|
|
I can't watch it - all those sheep, and no epidural...
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
According to the magistrate at your latest hearing that is not an epidural
|
|
|
|
|
Just as well it didn't go in the little darlin's spine then... 
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Would I be correct in saying that most Windows apps have no 64-bit version? I know this is true for Visual Studio, and it also seems to be the case for tools like editplus and irfanview.
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say you are correct.
In the case of the examples you give, there are no reason to switch to 64 bits.
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
|
I did not say that; NOT ALL applications gain from being in 64bit.
Other than having access to more memory, there is no real gain in performance.
In the examples (irfanview, editplus, VS), there is no advantages to convert to 64 bits; they all are working on relatively small dataset.
We are working on an engineering software, we work with 3D models and large datasets; and in the last couple of years, our clients were working with large datasets and we had no choice of switching to 64bit (with a lot of pain,sweat and swear due to very old legacy code).
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. on an Itanium processor, which no one has.
|
|
|
|
|
harold aptroot wrote: on an Unobtainium processor
FTFY!
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
|
oh, my bad. You're right. Looks like I read that article too quickly 
|
|
|
|
|
That might be true for most users; but the 32bit nature of VS is causing problems for some large software projects. Mozilla's been bumping into memory limits with MS's 32bit linker for years. And while 64bit isn't a headline target for the VS team, a few years ago (vs2010 release???) when asked they blogged that they'd been making sure that each component they touched in development was made 64bit compatible when they were done along with whatever functional changes were responsible for it being updated in the first place. The intent was to get most of the way there organically so that wrapping up the remaining loose ends would be a reasonably sized task as part of a release as opposed to something that would consume all of their work for a few years.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: no reason to switch to 64 bits
Why just last week I was bemoaning my inability to ship 2TB of icons embedded into my application resource file.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk[^] 
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Collin Jasnoch wrote: The only people that should still be on 32 bit are those that refer to the internet as "That email thingy".
Sorry old chap, but I must disagree there.
If you've got under 4gb of memory, there's no advantage to building a 64-bit application in many, many cases.
In fact, as you're no doubt aware, 64bit instructions are longer and can have the effect of reducing the effectiveness of the machine, by reducing the amount of RAM available for data.
So, with an older machine that's still being put to useful work, a 32bit OS can be a better choice. Not sure how many 64bit smart phones/tablets there are - each can do useful work too.
Nevermind the fact that you can't run a 64bit OS on a raspberry pi or any one of a number of other embedded solutions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Of course many things can be done faster with newer hardware. The fact is however, that in many cases, this is simply not a viable option. A not-for-profit organization I'm involved with is in the process of converting local newspapers from 1958-1972 into a digital, searchable format. It is simply not possible that the organization's computers are all upgraded, the finances just don't exist. So, the 15 or so 2gb Core2-Duos have the newest 386 build of Xubuntu on them and work perfectly fine for the purpose. A 64 bit build would actually make them less effective in fact.
Sure, power-users of desktop pcs would be better served by a 64bit os than they would by a 32bit one - that's not what you said, nor what I responded to.
Your desktop is also undoubtedly a different case again. The point is, your remark was disparaging of those that (for whatever reason) aren't using a 64bit os. It was also generalized and made no distinction between platforms or intended use. It was rather difficult to tell if you were being imprecise or just a buffoon. I expected it was the first and am happy to have that impression re-enforced by your response.
 Nope, no tanks welcome at domestic disturbances. Which is a different set of words used to convey my point. Don't need a 20lb sledgie to break open peanuts. Nor can you bust concrete with a nut-cracker. One should simply use the most appropriate tool for the job at hand.
Have a 5 for the tank question, I'm still grinning!
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits come from more than application itself. 64 bit virtual memory allows for OS to minimise swapping of memory but wow64 introduces a new overhead. Avoiding wow64 is a performance enhancer.
http://www.ni.com/white-paper/5709/en/[^]
Peter Wasser
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
modified 25-Mar-14 0:01am.
|
|
|
|
|
Maximilien wrote: In the case of the examples you give, there are no reason to switch to 64 bits.
In my experience some of the image manipulation programs (like photoshop) seems twice as fast at startup and some operations when using 64-bit version on 64-bit OS. This is quite logical, since image manipulation require reading of pixels usually AARRGGBB format, which is 32-bit. If using aligned words, you can get twice as many pixels from memory in one op.
|
|
|
|
|
ASLR[^] works much better for protecting a program against attack if it has a 64bit address space to work with than if it's limited to 32 bits.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
