64bit version



  • I would like a 64bit version.



  • https://vivaldi.net/forum/vivaldi-browser/1660-new-snapshot-of-vivaldi-is-ready-for-download?start=40

    A linux 32bit version is way more needed and more worth the effort



  • I would too, but I don't think "why ?" is even an appropriate response to your request. 64bit browsers have many pluses that shouldn't need to be defended to a "premium member".



  • @chamberfis6:

    I would too, but I don't think "why ?" is even an appropriate response to your request. 64bit browsers have many pluses that shouldn't need to be defended to a "premium member".

    Can you name some of those "many pluses"? 'Cause, honestly, while I'm certainly not against the idea of a 64bit browser at all - even if it doesn't make sense for Vivaldi to spend time on making a 64bit version of their browser at this point - and I think the transition to full 64bit desktop is long overdue on Windows, I honestly fail to see much benefit. A 64bit browser can - under pretty specific circumstances, it needs to be pointed out - be somewhat faster. But that's about it. So what other "pluses" are there?



  • Everything is going 64 bit.. It's about time browsers caught up too. I just changed to Waterfox from firefox because it's a 64 bit version. Most CPU's if not all apart from ARMs are 64bit. (even ARM is making the switch to 64bit) No one bothers with 32 bit operating systems any more. I even run 64bit Office.

    I want everything in my system to catch up with the times including browsers. 32bit is software made for pre Windows 7 computers. About time software developers catch up to the real world of 64bit.



  • @charm3d:

    Everything is going 64 bit.. It's about time browsers caught up too. I just changed to Waterfox from firefox because it's a 64 bit version. Most CPU's if not all apart from ARMs are 64bit. (even ARM is making the switch to 64bit) No one bothers with 32 bit operating systems any more. I even run 64bit Office.

    I want everything in my system to catch up with the times including browsers. 32bit is software made for pre Windows 7 computers. About time software developers catch up to the real world of 64bit.

    In short you have no idea.



  • A 64-bits version is in the works and being tested internally. The same applies to a 32-bits Linux version. Source: https://twitter.com/vivaldi_ru/status/565335854257029120

    ;)



  • @RRR13:

    Who is vivaldi_ru?! Where did you find them? Are they mentioned in any of the official sources (homepages, blogs, etc.)?

    I would be glad if Vivaldi had the time time to work on the 64-bit version.
    However, as Case pointed out above, surely Vivaldi have more important things to do at the moment and I would be pissed if I found out they are taking resources away from implementing features, and assigning those resources to making a 64-bit version.
    Now, don't get me wrong, the code must be written in a decent way as to not crash and burn and need a rewrite when the time to go 64-bit will come, but that's all! No reason to waste time building, packaging, and supporting a 64-bit version at the moment.

    It is the official Russian twitter account.
    All information regarding Vivaldi is also released in Russian here: https://vivaldi.net/en-US/blogs?view=blogger&layout=listings&id=207 and shared on Twitter. Furthermore, if you noticed, it's Shpankov's blog, who works with the Vivaldi team (you can confirm at Vivaldi.com).



  • https://vivaldi.net/en-US/blogs/entry/vivaldi-browser-first-preview - Scroll down to the bottom of the article and check the second Twitter link.
    You could also check his Twitter personal profile, where he has retweeted some vivaldi_ru tweets.



  • lifehacker.com/chrome-releases-faster-more-stable-64-bit-builds-for-w-1585324834

    You can read couple of the reasons from that post. Basically, 64-bit allows the use of more memory, which is GOOD thing, especially if Vivaldi is getting memory-only cache at some point. Unused RAM is wasted RAM. Secondly, it is faster, since it can cache more stuff and use 64-bit specific build options and instructions. Google claims (same chromium engine is used on Vivaldi) about 25% increase in speed. Also security is improved especially windows 8, most of the tech-talk goes over my head, so here is the link: blogs.technet.com/b/srd/archive/2013/12/11/software-defense-mitigating-common-exploitation-techniques.aspx

    Basically saying "why 64-bit?" is not relevant, the question should be "why support 10 years old-dated software type?". 64-bit is the future, and everyone should be using it 2015, no matter if you "understand" or "feel" the benefits, since most of them are under-the-hood kind of upgrades.



  • The problem with those reasons is that these are what Google claims should happen, not what actually happens when using 64bit browser for your day-to-day needs.

    See for example here for some real comparison of 32bit and 64bit Chromium: www.makeuseof.com/tag/chrome-64-bit-vs-32-bit-for-windows-is-64-bit-worth-installing/

    Even in synthetic benchmarks, the speed difference is pretty negligible.

    Also, the thing with "64bit allows the use of more memory" is really a non-issue with Chromium-based browsers, as they start each tab as a separate process, meaning that we're still pretty far from the point where we'd start running into memory limits with 32bit Chromium. Even though Chromium tends to gobble the memory like there's no tomorrow when you're using a few tabs and is very hesitant to release it back to other apps. But in that regard, the 64bit version is even worse. And while unused RAM is certainly wasted RAM, just the fact that it's "used" doesn't mean that it's used effectively.

    Again, I'm certainly not against 64bit browsers on Windows and/or 64bit software in general when it makes sense (e.g. I most certainly want my RAW photo editor to be 64bit, since it needs loads of RAM and every bit of speed it can get helps), but the fact is there are no real reasons to go for 64bit when it comes to browsers. And saying it's "10 years old dated software" could even be considered to be a bit misleading, honestly.



  • It is also my opinion that developing a 64-bit version is a waste of time, at least until Vivaldi is a mature product.

    Although most of us may be using 64-bit OS, that's not true of everyone. Developing only a 64-bit version excludes some users, while developing both 32-bit and 64-bit versions in parallel divides development time.

    The benefits of 64-bit for browsers is not the same as for other applications like Photo Editors. The speed of browsers has a lot more to do with processor speed than memory, and rendering of pages is highly dependent on the user's connection speed. Any small improvements due to having more RAM available would not translate to real-world use.

    I have a 64-bit OS, and tried both 64-bit and 32-bit Opera 12.17. There is no difference, other than the 32-bit version being more stable, so that's what I use.



  • At this point in the development, I totally agree that the effort needs to go into maturing the browser and fleshing out its feature set. There's virtually nothing a 64-bit version could offer that isn't possible in a 32-bit version, and 32-bit versions run fine on 64-bit systems. So in that sense, heavily pursuing a 64-bit version now would represent a diversion of effort from the main task of obtaining a stable, feature-rich, configurable browser. Once that milestone has been largely passed, development could branch out into other areas of platform compatibility. I write this as a Win7-64bit user.


  • Moderator

    On my Win 8.1 machine (x64, 6-core 3.5GHz processor with 10 GB of RAM), and a nominal 8Mb connection, I am unable to tell any difference in performance between a 32-bit browser and a 64-bit one. 32 bit software runs perfectly on 64-bit systems which are, by necessity, backward-compatible.

    On the other hand, for some silly reason my 32-Bit P4 Lubuntu box can't seem to run any 64-bit programs. At all. I don't know what's up with that…

    Point is, if any additional platform support were to be added, I would kinda hope it would be something that would actually expand the number of machines on which Vivaldi would run - like so I could try it on my weak old HP tower, on which I loaded Lubuntu 14.04 to save it from obsolescence.



  • WOW mister look at what I have…. Well I too run a 6 Core 3.5 Ghz CPU, 16GB Ram on a 25MB optical connection and that means nothing!

    I've been running 64bit systems and Operating Systems since XP 64bit was released a million years ago.Since XP 64 bit was the future. .Back then 64bit was the most secure systems around because hackers and other A-holes used 32bit nasties.
    I could not give a flying monkey about your argument for 32bit browsers. Most you guys are probably running illigal downloads of 32bit Xp and are to cheap to actually buy your software.

    The point is 32 bit is becoming obsolete and I wish windows 10 would see the end of 32bit. Not going to happen but I can dream. I'm already running windows 10 tech preview on my phone. :)

    Get up with the times. 32bit is the old 16bit as was 16bit to 8bit. it's end IS coming!



  • @charm3d:

    Get up with the times.

    We are talking about IT not about fashion.



  • lol that's funny..

    technology is one of the fastest moving things on earth.
    6 months your hardware is superseded and outdated.

    Software is superseded every 12 months operating
    systems are about every 4 years like the Olympics.

    32 bit software has almost gone with the Cavemen.



  • @charm3d:

    lol that's funny..

    technology is one of the fastest moving things on earth.
    6 months your hardware is superseded and outdated.

    Really ? Explain it to the 2004 tablet I'm typing on. right-now. :lol:

    Software is superseded every 12 months operating
    systems are about every 4 years like the Olympics.

    32 bit software has almost gone with the Cavemen.

    You are speaking by "motto" , but in four messages you haven't mentioned a SINGLE REAL ADVANTAGE of the 64 bit architecture (I did, for the record)



  • Look I'd rather run software specifically designed for a 64bit OS.. It seems I need to spell that out for you lot.

    this is from MS.

    "If you have a choice of whether to install a 32-bit or 64-bit version of a program, always choose the 64-bit version if you're running a 64-bit version of Windows. Even though the 32-bit version should work with a 64-bit version of Windows, chances are the 64-bit version will perform better, since it was designed for a 64-bit version of Windows."

    To me it's like paring ram.

    Saying that, I never said they should not make a 32bit version as someone suggested I have. But the day will come where you 32bit lovers will have no choice than to make the change.



  • @charm3d:

    Look I'd rather run software specifically designed for a 64bit OS.. It seems I need to spell that out for you lot.

    this is from MS.

    "If you have a choice of whether to install a 32-bit or 64-bit version of a program, always choose the 64-bit version if you're running a 64-bit version of Windows. Even though the 32-bit version should work with a 64-bit version of Windows, chances are the 64-bit version will perform better, since it was designed for a 64-bit version of Windows."

    I asked if you had any clue about the 64 bit advantages, not if you are able to use google to find some promotional infos.

    Looks like my first impression was correct: the short answer is: NO

    It's enough for me, thanks.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Vivaldi Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.