64 bit optimized OS?

Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
This is more of a future software thread...



If this is in the wrong place please move it..



With all these 'upcoming G5 threads' in future hardware, it got me thinking about the successor to Panther. (Tiger? Lion?, Puma? Leopard? Sabretooth? or whatever feline species for that matter)..



A 64 bit computer is not going to be utilizing all of its ability on a 32 bit operating system.



So when should we expect a 64 bit operating system to take advantage of the true potential of the G5?



January 2005? By then there will hopefully be dual 3 ghz G5ivvers, and if all things go as planned G5s in the PBs...



Any thoughts regarding the upcoming 64 bit OS?



I think this is currently being overlooked in all of the 'future discussions'...

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 13
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    This thread belongs to the OS X forum. I moved it here.



    Software do not really need a full 64 bit os, in order to be fully optimised for a g5. What is needed is 64 bits libraries (there is already someones in panther). I think that the next versions of OS X will have more and more 64bits API who will allow to take more and more advantage of the 64 bits architecture.



    However some features will only allow a full 64 bits OS to work only on 64 bits chips. At this point, most of the macs will have to be based upon the G5 family, otherwise customers will be very angry. The latest rumors, said that IBM will also make 32 bits chip for the powerPC. It means that we will not see 64 bits chips in every apple computer in the next coming years.
  • Reply 2 of 13
    knappaknappa Posts: 106member
    I never really thought about this implication. If Apple indeed would make the next version of OS X 64-bit and not all Apple computers have 64-bit processors, then they will have two OS's to support and develop. I guess they'd better stick with 64-bit libraries for those programs that need it. At least until most people who recently bought a G4-based computer are ready to buy a new computer.
  • Reply 3 of 13
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Okay now I am being a forum troll. We have maybe 64 () threads on this same topic. So here's my reply.





    blah blah blah what I said in the other threads.
  • Reply 4 of 13
    airslufairsluf Posts: 1,861member
    Kickaha and Amorph couldn't moderate themselves out of a paper bag. Abdicate responsibility and succumb to idiocy. Two years of letting a member make personal attacks against others, then stepping aside when someone won't put up with it. Not only that but go ahead and shut down my posting priviledges but not the one making the attacks. Not even the common decency to abide by their warning (afer three days of absorbing personal attacks with no mods in sight), just shut my posting down and then say it might happen later if a certian line is crossed. Bullshit flag is flying, I won't abide by lying and coddling of liars who go off-site, create accounts differing in a single letter from my handle with the express purpose to decieve and then claim here that I did it. Everyone be warned, kim kap sol is a lying, deceitful poster.



    Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.



    Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.
  • Reply 5 of 13
    it'd be cool even if certain parts of the OS were g5 optimized... i'm not really sure what, but ya know...
  • Reply 6 of 13
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    You can run 32-bit apps on a 64-bit OS, so optimizing the OS for 64-bit will not hurt apps.



    You can build a 32-bit version and a 64-bit version of an OS from the same source code, so it's not like developing two separate OSes.



    But right now I don't have any apps that need 8GB of RAM, so I'm not complaining.
  • Reply 7 of 13
    jubelumjubelum Posts: 4,490member
    From what I have seen after you go past 2GB of RAM, the curve evens out and additional performance increases are minimal up to 8GB.



    Overall, it seems like the average user could care less about OS X 64.

    I have yet to see how it would really help speed up things for the daily browser-and-emailer.
  • Reply 8 of 13
    hmmm interesting..



    thanks for the responses...
  • Reply 9 of 13
    airslufairsluf Posts: 1,861member
    Kickaha and Amorph couldn't moderate themselves out of a paper bag. Abdicate responsibility and succumb to idiocy. Two years of letting a member make personal attacks against others, then stepping aside when someone won't put up with it. Not only that but go ahead and shut down my posting priviledges but not the one making the attacks. Not even the common decency to abide by their warning (afer three days of absorbing personal attacks with no mods in sight), just shut my posting down and then say it might happen later if a certian line is crossed. Bullshit flag is flying, I won't abide by lying and coddling of liars who go off-site, create accounts differing in a single letter from my handle with the express purpose to decieve and then claim here that I did it. Everyone be warned, kim kap sol is a lying, deceitful poster.



    Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.



    Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.
  • Reply 10 of 13
    Quote:

    Originally posted by AirSluf

    OS X shoots for the middle of the road and will get better at it as things go along but will probably remain a mixed 32/64 bit OS for a VERY long time. And some will lament for all those years that it is not a true 64-bit OS or that it is 64-bit optimized because it still has 32-bit portions. That's ridiculous because it is just a lack of understanding on the lamenters part.



    Except that, as of now, the OS does not support 64-bit memory allocation in application space. All programs are still limited to 32-bit memory space (meaning none can exceed ~4GB of memory). You can ridicule those who need this all you want, it still doesn't change the fact that those so-called "lamenters" have to go to a non-Apple solution for their code (I am referencing the sci-tech crowd).



    If Apple provided 64-bit memory allocation and added numerical types that a 64-bit processor allows (long double, etc.) then there would be few legitimate complaints.



    Today, the G5 is a 64-bit CPU with a 32-bit userland OS (Panther).
  • Reply 11 of 13
    airslufairsluf Posts: 1,861member
    Kickaha and Amorph couldn't moderate themselves out of a paper bag. Abdicate responsibility and succumb to idiocy. Two years of letting a member make personal attacks against others, then stepping aside when someone won't put up with it. Not only that but go ahead and shut down my posting priviledges but not the one making the attacks. Not even the common decency to abide by their warning (afer three days of absorbing personal attacks with no mods in sight), just shut my posting down and then say it might happen later if a certian line is crossed. Bullshit flag is flying, I won't abide by lying and coddling of liars who go off-site, create accounts differing in a single letter from my handle with the express purpose to decieve and then claim here that I did it. Everyone be warned, kim kap sol is a lying, deceitful poster.



    Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.



    Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.
  • Reply 12 of 13
    Quote:

    Originally posted by AirSluf

    Dude, why so hostile? If you wouldn't try to put words in between the lines of other folks posts you wouldn't seen unnecessarily hostile. Nobody (including me) ever said there wouldn't be progress towards a better 64-bit implementation within OS X.



    Where is the hostility in my post that you are so offended by?



    I didn't understand how you could accuse people who do not believe OS X is 64-bit OS of being some simple-minded lamenters.





    Quote:

    Originally posted by AirSluf

    The "Lamenting" you errantly hone in on is directly aimed a cutting off further arguments that a 100% 64-bit OS is the only standard to be used for "optimized" status, a preemptive strike against thread digression along the lines of.. OS X still has 32-bit APIs! We're being screwed out of the full power of the G5!



    Read! Understand! Argue with those who don't already agree with you!




    Aaaah, there's the hostility you were looking for. Reading and understanding your statement, you make two clauses labelling a person a "lamenter:" (I added the bold or)



    Quote:

    And some will lament for all those years that it is not a true 64-bit OS OR that it is 64-bit optimized because it still has 32-bit portions.



    I was addressing the first clause before the "or." Apple markets Panther as a 64-bit OS (which is not false because the kernel manages the 64-bit memory space of the G5), but, it currently does not allow 64-bit userland addressing. This makes it difficult to run some of my code on a G5, and I want to. Oh, how I want to.



    So, I am one currently lamenting the lack of a true 64-bit OS until they fix the allocation libraries.
  • Reply 13 of 13
    airslufairsluf Posts: 1,861member
    That's worth lamenting over, but I don't think you will have to wait too long (although that may still be a year or a little more--everything's relative). Most of that work is at the Darwin and BSD layer level and is being worked out now.
Sign In or Register to comment.