64bit version



  • It makes no difference to me whether we get a 64bit version now or 2 years from now but I think there is a good reason to at least spend a little developer time on the 64bit version that no one has mentioned - it gets all the programmers in the right mindset. They know there'll be a 64bit version so they'll develop parts of Vivaldi with that in mind so when they do release a 64bit version all the parts are mostly there instead of requiring a complete rewrite. Having someone working on it now means all that trouble shooting can occur in the infant stages of the program as apposed to much later when it may be much more work.



  • @charm3d:

    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.

    LOL. I know I should ignore this, but I just have to ask…are you twelve?

    @charm3d:

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

    (To everyone else - I'm sorry, I just couldn't resist 😉 )


  • Moderator

    The mention of the hardware and the connection was not meant to impress, but to show that a failure to demonstrate superiority of 64-bit browsing was not based on the equipment but, if anything, was because 8 MB connect speed can only do what it can do.

    The rest of your comment is not worthy of response.



  • @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".

    I think some of the member here think it should be all about them. They are stuck in the world of 32bit and think everyone else should be held back with them and not advance into the world of 64bit that has been around for at least 10 years now. I actually don't understand why the software developers are light years behind where things really are.



  • Right now, Vivaldi is trying to get off the ground, which means it codes for the users that are out there now - with an eye to the future, of course. The world out there currently is populated by both 32-bit computers and 64-bit computers that will run 32-bit software. 5 years from now, things may indeed be different, but now is… well... 'now'. If you want to initially attract the largest segment of potential users, you make your software compatible with that segment's equipment - which, right now, means a 32-bit browser. Vivaldi, like any other company, has finite resources. At some point, they may elect to issue a 64-bit version... but right now, they need to focus their resources on getting the best-running browser they can into the hands of the greatest number of users, and that's what I believe they're trying to do. 😉

    edited: corrected company-name typo… thanks, @charm3d



  • @Blackbird:

    Right now, Vivaldi is trying to get off the ground, which means it codes for the users that are out there now - with an eye to the future, of course. The world out there currently is populated by both 32-bit computers and 64-bit computers that will run 32-bit software. 5 years from now, things may indeed be different, but now is… well... 'now'. If you want to initially attract the largest segment of potential users, you make your software compatible with that segment's equipment - which, right now, means a 32-bit browser. Opera, like any other company, has finite resources. At some point, they may elect to issue a 64-bit version... but right now, they need to focus their resources on getting the best-running browser they can into the hands of the greatest number of users, and that's what I believe they're trying to do. 😉

    Why bring up opera? They have a 64bit browser also.

    ftp://ftp.opera.com/pub/opera/win/1214/en/


  • Moderator

    I think that was a slip of the keyboard. I believe Blackbird was talking about Vivaldi. We are 99% old Opera aficionados, here. It's an easy mistake to make - especially when the guys founding and writing Vivaldi are much the same crew in many instances as the ones who founded and wrote old Opera.



  • @Case:

    @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?

    Because WE11 64 bit, Chrome 64 bit and Mozilla Nightly 64 bit are all much (much …) faster than their 32 bit counterparts on my computer?



  • @RRR13:

    Second of all, I think your impression about which is faster on your computer is exaggerated

    It's called placebo effect 😉



  • Having cracked the 32bit memory limitations with Opera several times I was very thank full for the 64bit Version. (12.17 64bit is still my default browser.)
    So going back to 32bit fells like a downgrade. But my head wins over my heart knowing that each tab gets his own process.

    The browser should mature first before they infest time into 64bit.



  • @samohT:

    But my head wins over my heart knowing that each tab gets his own process.
    .

    Indeed.

    The memory address limit for a 32bit process is 2 o 3 or 4 GB of memory, depending on how the process is configured and depending if the underlying OS is 32 or 64 bit.

    Practically a multiprocess 32 bit browser hardly will reach any of those limits.



  • @The_Solutor:

    @samohT:

    But my head wins over my heart knowing that each tab gets his own process.
    .

    Indeed.

    The memory address limit for a 32bit process is 2 o 3 or 4 GB of memory, depending on how the process is configured and depending if the underlying OS is 32 or 64 bit.

    Practically a multiprocess 32 bit browser hardly will reach any of those limits.

    I still use a 32bit laptop. I never got any problems with too less memory (3GB) and I can't even think of a multiprocess browser to get over 3GB… How is that even possible?



  • @Em-a-il:

    I still use a 32bit laptop. I never got any problems with too less memory (3GB) and I can't even think of a multiprocess browser to get over 3GB… How is that even possible?

    ~

    Well, supposedly you can have a web page containing a 5GB Image and that image would't be opened by a 32 bit browser.

    But that's, for now, is just an hypothetical scenario, nothing you can practically face…



  • @Reiknir:

    @Case:

    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?

    Because WE11 64 bit, Chrome 64 bit and Mozilla Nightly 64 bit are all much (much …) faster than their 32 bit counterparts on my computer?

    Well, even though "it's faster on my PC" can hardly be considered a "plus" for 64bit browsers in general, are you sure about that? In what way they are faster? Did you do any measurements? Were the browsers configured the same way for the comparison to be relevant? I'm not trying to troll you, I'm just genuinely curious (and suspicious, yes) of claims that those 64bit browsers are "much, much faster than their 32bit counterparts, because I've got some experience with all of these browsers in both 32bit and 64bit versions (well, if by WE11 you mean IE11, otherwise I do not know what WE11 is) on several 64bit PCs and when you matched their configurations, if there actually was any difference in speed, it was almost unnoticable (but no, I didn't do any measurements either, didn't seem worth the hassle). And the 64bit versions consumed noticeably more memory (in Chromium's case, it was close to double the amount).



