabs open will gobble memory resource (I've watched Opera's mouth get bigger and take longer to spit out what's left after I close it), but is that indicative of running more or is it really indicative of running basically the same stuff, except the underlying code is just bloated? Take YT for instance.. you cannot even view a video smoothly without incessant reams of 'junk' advertising threads running in the background. All to watch the same video that played smoothly years ago. Sure, if 64-bit makes it run smoother and I can run more browsers at once fine, but part of me thinks this is just an incentive to run bloated rather than efficient, code.
Or could it be the juxtaposition of that scenario: some software developers getting even more lazy than they are now..hey, upgrade to Windows 8 with it's Mr. Blobby theme, then run this 64-bit app to get your computer running at the same speed it did 2 years ago under Windows XP.
I sympathise that in some cases having lots of tabs open will gobble memory resource (I've watched Opera's mouth get bigger and take longer to spit out what's left after I close it), but is that indicative of running more or is it really indicative of running basically the same stuff, except the underlying code is just bloated? Take YT for instance.. you cannot even view a video smoothly without incessant reams of 'junk' advertising threads running in the background. All to watch the same video that played smoothly years ago. Sure, if 64-bit makes it run smoother and I can run more browsers at once fine, but part of me thinks this is just an incentive to run bloated rather than efficient, code.
darkguset
Distinguished
- Aug 17, 2006
- 74
- 0
- 18,590
[citation][nom]Netherscourge[/nom]There is nothing out now that you can't just code for in a 32-bit environment and get similar, if not better results. [/citation]
I think you may want to revise that... I will simply put my astronomy applications that take a few 24GB of RAM, to process multiple images on a 64bit W7, quad core PC and still cocks up... Would you like to try that on a 32bit machine with a 4GB limit!???? All the coding in the world is not going to help you! And this is not an extreme situation, as I am not a professional astronomer, and there are plenty of people out there with the same requirements as me. Digital cameras and scopes are quite cheap today, so many people jump on the astroimaging wagon. Just because the majority of the applications today are still 32-bit coded, it does not mean they should stay that way.
I think you may want to revise that... I will simply put my astronomy applications that take a few 24GB of RAM, to process multiple images on a 64bit W7, quad core PC and still cocks up... Would you like to try that on a 32bit machine with a 4GB limit!???? All the coding in the world is not going to help you! And this is not an extreme situation, as I am not a professional astronomer, and there are plenty of people out there with the same requirements as me. Digital cameras and scopes are quite cheap today, so many people jump on the astroimaging wagon. Just because the majority of the applications today are still 32-bit coded, it does not mean they should stay that way.
Thunderfox
Distinguished
- Sep 3, 2006
- 177
- 0
- 18,630
[citation][nom]Netherscourge[/nom] There is no obvious advantage. There are no side-by-side, real world comparisons that makes 32-bit software look inferior or obsolete.[/citation]
Try the Dolphin emulator. The 64bit version is about 25% faster, which for me makes the difference between a game being playable or not.
The elephant in the room of the chicken and egg problem is the operating system. x64 won't become the norm until several years after the last 32 bit version of windows, because developers need a simple tag to advertise compatibility without having to explain to the unwashed masses how processors work. There needs to be a big 'Windows 9' sticker on the box in order for normal people to know that their program will work only with the 'latest' operating system, so they won't gripe that it doesn't work with the 'old' Windows 7 or whatever they are using.
Try the Dolphin emulator. The 64bit version is about 25% faster, which for me makes the difference between a game being playable or not.
The elephant in the room of the chicken and egg problem is the operating system. x64 won't become the norm until several years after the last 32 bit version of windows, because developers need a simple tag to advertise compatibility without having to explain to the unwashed masses how processors work. There needs to be a big 'Windows 9' sticker on the box in order for normal people to know that their program will work only with the 'latest' operating system, so they won't gripe that it doesn't work with the 'old' Windows 7 or whatever they are using.
Thunderfox
Distinguished
- Sep 3, 2006
- 177
- 0
- 18,630
...then again, the reason MS hasn't done this already is probably that they don't want to create the impression that the new OS doesn't work with old software. If people get the idea that they have to start from scratch with a new version of Windows, they may just decide to start over with something that isn't Windows.
And then Steve would pull out the rest of his hair.
And then Steve would pull out the rest of his hair.
It's just like 8 core processors. There are simply too few applications that use the available extra resources to make them worthwhile. We live in a world where bigger is perceived as being better. While this is rarely the case those who have invested in it will always believe it is better and will promote it as such. An example of this in action; I play wow and consistently hear my quad core processor makes the game run so much smoother than my old dual core (now its 6 vs 4). Funny thing is, according to my charted cpu usage, wow only uses 2 of the 4 cores available on my cpu. 64 bit holds no real advantage for the same reason. Until 64 bit applications proliferate the market, there is simply no true advantage to 64bit. If you actually run out of ram on a 32bit os, then 64 bit will alleviate that issue, but so will closing the unused apps. The same goes for your browser! I only run 4gb of ram and have never come close to running out of ram, but, then again, I don't have 15 tabs open either! Instead of constantly increasing the capacity to allow for more fat, perhaps we should simply trim the fat.
Most of you people also don't notice when something is failing and you're running on a fall back solution.
Yes I do care.
It's really a pain in the ass not to be able to use equipment because developers haven't made both an 32 and 64 bit executable.
Many applications only require a recompile to 64 bit. No programming required.
It's about time we are able to switch.
The reason everything has to be done is because of the following.
Because when it needs to be ready, you can't just demand the world to do a speedup and put everything right in an instant.
