That would be nice, if I had enough money to buy 4 iDevices to connect to a single ATV.
Because you alone can use four of them at once? NO. Because your friends come over with their own iOS devices and you play some effing games together. Heck, quoted below PROVES you don’t mean that, so why would you even say it at all?!
Besides, as I said when friends do come over and we are able to use multiple iDevices on a single ATV using AirPlay it LAGS!
Yeah, that can’t possibly change in the future ever at any time for any reason.
Because you alone can use four of them at once? NO. Because your friends come over with their own iOS devices and you play some effing games together. Heck, quoted below PROVES you don’t mean that, so why would you even say it at all?!
Yeah, that can’t possibly change in the future ever at any time for any reason.
True I alone can't use 4 of them, however not everyone likes Apple and is willing to throw down a couple hundred for even an iPod touch, therefore providing the controllers necessary to play would be nice. I even admit in an earlier post that Apple may come out with an update that fixes the lag. lol. I know it was only a couple hours ago, but try and remember. On top of all of this, for us to all play the same game, we all have to buy it separately.
The thing I don't understand is why you are arguing with me. My original post was only to point out that Apple has taken actions that could be viewed as an attempt to enter the console gaming market. I am not saying it's not possible to game on a TV using existing Apple products and technologies, only that the way it is currently setup makes it exceedingly difficult when compared to other dedicated consoles. lol. If Apple is serious about the Living Room market it would only make sense to try and alleviate some of these issues.
Specifically the Year 2038 bug. I honestly DO believe that there will be a large number of 32-bit machines and software, Windows or otherwise, left in important use in 2038. Mostly because Microsoft refuses to actually do anything for the betterment of mankind.
Isn't Mac OS the only OS to take advantage of this, like most windows still run 32 bit, so apple not only has its macs superior but its much less powerful IOS device to become more powerful than average anything else... I'm loving it... Apple really is taking its competition out, with this plus finger printing, and a new coprocessor that all 3 will be on there own android devices (android splits it featured per phone) and kill market.
Isn't Mac OS the only OS to take advantage of this, like most windows still run 32 bit, so apple not only has its macs superior but its much less powerful IOS device to become more powerful than average anything else... I'm loving it... Apple really is taking its competition out, with this plus finger printing, and a new coprocessor that all 3 will be on there own android devices (android splits it featured per phone) and kill market.
Windows has published both 64 bit and 32 bit builds since at least Vista, and Linux distributions were fully ported to x86_64 before either OS X or Windows. For a while Windows still had a few 32-bit userland utilities. OS X transitioned to a 64 bit kernel with the release of snow leopard in '09.
Sure it is irrelevant but not because of what you think. The fact is Apple is on a different path than Android, Android could stay 32 bits forever and it wouldn't matter for either platform. Android won't of course for the same reason Apple hasn't, and that is because it is an excessive limitation for the platform.
I actually don't think about Google's Android plans at all. High-end Android phones will obviously suffer should the platform stay 32-bit.
"Excessive limitation" is quite a strong statement. The PC stayed 32-bit for almost two decades. Actually, Microsoft managed to successfully move to 64-bits with Win7 in 2009 (excluding 64-bit servers, 32-bit Vista ran much better than 64-bit). 64-bit processors for consumer electronics are available since 2000.
And, as I stated in an earlier post, 32-bit CPUs can address more than 4GB of RAM. I am not sure if ARM architecture supports it, but Intel's x86 does. Actually, even the 16-bit 80286 CPU was able to address 16MB RAM (24-bit addressing). So, 32-bit architecture is a huge inconvenience, but not a limitation.
Now, as a few people pointed out, the extended memory range is great since it allows mapping of files greater than 4GB in memory and seamlessly access them as if they were fully loaded into memory, i.e. improved access to resources. With 32-bit architecture that will require splitting resources into separate 4GB blocks, i.e. more code on the developer side, more possibilities for errors, etc. But, that's inconvenience, not a limitation.
