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

tmelvin

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Mar 17, 2008
343
0
Okay, I'm confused [easy I know]. I was under the impression that OS X [Leopard] is 64 Bit. But I just read an article on MacWorld, and it states that the next version of OS X [Snow Leopard] will be 64 Bit? Isn't it already???
 
No, Snow Leopard will still be both. The thing is that all but two (Xcode, Chess) of the included apps on Leopard are 32 bit only.
 
Thanks for all those that replied. It makes sense now...
 
Thanks again. I guess it's safe to assume that the OS itself is 64 bit though...
 
Why would it matter? If the OS supports both 32bit and 64bit, then it's all good. Whichever application really needs 64bit it can already benefit from it, but those parts which don't benefit from it don't waste memory for nothing.

It's a very different story than the 16/32bit transition. Currently, 32 bits is more than enough for "almost everything"; those who benefit from 64 bits know that they do.

I would be more interested in whichever way applications are coded; I mean, are they still the classic carbon code or modern cocoa. This is a far more important transition than 32 to 64 bits which is mostly marketing nonsense.
 
Why would it matter? If the OS supports both 32bit and 64bit, then it's all good. Whichever application really needs 64bit it can already benefit from it, but those parts which don't benefit from it don't waste memory for nothing.

It's a very different story than the 16/32bit transition. Currently, 32 bits is more than enough for "almost everything"; those who benefit from 64 bits know that they do.

I would be more interested in whichever way applications are coded; I mean, are they still the classic carbon code or modern cocoa. This is a far more important transition than 32 to 64 bits which is mostly marketing nonsense.

Apple is dropping 64 bit for Carbon.
 
Odd thing -- I've checked Xcode, and it contains a 64bit copy inside, however when I launch it, Activity Monitor reports that a 32 bit application ("intel" as opposed to "intel (64 bit)") is running. Any idea why?
 
Odd thing -- I've checked Xcode, and it contains a 64bit copy inside, however when I launch it, Activity Monitor reports that a 32 bit application ("intel" as opposed to "intel (64 bit)") is running. Any idea why?

The hardware of only more recent intel macs are capable of 64bit.
 
Well, since my MBP is fairly recent (bought March '08) and it runs other 64bit applications (some commercial, others self-compiled), there should be no problem in that aspect.
 
Apache 2 is also 64 bit on OS X, but that's the only program from the OS distribution that's showing as 64 bit on Activity Monitor at the moment
 
In that case, all the apps you're running are 32bit. Here's an example -- all the processes apart from "fdcode" are 32bit intel.
 

Attachments

  • Picture 6.png
    Picture 6.png
    24.5 KB · Views: 95
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.