64 bit Tiger

[johnnyluu]

So who thinks Tiger being 64 bit will make any difference to us G5 powermac users?

I'm not convinced just yet.

 

[dtravis7]

So who thinks Tiger being 64 bit will make any difference to us G5 powermac users?

I'm not convinced just yet.

Unless you use 64Bit applications it will not do a thing. I am glad it's there just like the AMD 64, but until more applications are written in 64 Bit, you will not see any difference.

So many say AMD 64! The 64 Bit makes it faster. Nope. Not right now, what people are seeing is the better 32 bit performance and On Die Memory controler but everyone is so fast to credit the 64 bit instructions. In the future that will be true and if you use 64 Bit Linux and Applications, but for most people using 32 Bit Code, the 64 bit will not benefit them in the least. It's nice it's there and I hope more Software people code 64 Bit applications in the future.

 

[inflexion]

it could be worse as most people still use a 16bit boot strap for installing M$ programs least stuff aint that bad

 

[D3v1L80Y]

Unless you use 64Bit applications it will not do a thing. I am glad it's there just like the AMD 64, but until more applications are written in 64 Bit, you will not see any difference.

My sentiments exactly. At the moment if you are using Tiger on a G5, without the 64 bit apps, then your G5 is the proverbial cart before the horse. You aren't going to notice anyting or get any real benefit until there are more applications designed to utilize the technology.

 

[MadSkillzMan]

Lemme ask this, could you run a 64bit app when running a 32bit osx?

Also, will the DVD include both versions? or will in the store would i have to find the 32 bit for a G4 and a 64bit for the G5?

And if i compile my apps via portage for osx, will they compile in 64bit code? Ive never thought about that actually.

 

[trpnmonkey41]

It is the same OS just if it detects a 64 bit processor it can use the 64 bit processor.

64 bit app's when released will probably be able to work down to 32 bit just like USB2 things can work on slower USB1

 

[Kokopelli]

Applications compiled only for 64 bit systems will not run on 32 bit systems. The way Apple is getting around this is by using fat binaries. In essence the application stores both the 32 bit and 64 bit executables and uses whichever is appropriate for your computer. i.e. 64 bit for G5s and 32 bit for G4s. Reference (see "Chameleon Code"): http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/64bit/


While systems level programming is not my forte, I am given to understand that if an application can run in a 32 bit memory space (4GB) then you are better off using the 32 bit binaries. In essence 64 bits does not gain you much with the exception of a much larger virtual memory space. Most math functions can already take advantage of 64 bit processors in Panther, so the changes in Tiger do not improve upon that. People, programmers and non-programmers alike, seem to think 64 bit applications are a magic bullet for performance. Statements from people smarter than I seem to indicate compilation for 64bit architectures does not in and of itself increase performance in most cases.

 

[technologist]

Another peculiarity is that Tiger does not allow for 64-bit GUI applications. Meaning that 64-bit Mac application will need a 32-bit "front end" that presents the user interface, and a 64-bit backend that takes advantage of the 64-bit memory space and such.

When we do start getting 64-bit apps, they will probably include a 32-bit frontend that starts either a 64- or 32-bit backend, depending on whether it's running on a G4 or G5.

http://developer.apple.com/macosx/tiger/64bit.html