Re: 32/64-bit transition and memory expansion
Re: 32/64-bit transition and memory expansion
- Subject: Re: 32/64-bit transition and memory expansion
- From: Greg Parker <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 15:48:19 -0700
On May 10, 2010, at 3:13 PM, Nick Zitzmann wrote:
> On May 10, 2010, at 3:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>> - Either way, should I be concerned?
>
> Two years ago I would have said yes, because when we published our first 64-bit program around that time, we had several users write in and tell us they thought the app was using too much memory. 64-bit apps were really rare back then, and people weren't used to seeing them, so we obliged and went back to 32-bit. But now, 64-bit apps are far more common than they were back then, and a lot of the bugs in Leopard's 64-bit frameworks were fixed in Snow Leopard, so now I wouldn't hold back. There is more to the transition than having a higher VM ceiling, e.g. 64-bit apps will run faster than 32-bit apps on Intel CPUs due to improvements in the ABI.
Another advantage for 64-bit: if your app is the only 32-bit app on an otherwise all-64-bit system, you will be solely responsible for loading the entire 32-bit library stack, and your launch time and RSIZE will suffer accordingly. (Admittedly, this is not currently a big issue since iTunes is 32-bit.)
On Leopard this effect was a disadvantage for 64-bit, since it was likely that your app was the only 64-bit app. You don't want to be the odd-app-out because you won't share as much memory with everybody else.
--
Greg Parker email@hidden Runtime Wrangler
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden