Comments on: Myths of Snow Leopard 2: 32-bit Support

By: Road to Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard: 64-Bits — RoughlyDrafted Magazine

Road to Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard: 64-Bits — RoughlyDrafted Magazine — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 21:46:13 +0000

[...] supplied a 64-bit version of libsystem, the system library handling most of its Unix APIs. This followed the LP64 model to allow broad compatibility with 64-bit versions of Linux and commercial Unix. It also delivered a [...]

By: metromacs blog » Blog Archive » Road to Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard: 64-Bits

Thu, 28 Aug 2008 12:59:40 +0000

[...] a 64-bit version of libsystem, the system library handling most of its Unix APIs. This followed the LP64 model to allow broad compatibility with 64-bit versions of Linux and commercial Unix. It also [...]

By: ulric

ulric — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 22:14:23 +0000

@danieleran
That article on techtarget.com is poorly worded: Wow64 is not an “emulator”. It is a 32-bit sub-system that forwards the Win32 API calls to the 64-bit API. The instructions are not emulated and run-time performance is not affected as the word suggests.

There is no mesurable lost in applications speed, whether games or business, which makes sense, since most common applications will be 32-bit for a long time.

Why did Microsoft make a separate 64-bit version Window SKU? It was to make a clean break with the old driver models and some obsolete API, old shell extensions, etc. The 64-bit version is more secure and fixes some holes. It was to do exactly what people are asking them to do: make a clean break with some of the oldest things. They also dropped all support for DOS and 16-bit windows application in Windows 64-bit.

It is precisly part of the plan that people will be gradually buying new machines with Vista 64-bit. That’s how you deal with a very large user base.

If windows 64-bit still ran all the 32-bit old drivers and old DOS apps, then you’d complain that Windows is held back by all the backward compatibility it needs to do. If they breaks it, then you complain it isn’t as backward compatible..

Leopard is not a true 64-bit operating system, the kernel is still 32-bit, that’s how they “remain compatible”.

I’d also point out that Apple makes no 64-bit applications, none at all, including their FCP suite. I’m only aware of Houdini for OS X being 64-bit. On Windows, all the majors CAD, multimedia, and video (Autodesk, Avid, Avid, Softimage, Maxxon Cinema 64, NewTek) are 64-bit. Pretty much all the drivers you need including graphics drivers are there in 64-bit form. 64-bit was really made for these markets, and server-side. It’s ok if the consumer doesn’t jump on 64-bit immediately.

By: Myths of Snow Leopard 1: PowerPC Support — RoughlyDrafted Magazine

Myths of Snow Leopard 1: PowerPC Support — RoughlyDrafted Magazine — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 13:39:54 +0000

[...] have panicked that Snow Leopard will kill support for even 32-bit Intel Macs. That is addressed in Myths of Snow Leopard 2: 32-bit Support. [Update: Warren Gish forwarded the following comment on PowerPC and 64-bit computing in Snow [...]

By: Myths of Snow Leopard 5: No Carbon! — RoughlyDrafted Magazine

Myths of Snow Leopard 5: No Carbon! — RoughlyDrafted Magazine — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 13:26:41 +0000

[...] Myths of Snow Leopard 2: 32-bit Support [...]

By: Felix

Felix — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 21:29:17 +0000

Actually, there’s at least a third app running on 64 bits on Leopard: httpd (Apache’s daemon).

By: Ephilei

Ephilei — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 21:38:54 +0000

Chess?!

I thought 32bit only supported 4GB RAM, not the 32GB in the article

By: neoanderthal

neoanderthal — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 14:39:08 +0000

I understand what you’re saying - and there’s no arguing with the technical details of the 32-bit & 64-bit implementation on windows. I will say, however, that I’ve not yet run into any application or game that would not run on Windows 64-bit. It doesn’t do this in any way that is reminiscent of the ‘classic’ mode on PPC Mac OS X - you just run the program. From a standpoint of simply running applications, it *seems* seamless, regardless of what sort of chicanery is going on in the background.
It’s all good and well to read someone else’s theories as to the problems that may crop up, but i’m relating my personal, empirical day-to-day experience with CS3, Office, games like Quake Wars, Hellgate:London, DDO:Stormreach, Diablo 2, Psychonauts, KOTOR/KOTOR 2, etc.
It’s not an elegant solution, to be sure. There’s no way Windows could have a seamless 32/64 library, as too many installers mess around with DLLS, and that would definitely be a problem. This points to a superiority in design of OS X, certainly.
I am no fan of Windows, but I am a fan of real experience versus theoretical discussion.

By: Myths of Snow Leopard 2: 32-bit Support | Stan's List

Myths of Snow Leopard 2: 32-bit Support | Stan's List — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 04:38:47 +0000

[...] RoughlyDrafted has an excellent article on whether Snow Leopard will support PPC Macs or early 32-bit Intel Macs. In laying out the arguments, the magazine starts from what may seem an unrelated quote from Mary Jo Foley: [...]

By: danieleran

danieleran — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:14:25 +0000

@ neoanderthal: Being able to run some or even most 32-bit apps on x64 Windows Server is not the same as being able to seamlessly run 32-bit apps on 64-bit Windows.

This article explains in part why running standard apps on 64-bit Windows is frustrating and problematic:

“The x64 version of Windows is not capable of natively running 32-bit code. Because most applications are 32-bit, the x64 version of Windows makes use of an emulator known as WOW64 to allow 32-bit applications to run.”

“One of the problems with running 32-bit code on a 64-bit operating system is that the OS must maintain complete code separation. Microsoft has created a new folder named \Windows\SysWOW64 that is used to store the 32-bit DLLs. In the 32-bit version of Windows, DLL files are normally stored in the \windows\system32 folder. However, the x64 version of Windows uses the \windows\system32 folder for 64-bit DLLs.”

I dare you to rename your System32 folder on a regular PC. 64-bit Windows does just that. Boom. You just never know exactly when its going to flip out.

http://searchwincomputing.techtarget.com/tip/0,289483,sid68_gci1218185,00.html