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.
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.
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?
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
The "Kind" column.
In that case, all the apps you're running are 32bit. Here's an example -- all the processes apart from "fdcode" are 32bit intel.