Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Please... I need some help. I NEED THE 64 BITS! I heard that Apple has the 64 bits but doesn't always give us the 64 bits.

I have a computer with the 64 bits but iLife is only the 32 bits? I don't understand! I know the 64 bits is what I NEED! All the cool kids have the 64 bits. I feel like people might question my manhood if my iLife doesn't have the 64 bits. The 64 bits is the future of the computers.

Help me attain the 64 bits! :confused: Without them, my computer is the useless. When I open a program that's the 32 bits I can't even keep it open because I KNOW it's the 32 bits which is less than the 64 bits.

I NEE-EE-EE-EE-EE-EE-EE-EE-EE-D the 64 bits! How did people even use their computers before the 64 bits!?

(Also, I need the i7 and the ATi 60000 in my 7" laptop with the 64 bits.)

Why not go for 128bit, all the cool keeeeeeds have them, they just don't want to talk about it because they are cooooool!:p

(lol, your post was too funny, thanks for that comedic relief. :D:D:apple:)

Last edited by cult hero : Today at 06:59 PM. Reason: I NEED the 64 bits!
rolmfao!!!!!! that had me in stitches...
 
from a technical viewpoint, wouldn't a 64 bit app exclude non 64 bit previous OSXes?

:confused:

Logic and reasoning will get you nowhere around here. :cool:

If you apply "logic and reasoning" to Apple's recent history of upgrades - it will tell you that more than likely Apple *will* go x64-only to push hardware and software upgrade sales. ;)

And of course, in Apple's defense, the number of systems that are x86-only is a tiny proportion of the installed base, and those systems are old. Don't hold back progress because of a few antique systems still in service - 10.6 was the death knell for PPC, now is time for the death knell for x86.
 
There are many valid points here, I could add a few myself, but I don't think apple is falling asleep on the wheel here. Come summer a new os will be around, much earlier than that a new iwork suit.

Nobody is perfect and if I start mentioning my nuisances about something as simple as say safari, it would be a long list too. I hope your post doesn't go to waste and that you do go into the trouble of posting this in the feedback section to apple.

Having said that there's always that fine line between offering options and making too many options available for the end user that will ultimately confuse, I don't think most of your points fall in the latter category, but I am just saying it's an important consideration.

Apple have indeed entered an important stage in their history, they might develop or they might become complacent.

But it's important that public forums are places were people can post some of their valid day to day nuisances with using os x and apple products. I don't agree with everything you are saying, I might not be well versed with all the problems you are mentioning, but it's important that you mention them.

It's sad though that such quality posting amounts to about 5% of this thread, and I am being generous.

And I am asking you this. If apple are showing signs of becoming complacent then what about sites such as this one who are riding the coattails of apple's success? If people who are supposedly close to apple as a community of users, and who are making a fair amount of cash along side, do not safeguard these forums and instead start topic discussions relaying sensationalist, misleading news, from other sites, with not even a semblance of analysis, with not even rudimentary attention to the type of discussion they foster, how much are they helping the user and the user's experience with their devices? If you think apple don't care about what you said, ask these guys here how much they care about it.

Today we 've had one misleading fud post on the availability of flash on the air, and another fud piece on 32 vs. 64 bit on ilife. And a galore of hateful and uninformed comments ensued (who would have expected that...). But who cares, there are a few hundred tweets and digs and what have you, and above all publicity and ad monies keep on coming...

If the very same places that are supposed to complement apple in terms of community support are not interested in that, if they are not really interested in making the systems we use better, or setting up the fora for some decent level of criticism apple certainly isn't to blame there.

So give me a climate conducive to criticism and I can be apple's harshest critic, where it matters, and push for what they have to do (as opposed to what I would prefer they did), but put everyone in a climate of snakiness, derision and imbecility and only bad is going to come out of this. And this is very important as apple grows and incorporates lots of younger users and users with a pc mentality. But it's nowhere to be found here it seems, not on the main threads anyway, or if it is it's very well hidden and I can't find it. And these are supposed to be the largest apple forums online, for us "proles" as a frequent poster/troll/(sockpuppet?) said a few posts back.

