Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Software > Software for Windows

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-27-2012, 11:04 AM   #26
Nothinman
Elite Member
 
Nothinman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 30,672
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnD1 View Post
Being able to access 4gb of ram means it's capable of playing those incredibly inefficient flash advertisements found on some web pages. It's not unusual to see firefox.exe hit 500-600mb of memory with only 1 tab open.
More important are the security enhancements from things like HEASLR.
__________________
http://www.debian.org
Nothinman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 02:12 PM   #27
Chiefcrowe
Diamond Member
 
Chiefcrowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,588
Default

Good article on the topic

http://arstechnica.com/information-t...-not-suspended
Chiefcrowe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 03:52 PM   #28
Socio
Golden Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,615
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nothinman View Post
More important are the security enhancements from things like HEASLR.
IE10 64bit has this and ForceASLR as well.
Socio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 04:09 PM   #29
Nothinman
Elite Member
 
Nothinman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 30,672
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Socio View Post
IE10 64bit has this and ForceASLR as well.
And it's also not what this thread is about.
__________________
http://www.debian.org
Nothinman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 05:53 AM   #30
Socio
Golden Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,615
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nothinman View Post
And it's also not what this thread is about.
It absolutely is, shows that by Firefox not supporting 64bit they will loose ground as users opt for more secure 64bit browsers that support things like HEASLR and ForceASLR, duh!
Socio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 10:45 AM   #31
Phynaz
Diamond Member
 
Phynaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,493
Default

Mozilla continues its decent into irrelevance.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abwx View Post
I saw good resolutions pics of the so called lunar module, heck, that s quite a piece of garbage with badly jointed metalic and litteraly hammered plates, seriously, you think that this piece of metalic junk actualy landed on the moon..??
Phynaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 12:44 PM   #32
Crow550
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,218
Default

Yeah but what about Chrome 64bit too?

I thought Browser makers weren't in a rush to move to 64bit as they have been more focused on Mobile browsing which is currently 32bit anyways.
Crow550 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 12:48 PM   #33
lxskllr
Lifer
 
lxskllr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 37,985
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phynaz View Post
Mozilla continues its decent into irrelevance.
Mozilla is plenty relevant. They're the one group you can count on to make YOUR interests their primary goal. They don't sell products, and they don't sell you as a product. Their primary goal is an open and free web.
lxskllr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 03:09 PM   #34
Phynaz
Diamond Member
 
Phynaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,493
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lxskllr View Post
Mozilla is plenty relevant. They're the one group you can count on to make YOUR interests their primary goal. They don't sell products, and they don't sell you as a product. Their primary goal is an open and free web.
All the above doesn't make them relevant.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abwx View Post
I saw good resolutions pics of the so called lunar module, heck, that s quite a piece of garbage with badly jointed metalic and litteraly hammered plates, seriously, you think that this piece of metalic junk actualy landed on the moon..??
Phynaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 03:25 PM   #35
lxskllr
Lifer
 
lxskllr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 37,985
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phynaz View Post
All the above doesn't make them relevant.
How so? They're still the leading 3rd party browser, and they're the only relevant 3rd party browser that stands for user freedom. That's the only relevance that matters.
lxskllr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 09:21 PM   #36
VirtualLarry
Lifer
 
VirtualLarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 25,664
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lxskllr View Post
How so? They're still the leading 3rd party browser, and they're the only relevant 3rd party browser that stands for user freedom. That's the only relevance that matters.
Amen! Preach it!

Anyways, I've been using Waterfox 64-bit for quite some time now. Initially there were some plugin issues, mostly with Adobe, but things seemed to have stabilized. I did try the Mozills Minefield 64-bit nightlies before that, and they did have "issues".

I am disappointed, with the proliferation of 64-bit OSes on the desktop, that the Mozilla foundation would de-prioritize 64-bit Firefox. Maybe they are preparing for the end of the desktop PC altogether, and figure that their effort should be spent on mobile. Thus the x64 experiment by AMD and Intel was a waste of time.
__________________
Rig(s) not listed, because I change computers, like some people change their socks.
ATX is for poor people. And 'gamers.' - phucheneh
haswell is bulldozer... - aigomorla
"DON'T BUY INTEL, they will send secret signals down the internet, which
will considerably slow down your computer". - SOFTengCOMPelec
VirtualLarry is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 10:06 PM   #37
Zodiark1593
Senior Member
 
Zodiark1593's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VirtualLarry View Post
Maybe they are preparing for the end of the desktop PC altogether, and figure that their effort should be spent on mobile. Thus the x64 experiment by AMD and Intel was a waste of time.
Who says it's gonna be the end of desktops?! I'd like to find this person, then deliver a swift, merciless slap across his face.
Zodiark1593 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2012, 05:39 AM   #38
Nothinman
Elite Member
 
Nothinman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 30,672
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Socio View Post
It absolutely is, shows that by Firefox not supporting 64bit they will loose ground as users opt for more secure 64bit browsers that support things like HEASLR and ForceASLR, duh!
The amount of users that really care about a 64-bit build is minuscule compared to those that want visible features like FF's extensions and sync. That should be obvious since they've never had an official 64-bit build and their marketshare has held up just fine. Obviously Chrome has given them some more serious competition, but that's not because of 64-bit builds by any means.
__________________
http://www.debian.org
Nothinman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2012, 07:46 AM   #39
beginner99
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,164
Default

This makes no sense especially with the arguments given.

