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

iLife '11 Still 32-Bit

As far as the iTunes situation goes, Apple provided 64-bit iTunes along with both the Leopard and Snow Leopard Developer Previews, finally removing them prior to the GM Seed.
 
RawBert said:
No 64-bit for you!

Come back - one year!

twopblogsquare_chefs_soupnazi.jpg
Click to expand...

No Final Cut Studio Update for you!
come back-2 Years!!!!
 
Maybe we can expect a 64bit update of it when Lion is released... I dunno. Still a poor effort from Apple though.
 
Well, if they couldn't find the time to make iMovie 64 bit... I'm not holding my breath on Final Cut Pro making the leap. (but, I'm sure it will be awesome nonetheless... ;) )

Thunderhawks said:
Yes, shame on Jobs, he should be writing code at night instead of answering random e-mails.
Click to expand...

Heh heh, good one. :D
 
I think people are missing the principal of the complaining in this thread. The answer like "do you need it" "Does it make a difference" etc are ridiculous. Here an analogy

BMW XXX(64bit Ilife)
300hp
35mpg

Cost: 35000

BMW XXX(32Bit Ilife)
250hp
25mpg

Cost: 35000


Which on would you want? Sure you can get by with BMW #2 but WHY? when you can get BMW one with more power and better effeciency for the same price?

So why wouldnt you WANT 64bit if you could have it?
 
To all those who do not understand why some people are disappointed, do you remember when Steve was himself promoting 64 bit over 32 -bit in WWDC 2007 ? Some copied text from live coverage:

“Number four,” said Jobs. “Leopard is 64 bit from top to bottom.” This is the first time that 64-bit will be mainstream in the computer world, he said — not only does mean Leopard’s Unix underpinnings will be 64-bit, but so will Cocoa.

“One version of Leopard runs 32-bit and 64-bit apps side by side,” explained Jobs. “If you write a 64-bit app, you can guarantee that it will run on every copy of Leopard out there.”

To demonstrate the capability, Jobs loaded a giant photograph — 4GB in size — into a demo application that showed CPU and disk access. One version ran in 32-bit mode, the other in 64-bit mode. Running filters on both systems, the 32-bit version took 81 seconds to complete the tasks, hammering the hard disk in the process. The 64-bit version was able to load everything into memory, and finished in 28.48 seconds.

“We’re seeing a real need for 64 bits not just in scientific computation, but we’re hearing it more and more in the professional arts, whether it’s animation or the high-end Photoshop market,” said Jobs. “And please remember, almost every computer we ship is 64-bit capable.”

Jobs also demonstrated Core Animation, which enables developers to perform extensive animation capabilities within their apps simply by calling forth core technology in the operating system, similar to how Tiger’s Core Image and Core Audio technology works.


You can check it from youtube as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=id5vpy2CapY


Now it is 2010 and they are still delivering 32 bit apps :) I guess Steve and Apple are still doing the right thing as always ?
 
¿Whom is the Lazy NOW?

G4DP said:
When as a company you push the fact that the vast majority of your computers are 64bit compatible, yes it does matter. PowerMac G4's were capable of basic 64bit stuff. When the switch was made to Intel, Apple should have done all the conversions. Instead they bitch about everyone else's software.

If they can't get their own house in order they should just shut up. iLife and iWork not so important but when your "Professional - haha, that's a bloody joke" software is not up to scratch, then yes it does matter.

Flash worked fine in Safari up to the 5.0.1 release - funnily enough when Jobs got his head up his arse.
Click to expand...



Do you remember Stevo Calling Adobe lazy?
well who's apps are all 64bit now? and who's are not?
and the must ask question. Whom is the lazy-one NOW?
 
Can someone explain

Why would Apple do this? Seriously, not meant as a rhetorical question.
 
A general comment towards t hose who say "iLife and iTunes don't need 64bit support", I would like to think that my iTunes library that is 150GB and iPhoto library that nears 18,000 photos can somehow tap better into more ram and CPU power, then my iCal and Address Book which are now 64bit.

Plus, the whole point of Snow Kitty was that we would more towards 64 bit computing. If Apple isn't willing to convert their own applications to 64 bit, why would other developers care to follow? Apple needs to lead the charge and show the benefits.
 
Judging from the comments here, it seems few people understand what 64 or 32 bits really means except that they think "more is better". I wonder how many people know what bits are being counted?

Seriously how would it make any difference for most people? If the application does not need to access more than 4GB of memory then storing all those wider pointers just uses more space. It does not matter that you have more than 4GB in your iTunes library. the purpose or those wide 64-bit pointers to to allow the app to use more than 4GB of RAM. It has nothing to do with the size of the data files.

I wonder what would happen if people looked in Activity Monitor and saw that iTunes or iPhoto was using more than 4GB of virtual memory? We'd hear comments like it must be "bloated" and "can't they make it smaller?" but using >4GB or VM is the sole purpose of going with 64-bits. Well I mean sole technical reason, that is the marketing angle too..
 
If Apple says it needs to be 32-bit then it means it has to be 32-bit. They know better than any of us. There must be a good reason.
 
MACRUS said:
Do you remember Stevo Calling Adobe lazy?
well who's apps are all 64bit now? and who's are not?
and the must ask question. Whom is the lazy NOW?
Click to expand...

During the beta of Mac OS X 10.5, the first version that offered a credible, fully featured 64-bit API, Apple included a 64-bit version of Carbon. Adobe used this 64-bit Carbon to develop 64-bit Photoshop for Mac OS X.

This was all going well, until Apple decided, "You know what? We're going to cancel 64-bit Carbon."

http://arstechnica.com/apple/guides...uide-to-platform-trolling-apple-edition.ars/4

dsc_0487.jpg
 
Eh, I'll still buy iLife 11. The iPhoto update, along with some more tools for Garage Band, are worth it to me. However, I'm not going to race out and buy it now, I'll buy it when I feel like it.
 
MACRUS said:
Do you remember Stevo Calling Adobe lazy?
well who's apps are all 64bit now? and who's are not?
Click to expand...
Adobe has several CS apps that are not yet 64-bit.

Do you even use CS5?

Or is this just a rant on a subject that you only have peripheral knowledge of?
 
calvin2006 said:
His lack of involvement in the keynote yesterday said it all.
Click to expand...

Said it all? To me it said his health isn't improving. Often when he spoke he sounded out of breath, and did you see how many times he had to pull up his pants, sleeves, and glasses?
 
Yeah, this is an outrage - my mom has totally been griping about the lack of 64-bit iPhoto for a couple of years now.

(Not.)


mcmlxix said:
did you see how many times he had to pull up his pants, sleeves, and glasses?
Click to expand...

Happens to us skinny people all the time. :(
 
pinjan said:
To demonstrate the capability, Jobs loaded a giant photograph — 4GB in size — into a demo application that showed CPU and disk access. One version ran in 32-bit mode, the other in 64-bit mode. Running filters on both systems, the 32-bit version took 81 seconds to complete the tasks, hammering the hard disk in the process. The 64-bit version was able to load everything into memory, and finished in 28.48 seconds.

“We’re seeing a real need for 64 bits not just in scientific computation, but we’re hearing it more and more in the professional arts, whether it’s animation or the high-end Photoshop market,” said Jobs. “And please remember, almost every computer we ship is 64-bit capable.”



You can check it from youtube as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=id5vpy2CapY
Click to expand...

Watching that video, right after seeing the Lion demo, made me sad. Steve just doesn't care about the Mac like he used to...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back