Anyway, it's probably back to the small fora for myself. At least I tried to give it a go here.:(

zzzzzzzzzzzzz
 
Why not go for 128bit, all the cool keeeeeeds have them, they just don't want to talk about it because they are cooooool!:p

(lol, your post was too funny, thanks for that comedic relief. :D:D:apple:)

There's the 128 bits! Oh noes!!!!!!!!111one

Here's reality: if you're using iLife for a project the NEEDS a 64-bit application, you're doing it wrong.

For serious people. The transition will happen eventually and when it needs to. The reason it hasn't happened yet is because the ONLY people that are going to notice or care are:

1. People who troll forums such as this (like me).

I was trying to think of a second demographic, but none come to mind. I'll start caring about the 64-bit transition about the time that it measurably starts impacting my machine in one way or another. Seriously... this "problem" affects you when you look at your application monitor. That's it. When 32 GB of RAM is standard rather than 2 - 4, I'll start to get annoyed if core apps are still 32-bit.

Until then, I have a life to live. (So says the guy trolling a forum half filled with whiney Windows apologists or guys that measure the quality of their computer based on their processor and TRIM support.)
 
From browsing though this discussion, it seems that most people have no clue about how OSX works and what 64 Bit does.

For information on OSX, you should watch this video: http://chaosradio.ccc.de/24c3_m4v_2303.html

64 Bit allows an application to address more than 4 GB virtual address space (that is not the same as RAM). This is needed when dealing with large data sets and/or with many concurrent threads (thousands). If an application is 64 Bit but does not need it, then there are minor downsides in terms of performance and memory requirements.
 
The announcement of no carbon 64 was made mid 2007. I think that excuse is way past its expiration date. Developers should be able to have 64 bit versions by now, these years later.

Adobe does. Apple doesn't.

Lazy.



On a 64-bit Windows platform I believe a 32-bit app can get up to 3.5GB, though I'm not sure why it doesn't allow the full 4GB.

It depends how you define "get". Windows (like its parent VMS) puts the kernel (and other privileged system code) into the same virtual address space as the userland code. This is a big win since system calls don't have to change context.

However, it also means that kernel and system address space must be reserved in every user process -- which is why the 2 GiB (or 3GiB with /3GB) split is needed.

The same mechanism is used in x64 Windows - but since the virtual address space is so huge is doesn't matter that a hundred terabytes or so is reserved for the OS.


When 32 GB of RAM is standard rather than 2 - 4, I'll start to get annoyed if core apps are still 32-bit.

I'll be annoyed whenever any app that could benefit 64-bit addressing ships as a 32-bit app, regardless of my default memory config. (I'm thinking of spreadsheets with millions of rows here....)
 
I'll be annoyed whenever any app that could benefit 64-bit addressing ships as a 32-bit app, regardless of my default memory config. (I'm thinking of spreadsheets with millions of rows here....)

Don't forget the documents with 1000+ pages. Seriously, I never thought documents of any size would render Macs and/or PCs helpless but the recent batch that I've been working with have been killer for these machines with 4GB of RAM, and the apps only able to use half that.

These are just documents . . . not my standard hi def footage/photos. I don't think I'll be using much of the iLife suite anymore, but it would have been nice to see Apple starting toward an all 64bit software lineup. I will assume that iWork won't be 64bit and that means that Final Cut Studio will take even longer to be 64bit.
 
Good grief. Where did people get the idea that 64-bit is going to change their computing world?

From Apple?


;)

(Hmmm. More than 7 years ago, and Apple's flagship apps are still 32-bit.)


Don't forget the documents with 1000+ pages. Seriously, I never thought documents of any size would render Macs and/or PCs helpless but the recent batch that I've been working with have been killer for these machines with 4GB of RAM, and the apps only able to use half that.

Good point - I haven't hit those yet....
 
No Emulation

Problem is our CPU are 64 bit but more importantly the OS is 64 bit.
No, all desktop systems use by default the 32-Bit kernel. Only Apples Xserve computers use by default the 64-Bit kernel.

This means to run a 32 bit app it requires having a emulation layer for the app to run int. A 32 bit app can not run naively in a 64 bit OS so the OS emulates a 32 bit OS for it. Pretty much it adds a fair amount of over head to the program because of the emulation layer.