Can't differentiate bug reports between 32 and 64-bit? Well, why does it work for Mac and Linux versions?
Same for plugins. Those 32-bit plugins will also fail on linux and so on.

And as mentioned in the linked article what opera already has (and seems pretty straight-forward) is that it is irrelevant if the plugin is 32 or 64 bit. both can run in 64-bit opera.

I mean that should not be that hard to achieve...I don't know for me it sounds like there i ssome general design flaw in FF that makes it very hard to change things.
beginner99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2012, 08:33 AM   #40
Nothinman
Elite Member
 
Nothinman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 30,672
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beginner99 View Post
This makes no sense especially with the arguments given.

Can't differentiate bug reports between 32 and 64-bit? Well, why does it work for Mac and Linux versions?
Same for plugins. Those 32-bit plugins will also fail on linux and so on.

And as mentioned in the linked article what opera already has (and seems pretty straight-forward) is that it is irrelevant if the plugin is 32 or 64 bit. both can run in 64-bit opera.

I mean that should not be that hard to achieve...I don't know for me it sounds like there i ssome general design flaw in FF that makes it very hard to change things.
From what I gather Opera runs plugins in a separate process and lets them do their job by passing data to and from them with some kind of IPC. I would guess that Opera has done that for a while just because the didn't have native support for the nsplugin architecture and it worked out to their advantage in the long run. I would think that FF would need to virtually rewrite their plugin system to take it out of process and handle passing data to and from both 32-bit and 64-bit plugin processes.

If you don't think it's that difficult why don't you grab the FF source and take a crack at it? That's the great thing about free software, you can actually fix things.
__________________
http://www.debian.org
Nothinman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2012, 08:50 AM   #41
lxskllr
Lifer
 
lxskllr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 37,985
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nothinman View Post
If you don't think it's that difficult why don't you grab the FF source and take a crack at it? That's the great thing about free software, you can actually fix things.
Yup, and I wouldn't get too hung up on the name. If someone really needs 64bit on Windows, there's Waterfox. That's Firefox in all but name. I don't even use Firefox. I'm using Iceweasel, but it's still Firefox. No big deal.
lxskllr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 12:34 PM   #42
Cerb
Elite Member
 
Cerb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,263
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Socio View Post
This is absolutely right, more secure, ability to use more ram etc... I believe the last data I saw there were more people using Windows 7 64bit than XP and Vista 64bit users combined. Pursuing a 64bit version should be their top goal, not giving up on it!

Correct me if I am wrong but 64bit apps like the OS have the ability to access more than 4gb of ram where a 32bit apps even on a 64bit OS are still stuck at the 4bg threshold.
32-bit just has 4GB, and the application can't use it all--most can't even use all they allocate. In a normal Windows instance, the OS gets 2GB and the application gets 2GB. 64-bit applications can access >4GB (8TB?), but 32-bit ones cannot access 4GB. At best, they can access 3GB, if you turn that on, and the application in question is large address aware, but for 99.999999% of users, it's 2GB.

A 32-bit application in a 64-bit environment, that is large address aware, and thus can utilize 3GB in 32-bit Windows so configured, can use up to 4GB in 64-bit Windows. Applications which are not large address aware are limited to 2GB in both 32-bit and 64-bit Windows versions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tcsenter View Post
Isn't the last thing keeping *some* check on the bloat of web design these days the 32-bit browser and plug-in limit? If all browsers and plug-ins were 64-bit, you wouldn't be able to load a webpage other than plain text that wasn't a full-blown application.
32-bit is slower, and will have to garbage collect more aggressively, and will have reduced security. We're already at a point where browsers can use >2GB VM, but we're still years away from single websites needing that kind of address space.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gmaster456 View Post
I doubt most average users don't even know what 64bit is. Let alone whether or not their browser supports it. I for one think it's a shame that they haulted development, but there's always waterfox.
Most users shouldn't know, either. Everyone should be using fat installers, and ship both with everything. But, even MS themselves don't do that. So, fat installers are a rarity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VirtualLarry View Post
I am disappointed, with the proliferation of 64-bit OSes on the desktop, that the Mozilla foundation would de-prioritize 64-bit Firefox. Maybe they are preparing for the end of the desktop PC altogether, and figure that their effort should be spent on mobile. Thus the x64 experiment by AMD and Intel was a waste of time.
That makes no sense, though: mobile 64-bit are on their way, and unlike x86-64, they're late (we have 1-2GB RAM mobile devices, already!). 64-bit has been the future since about 1991. It's been the present for at least 5 years. Pretty soon, it'll just be expected.
__________________
"The computer can't tell you the emotional story. It can give you the exact mathematical design, but what's missing is the eyebrows." - Frank Zappa

Last edited by Cerb; 11-30-2012 at 12:43 PM.
Cerb is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.