Quote:
That idea that Mac OS runs fine on just 2GB is false and obviously so. It has been well known for years now that 2GB is a minimal allotment of RAM for Mac OS.
The OS requires around 1GB. Watching movies, browsing, image editing (not the Pro software, though), etc, manage to fit in an additional 1GB.
Heavy-weight tasks require more RAM, of course. I've been doing iOS development on 4GB of RAM for quite some time (until mid 2012), and didn't have issues with the system performance. And I'm usually running quite a few applications at once - 30+ browser tabs, playing a movie, and debugging at the same time.
Quote:
While I can't argue that Androids are often sold to the spec obsessed, the funny thing here is that most of those phones are terrible performers compared to iPhones. Some people seem to not grasp the difference between real world usability and performance vs the spec sheet. As to necessity you do mis one thing, in the beginning Android phones actually did need that extra RAM verses the iPhone to work correctly.
I can't argue about Android's awful resource utilisation. Android still needs more RAM, and still needs more CPU, and still cannot achieve parity. That, however, does not change the fact, that 4GB of RAM is huge.
Nowadays, we've seem to have lost the idea how much 1GB of RAM actually is. My first computer had 4MB of RAM and 80MB HDD ...
What!? No more "all knowing" comments while clearly not reading or remembering what was said. lol I really was wondering why you were arguing with me. O well, I guess you're the reason people hate Apple fans. ROFL
What!? No more "all knowing" comments while clearly not reading or remembering what was said.
You can read the posts. They’re literally right there above you. Click the links and trace the line backward. Stop acting like an idiot, stop pretending you need your hand held through understanding the English language. Siri is better at conversational context than you have exhibited here.
Terrible, baseless FUD on Android. 64-bit mobile ARM processors have been in the pipeline for a long time. Everyone in the industry has known this because ARM are very good at communication their long-term strategy. If you don't think that Google has been aware of this coming event for many years then you're highly deluded. Google and ARM both have large dev teams in the UK and there's a lot of staff who've worked for both organisations.
I'm certain that Google has been building and testing a 64-bit version of Android for years, just like they've been doing with their x86 port.
If they have been testingit(Google) for long peri end of time, the. They have not got it right to work. So use forward thinking sorry
"Terrible, baseless FUD on Android. 64-bit mobile ARM processors have been in the pipeline for a long time." So, please do tell us which Android (or other OS) based phones are using 64 bit processors right now . Go ahead, we'll wait.
One of the beautiful things about Apple and iOS? One company, one device. Android? Don't even get me started. That water is so muddied that it's just bad, bad news. IF they ever get to the 64 bit area, it'll be quite a bit down the road. Yet another victory for Apple.
Now, what will the benefits to this 64 bit changeup be? Truth be told, we do not know. Most apps won't care, because, for now, we'be just got one device running it. Get the next gen iPod, iPad, iPad mini, and a couple generations down the road running x64 and we'll be seeing more and more and more apps working with this, utilizing this.
This is a good thing hardware wise, as well. It shows that Apple is thinking forward, instead of being stuck in 32 bit mode, with smaller memory limits (not that they've hit them yet, by any means). We'll just have to wait and see how this turns out
Just a note ARMv7 supports 48 bit addressing via PAE...so 4 gigs wouldn't be the limit. Android phones could indeed use over 4 gigs, so that's not an excuse to jump on the 64 bit bandwagon... However their is a 4 gig limit per process
honestly, just "no, wrong." the major improvements in the 5s camera software image processing alone simply would not be possible without the 64 bit computation power. now, we can't see with our own eyes how much a difference they make until this weekend so, yes, the jury is still out. but taking photos is certainly one of the top 3 uses of smartphones, and enabling "dummies" like me to get really good pix under all conditions - lighting is usually far less than optimal - without any extra effort is extraordinarily important for consumers.
you're really missing the point. what matters most of all is what us "dummy" users - not you engineers - never have to even think about, because it Just Works.
An 8M picture doesn't need 64 bits. In any case picture manipulation is best done on the GPU. Try playing a game on the 64 bit CPU in your mac if you doubt that.
The 64 bit GPU might be overpowering the GPU refinements which are more interesting.
"64-bit mobile ARM processors have been in the pipeline for a long time" is somewhat true, but you're missing the fact that they were targeting server applications. Nobody had any inkling of putting a 64-bit SoC in a phone.
That's why the tech media refused to believe it was real, and why exVPs from AMD rushed out to say it was hogwash and made no sense to attempt.
If you've been paying attention, you'll recall this all happened before when Apple released the iPhone. RIM BB & Microsoft scoffed at the idea of putting a desktop OS on a high end mobile phone. A mixture of contempt and disbelief.
Also: does Google have its own x86 port of Android or was that just an effort by Intel to enter the mobile market? Who uses it?
(Crickets)
Android is already running on 64-bit intel & MIPS architecture. I admit that outside prototypes and a few low-scale experiments there is no real hardware to speak of but the software support has been available for over a year.
"64-bit mobile ARM processors have been in the pipeline for a long time" is somewhat true, but you're missing the fact that they were targeting server applications. Nobody had any inkling of putting a 64-bit SoC in a phone.
That's why the tech media refused to believe it was real, and why exVPs from AMD rushed out to say it was hogwash and made no sense to attempt.
If you've been paying attention, you'll recall this all happened before when Apple released the iPhone. RIM BB & Microsoft scoffed at the idea of putting a desktop OS on a high end mobile phone. A mixture of contempt and disbelief.
Also: does Google have its own x86 port of Android or was that just an effort by Intel to enter the mobile market? Who uses it?
(Crickets)
Instead of "(Crickets)" you also could've ended your post with a picture of a fat lady singing¡
Of course ARM (a corp co-founded by Apple and Acorn Computer) discuss a lots with their partner, since they doesn't sold any hardware, they only licences their hardware to anyone who want to mfg. Problem is Google doesn't do any ARM development internally, they got no production hardware to work on a 64 bit version of Android and Samsung and Qualcomm, 2 of the most prominent ARM SoC maker chooses the cores multiplication way, look at the Exynos 5 Octa non-sense.
Google has never designed/manufactured a CPU still they own 80% of the smartphone market, what are you trying to imply with your post?
ARMv8 has been available to everyone since 2011, Apple didn't design it. They didn'tmanufacture it (TSMC did back in April)
Just a note ARMv7 supports 48 bit addressing via PAE...so 4 gigs wouldn't be the limit. Android phones could indeed use over 4 gigs, so that's not an excuse to jump on the 64 bit bandwagon... However their is a 4 gig limit per process
Actually, I believe it's 40 bit addressing (1TB).
And it is already running on all 2013 Android smartphones such as Galaxy S4 and HTC One. Maybe even last years Galaxy S3.
Wrong. It has already been stated that Kit Kat, Android's soon to be released new version, will have 64 bit support and Samsung clearly stated its next phone, likely the Galaxy S5, will have a 64 bit processor. These don't happen overnight. They've already been working on them before the iPhone and iOS announcements.
Kit Kat "will have 64-bit support".
iOS7 runs in 64-bit.
One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just doesn't belong.
One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just doesn't belong.
I've never seen Google comment on Kit-Kat 64-bit support anyway. With the latest Nexus reference smartphone supposedly being released within a very few weeks Kit Kat is probably complete for all intents. Besides, something like a 64-bit build would likely be a 5.x update rather than a continuation of 4.x. IMO. Just like with NFC or Thunderbolt there's no urgent need for it at the moment nor do I expect to see a 64-bit Android version in the next few months.
Comments
Because you alone can use four of them at once? NO. Because your friends come over with their own iOS devices and you play some effing games together. Heck, quoted below PROVES you don’t mean that, so why would you even say it at all?!
Yeah, that can’t possibly change in the future ever at any time for any reason.
Because you alone can use four of them at once? NO. Because your friends come over with their own iOS devices and you play some effing games together. Heck, quoted below PROVES you don’t mean that, so why would you even say it at all?!
Yeah, that can’t possibly change in the future ever at any time for any reason.
True I alone can't use 4 of them, however not everyone likes Apple and is willing to throw down a couple hundred for even an iPod touch, therefore providing the controllers necessary to play would be nice. I even admit in an earlier post that Apple may come out with an update that fixes the lag. lol. I know it was only a couple hours ago, but try and remember. On top of all of this, for us to all play the same game, we all have to buy it separately.
The thing I don't understand is why you are arguing with me. My original post was only to point out that Apple has taken actions that could be viewed as an attempt to enter the console gaming market. I am not saying it's not possible to game on a TV using existing Apple products and technologies, only that the way it is currently setup makes it exceedingly difficult when compared to other dedicated consoles. lol. If Apple is serious about the Living Room market it would only make sense to try and alleviate some of these issues.
Easily solved. Just invent time travel and send an agent back. It's the simplest solution to the 2038 problem!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Titor
Isn't Mac OS the only OS to take advantage of this, like most windows still run 32 bit, so apple not only has its macs superior but its much less powerful IOS device to become more powerful than average anything else... I'm loving it... Apple really is taking its competition out, with this plus finger printing, and a new coprocessor that all 3 will be on there own android devices (android splits it featured per phone) and kill market.
Windows has published both 64 bit and 32 bit builds since at least Vista, and Linux distributions were fully ported to x86_64 before either OS X or Windows. For a while Windows still had a few 32-bit userland utilities. OS X transitioned to a 64 bit kernel with the release of snow leopard in '09.
I there any book called "64-bit for Dummies"? I need it!
Sure it is irrelevant but not because of what you think. The fact is Apple is on a different path than Android, Android could stay 32 bits forever and it wouldn't matter for either platform. Android won't of course for the same reason Apple hasn't, and that is because it is an excessive limitation for the platform.
I actually don't think about Google's Android plans at all. High-end Android phones will obviously suffer should the platform stay 32-bit.
"Excessive limitation" is quite a strong statement. The PC stayed 32-bit for almost two decades. Actually, Microsoft managed to successfully move to 64-bits with Win7 in 2009 (excluding 64-bit servers, 32-bit Vista ran much better than 64-bit). 64-bit processors for consumer electronics are available since 2000.
And, as I stated in an earlier post, 32-bit CPUs can address more than 4GB of RAM. I am not sure if ARM architecture supports it, but Intel's x86 does. Actually, even the 16-bit 80286 CPU was able to address 16MB RAM (24-bit addressing). So, 32-bit architecture is a huge inconvenience, but not a limitation.
Now, as a few people pointed out, the extended memory range is great since it allows mapping of files greater than 4GB in memory and seamlessly access them as if they were fully loaded into memory, i.e. improved access to resources. With 32-bit architecture that will require splitting resources into separate 4GB blocks, i.e. more code on the developer side, more possibilities for errors, etc. But, that's inconvenience, not a limitation.
The OS requires around 1GB. Watching movies, browsing, image editing (not the Pro software, though), etc, manage to fit in an additional 1GB.
Heavy-weight tasks require more RAM, of course. I've been doing iOS development on 4GB of RAM for quite some time (until mid 2012), and didn't have issues with the system performance. And I'm usually running quite a few applications at once - 30+ browser tabs, playing a movie, and debugging at the same time.
I can't argue about Android's awful resource utilisation. Android still needs more RAM, and still needs more CPU, and still cannot achieve parity. That, however, does not change the fact, that 4GB of RAM is huge.
Nowadays, we've seem to have lost the idea how much 1GB of RAM actually is. My first computer had 4MB of RAM and 80MB HDD ...
What!? No more "all knowing" comments while clearly not reading or remembering what was said. lol I really was wondering why you were arguing with me. O well, I guess you're the reason people hate Apple fans. ROFL
What!? No more "all knowing" comments while clearly not reading or remembering what was said.
You can read the posts. They’re literally right there above you. Click the links and trace the line backward. Stop acting like an idiot, stop pretending you need your hand held through understanding the English language. Siri is better at conversational context than you have exhibited here.
So, please do tell us which Android (or other OS) based phones are using 64 bit processors right now . Go ahead, we'll wait.
One of the beautiful things about Apple and iOS? One company, one device. Android? Don't even get me started. That water is so muddied that it's just bad, bad news. IF they ever get to the 64 bit area, it'll be quite a bit down the road. Yet another victory for Apple.
Now, what will the benefits to this 64 bit changeup be? Truth be told, we do not know. Most apps won't care, because, for now, we'be just got one device running it. Get the next gen iPod, iPad, iPad mini, and a couple generations down the road running x64 and we'll be seeing more and more and more apps working with this, utilizing this.
This is a good thing hardware wise, as well. It shows that Apple is thinking forward, instead of being stuck in 32 bit mode, with smaller memory limits (not that they've hit them yet, by any means). We'll just have to wait and see how this turns out
An 8M picture doesn't need 64 bits. In any case picture manipulation is best done on the GPU. Try playing a game on the 64 bit CPU in your mac if you doubt that.
The 64 bit GPU might be overpowering the GPU refinements which are more interesting.
"64-bit mobile ARM processors have been in the pipeline for a long time" is somewhat true, but you're missing the fact that they were targeting server applications. Nobody had any inkling of putting a 64-bit SoC in a phone.
That's why the tech media refused to believe it was real, and why exVPs from AMD rushed out to say it was hogwash and made no sense to attempt.
If you've been paying attention, you'll recall this all happened before when Apple released the iPhone. RIM BB & Microsoft scoffed at the idea of putting a desktop OS on a high end mobile phone. A mixture of contempt and disbelief.
Also: does Google have its own x86 port of Android or was that just an effort by Intel to enter the mobile market? Who uses it?
(Crickets)
Android is already running on 64-bit intel & MIPS architecture. I admit that outside prototypes and a few low-scale experiments there is no real hardware to speak of but the software support has been available for over a year.
Instead of "(Crickets)" you also could've ended your post with a picture of a fat lady singing¡
Of course ARM (a corp co-founded by Apple and Acorn Computer) discuss a lots with their partner, since they doesn't sold any hardware, they only licences their hardware to anyone who want to mfg. Problem is Google doesn't do any ARM development internally, they got no production hardware to work on a 64 bit version of Android and Samsung and Qualcomm, 2 of the most prominent ARM SoC maker chooses the cores multiplication way, look at the Exynos 5 Octa non-sense.
Google has never designed/manufactured a CPU still they own 80% of the smartphone market, what are you trying to imply with your post?
ARMv8 has been available to everyone since 2011, Apple didn't design it. They didn't manufacture it (TSMC did back in April)
Just a note ARMv7 supports 48 bit addressing via PAE...so 4 gigs wouldn't be the limit. Android phones could indeed use over 4 gigs, so that's not an excuse to jump on the 64 bit bandwagon... However their is a 4 gig limit per process
Wrong. It has already been stated that Kit Kat, Android's soon to be released new version, will have 64 bit support and Samsung clearly stated its next phone, likely the Galaxy S5, will have a 64 bit processor. These don't happen overnight. They've already been working on them before the iPhone and iOS announcements.
Kit Kat "will have 64-bit support".
iOS7 runs in 64-bit.
One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just doesn't belong.
I've never seen Google comment on Kit-Kat 64-bit support anyway. With the latest Nexus reference smartphone supposedly being released within a very few weeks Kit Kat is probably complete for all intents. Besides, something like a 64-bit build would likely be a 5.x update rather than a continuation of 4.x. IMO. Just like with NFC or Thunderbolt there's no urgent need for it at the moment nor do I expect to see a 64-bit Android version in the next few months.