No, Mac OS X uses separate 32-Bit/64-Bit libraries depending on the code, which calls functions from these libraries. The processors have separate execution units for 32-Bit and 64-Bit code.

So everywhere you look, you do not find an emulation layer. You are misinformed. Try Wikipedia or Apples developer documention to get more information!
 
Nothing new here. Rodimus comes in, drops a load of clueless nonsense to spread FUD, gets pointed out, wraps up his tail and is nowhere to be seen afterwards. :p

The real scandal about iLife '11 is not the lack of 64 bit. It is the lack of an iWeb update :mad:
 
iMovie is a particularly sad case

With the prevalence of HD camcorders and still cameras that can shoot HD AVCHD video, I would think that, like me, many consumers would want to edit AVCHD video in iMovie. Not to make an epic movie. Just to trim the videos, add some titles and transitions, and do some general cleanup.

As far as I can find, iMovie 11 still can't edit AVCHD natively. It (and Final Cut Express) have to convert AVCHD to AIC with a ca. 10 fold increase in file size. So a simple 10 minute long 4 gB video becomes nearly 40 gB.

Wouldn't that conversion and the subsequent editing benefit from 64 bit operation?
 
With the prevalence of HD camcorders and still cameras that can shoot HD AVCHD video, I would think that, like me, many consumers would want to edit AVCHD video in iMovie. Not to make an epic movie. Just to trim the videos, add some titles and transitions, and do some general cleanup.

As far as I can find, iMovie 11 still can't edit AVCHD natively. It (and Final Cut Express) have to convert AVCHD to AIC with a ca. 10 fold increase in file size. So a simple 10 minute long 4 gB video becomes nearly 40 gB.

Wouldn't that conversion and the subsequent editing benefit from 64 bit operation?

Yes, iMovie would GREATLY benefit from 64-bit. So would iPhoto and GarageBand.

Apple also needs to fully realize 64-bit on everything else: iTunes, Final Cut Pro, etc....
 
This is a major random guess but I'm assuming since many of the applications rely on Webkit maybe they're waiting till Webkit2 (which breaks API/ABI compatibility) is finalised then move to Webkit2 and 64bit at the same time - hit two birds with one stone rather than doing a piecemeal transition. It makes a whole lot more sense if it requires a major disruptive change to do the lot at once rather than having a couple of releases which break something with each release.
 
But...But...But....My iPhoto library NEEDS 281,474,976,710,656 yobibytes of RAM!!!!

128bit or death!!!

You talk like someone who doesn't have 256 bits on their ilives, you are not cooooool like some kid I know who s got 512 bits. I want 1024 bits but I m not cool and my iLife has 32bit, apple stole the 32bit from it. Steve Jobs has the most bits in his iLife cause he stole from all of us, wake up kids, let's get our cool bits back from the thief Steve.
 
Adobe does. Apple doesn't.

Lazy.





It depends how you define "get". Windows (like its parent VMS) puts the kernel (and other privileged system code) into the same virtual address space as the userland code. This is a big win since system calls don't have to change context.

However, it also means that kernel and system address space must be reserved in every user process -- which is why the 2 GiB (or 3GiB with /3GB) split is needed.

The same mechanism is used in x64 Windows - but since the virtual address space is so huge is doesn't matter that a hundred terabytes or so is reserved for the OS.




I'll be annoyed whenever any app that could benefit 64-bit addressing ships as a 32-bit app, regardless of my default memory config. (I'm thinking of spreadsheets with millions of rows here....)

You ve always looked to me like that guy with the spreadsheets with the millions upon millions of rows, aiden, that guy with the millions of rows who mulls over cell a5 on a font issue. Remind me to have Steve ship you over these apple super computers from caltech or somewhere, it seems you need your bits more than any of us. Btw, go for arial 12pts, safe choice. Boy I feel like a good Samaritan, I just saved you a few good months of work, you can now move to a6 pronto.
 
Nothing new here. Rodimus comes in, drops a load of clueless nonsense to spread FUD, gets pointed out, wraps up his tail and is nowhere to be seen afterwards. :p

The real scandal about iLife '11 is not the lack of 64 bit. It is the lack of an iWeb update :mad:

People actually use iWeb?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.