Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

ajbrehm

macrumors 6502
Original poster
All the system files seem to be 32 Bit (i386 rather than x86_64).

Apparently Leopard really just adds 64 Bit Cocoa support to Tiger's 64
Bit Darwin/POSIX support. That's it. That's the 64 Bit Mac OS X.

I know a 64 Bit kernel is not as important as running in Long Mode
(which Mac OS X does), but Windows has it, why not Mac OS?
 
It's...

It's not a major point upgrade. It's still 10.x. Usually rewritting the kernel or 'guts' of a program is a 'major update' and would be like 98 to 2000 Pro or XP to Vista and would make it OS XI?

It's also cheaper to hang new shutters on the siding than to rebuild the house.

Anyone remember Windows Millenium Edition? Windows ME? As I remember, it was supposed to be a 'stepping stone' between the 32-bit kernel and the 64-bit kernel of the 'Windows NT' side. Microsoft wanted to put their two different operating systems on the same kernel and just hang features on it for what 'model' of OS the user bought. I assume that Vista is the culmination of that dream, and the computer world's nightmare...

I seem to remember someone saying that OS X was 64-bit though... *shrug*
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.