Here are two examples:
studying and exams, you hopefully not just study the day before the exam
medicines and accidents, you hopefully don't go to the pharmacist to buy medicines and patches and stuff after you have had an accident
Because when it needs to be ready, you can't just demand the world to do a speedup and put everything right in an instant.
Here are two examples:
studying and exams, you hopefully not just study the day before the exam
medicines and accidents, you hopefully don't go to the pharmacist to buy medicines and patches and stuff after you have had an accident
@Writer of the article:
You should have done your job and read up on
Wikipedia. Seriously the benefits are not that obvious? Do you expect them to come to your mind in some kind of revelation? You're a moron and need to get this. SEARCH INFORMATION TO INFORM YOUR READERS! It's simple, use google or wikipedia and type in the subject.
This is what I found:
http
/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit#Pros_and_cons
You should have done your job and read up on
Wikipedia. Seriously the benefits are not that obvious? Do you expect them to come to your mind in some kind of revelation? You're a moron and need to get this. SEARCH INFORMATION TO INFORM YOUR READERS! It's simple, use google or wikipedia and type in the subject.
This is what I found:
http
/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit#Pros_and_cons
wild9
Distinguished
- May 20, 2007
- 456
- 0
- 18,930
annymmo, I think that was uncalled for.
Tthe author referred to Firefox's 64-bit development, and then asked our input in addition to stating the main benefits of 64-bit code. Clearly there's a reason for Firefox hasn't jumped on the 64-bit bandwagon, and the author has stated their opinion as to why this is so, as well as encouraged feedback. They said they stand to be corrected. The author could have just provided the news article and nothing else, but calling them a moron for just having an opinion and inviting others is a bit extreme isn't it? They haven't denied you your opinion.
Tthe author referred to Firefox's 64-bit development, and then asked our input in addition to stating the main benefits of 64-bit code. Clearly there's a reason for Firefox hasn't jumped on the 64-bit bandwagon, and the author has stated their opinion as to why this is so, as well as encouraged feedback. They said they stand to be corrected. The author could have just provided the news article and nothing else, but calling them a moron for just having an opinion and inviting others is a bit extreme isn't it? They haven't denied you your opinion.
wild9
Distinguished
- May 20, 2007
- 456
- 0
- 18,930
Just to add some context, that wasn't criticism. I meant that the author could have simply provided the news rather than add some input of their own. I fail to see what's wrong with adding input especially when they're so open about it, and welcoming of other people's opinions
[citation][nom]njt[/nom]i don't want to sound aggressive, but what the hell are you two talking about? it's like you're using a different language, i don't understand absolutely *anything* in any of the sentences you two wrote[/citation]
ok, with a 32bit system at most you get 2gs right, maybe 4? But with 64bit you can get almost 200, but more 192? 2 times 100 is 200. Thats basically 100fold factoring. like if you take the letter A and make it hundred times, lets say for sack of arguement it takes 2gs to make the letter A , then obviously then you only need 100 times to get 200, right? When you calculate for any calculations, what are your probably doing? Calculating for a small sense, but folding probably fits better. Just saying easier to say and work with.
Cause there are reasons why things work and dont work, yes?, And to say that most of these conversations are computer illaterate is to say that you can comment within the concept sections of the sites. But of it is just a term used loosely for the sack of conveince.
Otherwise i think is applied understood without a literal basis of it. I barely know of myself, so the explain is very basic within the usage of it all. What not to understand is probably that of anything within the idea itself, probably, who knows...
That might help, but probably not. All perspective though to say, yes? To some points of argument within the articles and comments.
ok, with a 32bit system at most you get 2gs right, maybe 4? But with 64bit you can get almost 200, but more 192? 2 times 100 is 200. Thats basically 100fold factoring. like if you take the letter A and make it hundred times, lets say for sack of arguement it takes 2gs to make the letter A , then obviously then you only need 100 times to get 200, right? When you calculate for any calculations, what are your probably doing? Calculating for a small sense, but folding probably fits better. Just saying easier to say and work with.
Cause there are reasons why things work and dont work, yes?, And to say that most of these conversations are computer illaterate is to say that you can comment within the concept sections of the sites. But of it is just a term used loosely for the sack of conveince.
Otherwise i think is applied understood without a literal basis of it. I barely know of myself, so the explain is very basic within the usage of it all. What not to understand is probably that of anything within the idea itself, probably, who knows...
That might help, but probably not. All perspective though to say, yes? To some points of argument within the articles and comments.
What is the gain for the average user to use the 64bit browser version?
Turrbo
http/www.alnoualeacer.ro
Turrbo
http
/www.alnoualeacer.rojakjawagon
Distinguished
- Aug 28, 2010
- 134
- 0
- 18,660
Even if 64 bit doesn't improve the product, when you do need a new feature that does need 64 bit then you'll be way behind and wishing you were already there. We all need to move forward and phase out 32 bit. Windows is doing it.
I have been waiting as patiently as I can and putting up with the buggy Nightly for far too long. My patience is at an end! I reported the problems, the same problems I'm am sure that thousands of others have reported. I want (need) a 64 bit version that works reliably period! My preference has been Mozilla's browser. That preference is soon about to change. It is time for Mozilla to present a stable 64 bit version that users can depend on. One that plays videos (flash or otherwise) reliably. One the supports sites like the Weather.com reliably, Foxnews.com reliably and I could go on. I live on the internet. All day long I have to switch to Internet Explorer to display various pages or videos. It is really getting old. I am in the IT business. I setup and install mostly windows systems for a living. I have installed a version of Firefox on virtually all of these systems. I have recommended the product and you are making me look bad. Solve this now!
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question Free design app to create a 3D effect on images- Started by pilgr1mag3
- Replies: 4
-
Question Nikon D40X - How to import filters/colour simulations
- Started by zataka
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter