Google launches first 64-bit Chrome Web browser for OS X

Posted:
in Mac Software edited November 2014
Google on Tuesday released Chrome 39, the first stable version of its Web browser to offer 64-bit support for Apple's OS X operating system.




Chrome 39, specifically designated as Chrome 39.0.2171.65, is the first stable build for OS X to support 64-bit processes, promising faster startup times and better memory management features.

With Chrome 39, Google is dropping 32-bit support altogether, meaning owners of older Intel-based Macs will be stuck with Chrome 38. As noted by Computerworld, Apple began switching to Intel's 64-bit architecture in 2006, but did not finish until August 2007.

Apple's iMac line was one of the first to complete the transition to 64-bit Intel in September 2006, with the MacBook Pro following in October and the MacBook in November of that year. The Mac mini switched over in August 2007, while the MacBook Air series has always featured 64-bit silicon.

Aside from Chrome 39's 64-bit capabilities, the browser update addresses 42 security vulnerabilities.

Chrome 39 for Mac OS X 10.6 or higher can be downloaded via Google's website.
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 88
    Note that the OS X kernel didn't start booting as 64-bit until Snow Leopard was released in August 2009.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_Snow_Leopard#Developer_technologies
  • Reply 2 of 88
    Is there a reason it took so long? I can understand Adobe and MS taking years to update their complex Mac apps but Google and web browser taking 8 years since Apple started making the switch seems excessive.
  • Reply 3 of 88
    mpantonempantone Posts: 1,378member

    Interesting, it just crashes on launch. (Running OS X Yosemite 10.10.1)

     

    I foresee a hasty update shortly.

  • Reply 4 of 88
    That's ridiculous that it was still 32-bit. Did it take that long to convert or was supporting older systems that important?
  • Reply 5 of 88
    Is there a reason it took them so long? I can understand Abobe and MS taking years to update their complex Mac apps but Google and a browser doesn't seem like it would take 8 years
    mpantone wrote: »
    Interesting, it just crashes on launch. (Running OS X Yosemite 10.10.1)

    I foresee a hasty update shortly.

    It runs fine for me on a 2013 15' MBP running 10.10.1. I'd try trashing the PLIST files and maybe re-downloading it.
  • Reply 6 of 88
    mpantonempantone Posts: 1,378member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post



    It runs fine for me on a 2013 15' MBP running 10.10.1. I'd try trashing the PLIST files and maybe re-downloading it.



    That might work, but Joe Consumer isn't going to do that. I might try installing it on another Mac running 10.10.1, see if it works.

     

    Not that I really care, Chrome is definitely not my primary browser. I mostly use it when I encounter some website that has Flash content. (The Adobe Flash Player browser plug-in is banned in my house.)

     

    Curiously, I did try the 64-bit Chrome beta a few months ago and did not have to fuss with plists, etc.

  • Reply 7 of 88
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member

    Reminds me of 2004 when I had to run browsers in 32bit mode in 64 bit Linux on an Athlon 64.

     

    The tech industry is as slow as a glacier sometimes. 

  • Reply 8 of 88
    Runs fine on 10.10.1 for me. It's also faster than Safari.
  • Reply 9 of 88

    I've been waiting on this for a long time so I could install Oracle Java from here https://java.com/en/download/index.jsp. However, clicking the download button says "32-bit Chrome does not support Java 7 and later versions on Mac OS X. Java runs only on 64-bit browsers."

     

    I verified I'm running the 64-bit new release. Any thoughts?

  • Reply 10 of 88
    It should have been 64bit a long time ago. Safari has been for several years.
  • Reply 11 of 88
    bdkennedy1 wrote: »
    It's also faster than Safari.

    What's your methodology?

    I ran SunSpider 1.0.2, which shows 168.6ms for Google Chrome 39.0.2171.65 (64-bit) and 157.3ms for Safari 8.0 (10600.1.25.1). Oddly, Sunspider took about 20x as long to finish the test even though the results show Safari was faster. I have no idea why, except to say it's because of non-JS code not performing properly on Safari.

    Browser mark has a score of 6677 for Google Chrome 39.0.2171.65 (64-bit) and a score of 6677 for Safari 8.0 (10600.1.25.1). Again, Chrome seemed to complete much faster than Safari but not by a factor of 20 to 1.

    Both apps opened up and to the same page in about two Mississippi's.
  • Reply 12 of 88
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,070member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mpantone View Post

     

    Interesting, it just crashes on launch. (Running OS X Yosemite 10.10.1)

     

    I foresee a hasty update shortly.


     

    Funny. I'm running it as I post this response. Are you claiming it crashes for everybody? Do you even know what you are doing?

  • Reply 13 of 88

    I switched to Safari a year ago and I never looked back.

  • Reply 14 of 88
    mpantonempantone Posts: 1,378member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

     

     

    Funny. I'm running it as I post this response. Are you claiming it crashes for everybody? Do you even know what you are doing?




    No, not claiming it crashes for everyone. Please re-read my initial response; I make no such claim.

     

    As it turns out, Chrome 39 crashes on my 4.5-year-old Mac mini running 10.10.1, but not my 1.5-year-old MacBook Air running the same OS. More interesting is the fact that the 64-bit beta ran fine on the older Mac just a few months ago.

     

    Ah well, not a big deal, I don't use Google Chrome regularly. I didn't put more than 10 minutes of trying to figure this out. I have better things to do.

     

    As to the latter inquiry, I just downloaded the installer from Google's servers and dragged the app to the target directory as usual. For Joe Consumer, that's about the extent of "knowing what you are doing." This isn't supposed to be Windows.

     

    But I do enjoy your hilariously patronizing tone. Makes the Internet seem so edgy and elite. I'm grateful that I am able to post here amongst true giants.

     

    Keep it up, good work!

  • Reply 15 of 88
    Who cares about this junk? Every freaking Mac I've had to deal with that had issues were all related to Chrome being on the system. Safari destroys this POS any day of the week.

    For those users who need (or just want) an alternate browser, nothing but Firefox.
  • Reply 16 of 88
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MagMan1979 View Post



    For those users who need (or just want) an alternate browser, nothing but Firefox.

     

    The last remaining 32 bit browser. They even dropped the official 64 bit builds. Amazing how they can go from the best browser, to further behind the times than Internet Explorer.

  • Reply 17 of 88

    my wife used to love this browser and installed it on my mac. but on my web traffic app i noticed that it was always trying to send stuff to google. even with the app off it wanted to send stuff out. thanks but no.

  • Reply 18 of 88
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,595member
    solipsismy wrote: »
    Both apps opened up and to the same page in about two Mississippi's.
    When I speed test apps that is my methodology :) 'One Mississippi, two Mississip... Yup, they're both pretty much conclusively the same!'

    Which proves that for 99% of users speed is not the deciding factor.
  • Reply 19 of 88
    shsfshsf Posts: 302member

    Ditched Chrome a month ago, and it was my main browser.

     

    The new safari is extremely well done, the bookmarks popping up from the address bar, and the favs/bookmarks on a new page, the ease which you can send a something to your reading list or/and launch reader, the side bar (yet another way to see your bookmarks).

     

    Bird's eye view works wonders to overview, sort, close etc. your open tabs. And closing tabs and opening more than the amount that can fit one window, the way they gather up and then expand works simply lovely. 

     

    And I didn't think I 'd say this, and I 'd thought that'd be the first thing I'd change, but the short address on top is really great. You don't need to have the full thing thrown at your face, and clicking on it to see it works just fine.

     

    It's super fast, memory and energy efficient. The new safari's just great. 

     

    You can really see Jony Ive's and his team's light touch, rethinking and care in the OS everywhere. Safari is one of them.

     

    All that gives you the added benefit of telling rude Larry Page, to shove it when it comes to chrome. And for anyone looking for alternatives. Alternatives are always good, btw. Firefox is and has always been a great browser, not my personal fav. And opera's always been an extremely well done and forward looking browser too, and a personal favourite of mine. 

  • Reply 20 of 88
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,144member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post



    Runs fine on 10.10.1 for me. It's also faster than Safari.

     

    Uh, no it isn't. Safari demolishes it in speed, in every way. 

Sign In or Register to comment.