The title says the question. Do you think any of these apps will take advantage of Tigers 64-bit arch? As of right now, I am thinking not.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
is iLife 05' 64-bit?
- Thread starter wwooden
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I wouldn't count on it, and it's not as if it would be a massive performance boost for the 64-bit CPU's - they can typically bundle 2 32-bit integer STORE/FETCH instructions together.
Let's see have iLife 2005 be 64-bit and have all the G5 users take advantage or it or have iLife 2005 32-bit and sell more copies to G3, G4 and G5 users.
This is a hard one.
iLife 2005 is 32-bit that is logical.
This is a hard one.
iLife 2005 is 32-bit that is logical.
i highly doubt it, then ppl with g3 and g4 would have a dog application set to work with, maybe i life 06 but not 05 its too soon
Wouldn't high end apps like Final Cut Pro HD be converted to 64bit first? rather than low end crap that won't make a diff whether its 32bit or 64bit
I know they are not 64-bit right now, maybe the next version will be. It just seems weird to me that they are designing Tiger to be 64-bit and I would think they would try to make some of their programs that way too. I know they will function in Tiger either way, that's not what I am worried about. I suppose you are right that they would change the high-end apps first, the ones that would take advantage of it the most.
I got a kick out of this.
http://developer.apple.com/document...SWDesign/PortingTips/chapter_8_section_4.html
"Unless your program needs more than 4 GB of addressable memory, supporting 64-bit pointers may only reduce the performance of your application."
http://developer.apple.com/document...SWDesign/PortingTips/chapter_8_section_4.html
"Unless your program needs more than 4 GB of addressable memory, supporting 64-bit pointers may only reduce the performance of your application."
Spock said:
It reminds me more of the 8 to 16-bit transition.
CP/M applications that fit into 64 KB suddenly needed 128 KB to work on an IBM PC and they were slower.On the other side, going from the 6502/6510 to the 68000 was much better since the 65xx series had so few instructions. Now, I've heard the 6502 called the original RISC processor but back then, it was just short on convenience.
"Brother, can you spare a BRA?"
I doubt that Apple put much more than marginal 64-bit compatibility into iLife 2005, just so they could take advantage of the memory space.
kingjr3 said:
ROTFL, when any application actually needs 4Gigs of memory Apple will give you 2Gigs stock.
That said when applications need 4GB of memory we will not be using a G5 at that point a G6+ or something.
Bigheadache said:
No point of even the Apple Pro applications to go 64-bit, if you look at the specs for FCP HD it doesn't even need 1Gig of ram or a G5 to run smooth.
I can see "Motion" might be the first, however the rest are fine at 32-bit.