  • @RRR13:

    @Em-a-il:

    I still use a 32bit laptop. I never got any problems with too less memory (3GB) and I can't even think of a multiprocess browser to get over 3GB… How is that even possible?

    People do crazy things with their tools. It depends on the user.
    I had about 60-70 tabs open at one time for some reason I can't remember now.

    At one time? 😛 That's pretty much normal for me, I hardly ever go under 50 (and when I mention this, I get weird looks from anyone who's not a long time Opera user). Which, sadly, is almost a no-go for Chromium-based browsers, since they handle lots of tabs quite badly - I can make Chromium (or Vivaldi, as it is now) easily consume more than 6GB of my 8 gigs of RAM just by opening my default set of tabs, making the rest of the system pretty sluggish…:/ Yeah, I should upgrade my RAM, but still.

    And (to get back on topic here) when I tried that with 64bit Chromium, it pretty much toppled even before I managed to open all of my tabs 😕



  • @RRR13:

    @Reiknir:

    Because WE11 64 bit, Chrome 64 bit and Mozilla Nightly 64 bit are all much (much …) faster than their 32 bit counterparts on my computer?

    Well, then, if they are faster on your computer, then, yes, obviously, the whole planet should do what is faster on your computer.
    .

    Wow, ego issues man
    Do all the self declared nerds here take themselves so seriously?

    There is no magic with 64 bits, apart from memory addressing space issues it is just that AMD64 has a whole bank more of registers than i86, hence if you compile programs for AMD64 and they are the same speed as an i86 program something is wrong somewhere.

    If you have doubts about that fine. And PPC, ARM and MIPS 64 bit processors do indeed perform more slowly than equivalent 32 bit processors but the AMD64 architecture is considerably faster that i86 due to the extra registers, even Microsoft Office is noticeably faster in 64bit guise than the 32 bit one.

    But extrapolating from your own doubts to counter something that you can easily test at home by downloading the 64bit versions of the other browsers is such a waste of oxygen.

    Over 90% of all Windows systems sold in the last couple of years have been 64bit version, slightly lower with upgrades, but what exactly is wrong with shipping 64 bit software for 64 bit systems?



  • @Case:

    on several 64bit PCs and when you matched their configurations, if there actually was any difference in speed, it was almost unnoticable.

    Uncle Technology. By default IE shares a configuration and setup between 32 and 64 bit versions.



  • @Reiknir:

    even Microsoft Office is noticeably faster in 64bit guise than the 32 bit one.

    Can you elaborate ?

    Faster on what ?

    Maybe a complex Excel sheet will be managed faster, but for the average joe usage, in the best scenario they are practically on par, but 32 bit version is faster to launch, especially on mechanical HDDs

    Edit: For the record this is the first related link found by google.

    http://blogs.technet.com/b/office2010/archive/2010/02/23/understanding-64-bit-office.aspx


  • Moderator

    Again, no one has anything against 64-bit. To write an additional 64-version of the program, however, does take resources.

    It is the judgment of the majority on this thread (and I image at Vivaldi, who are the ones who actually have to MAKE that judgement call) that FOR NOW resources are best spent refining the features and function of the browser on the platform(s) which can be used by the absolute broadest cross-section of the potential user-base - which in the case of Windows, will be 32-bit. It has the greatest potential benefit to the authors at the lowest necessary cost, and creates, for all intents and purposes, zero problems for adopters.

    Keep in mind that while most current distributions of Windows are now 64-bit, most legacy systems in the wild are still 32-bit.

    Down the road, it may make economic sense for Vivaldi to add a 64-bit version to its offerings - but given the needs versus the resources in the here-and-now, it appears to me to make no sense whatever.



  • @Ayespy:

    Again, no one has anything against 64-bit. To write an additional 64-version of the program, however, does take resources.

    It is the judgment of the majority on this thread (and I image at Vivaldi, who are the ones who actually have to MAKE that judgement call) that FOR NOW resources are best spent refining the features and function of the browser on the platform(s) which can be used by the absolute broadest cross-section of the potential user-base - which in the case of Windows, will be 32-bit. It has the greatest potential benefit to the authors at the lowest necessary cost, and creates, for all intents and purposes, zero problems for adopters.

    Keep in mind that while most current distributions of Windows are now 64-bit, most legacy systems in the wild are still 32-bit.

    Down the road, it may make economic sense for Vivaldi to add a 64-bit version to its offerings - but given the needs versus the resources in the here-and-now, it appears to me to make no sense whatever.

    I think 32bit processors for desktop stop being sold at least 5 years ago. So all PC's sold in at least the past 5 years are 64bit. So most computers would be 64bit. It would make so sense to install a 32bit OS when you have a 64bit Processor unless you are very stupid.

    From what I can tell. Most of you seem to have 32bit systems and are bitching because those of us who have 64bit systems what software designed for our systems. So it's all about you! One said they never said a 64bit versions should not be made but this whole thread reads as a bitch at us who want a 64bit. Call me a child, look in the mirror. You all throw tantrums like 4yo little girls. Some act like they are all knowing and above the rest of us. I have just sat back and laughed at most of your comments. You have superiority complexes.

    Everyone has a right to request what they want with out being put down and belittled by a bunch of kiddies who think only of themselves and think they know it all.

    Vivaldi asked for requests I made one and got a bunch of A-holes jump on the thread. In the beginning I should have just answered "Because some of us want it" I have no need to explain myself to a bunch of kids. My request was to the Vivaldi developers and really has nothing to do with you lot at all. You want to act like children fine, don't be Trolls on other peoples threads and start your little bitching sessions on them.


 

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