64bit version



  • @charm3d:

    1. There are still to many people using the outdated 32bit software

    There is no outdated SW.

    There is SW that meet your need and SW that does not.

    "I really have never had those issues."

    this

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule :lol:



  • @The_Solutor:

    @charm3d:

    1. There are still to many people using the outdated 32bit software

    There is no outdated SW.

    There is SW that meet your need and SW that does not.

    "I really have never had those issues."

    this

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule :lol:

    I can see some of you will argue till you are blue in the face. So back on topic. You all should accept that some of us not only I would like a 64bit version and get over yourselves. Hopefully the developers will consider it.



  • You're late - they already did. See today's snapshot.



  • @sgunhouse:

    You're late - they already did. See today's snapshot.

    I'm still waking up.. lol

    thanks for bringing that to my attention. 🙂



  • LOL, LOL, LOL and MEGA LOL - even 64bit version installs itself in… "Program Files (x86)" directory. What a 2#$%@ crappy installer.



  • I have downloaded and installed the 64 bit version. It seems to work OK BUT it badly needs extensions added to it. I normally use ABP , Ghostery, and Last Pass on my browsers. I opened my email account and was met with tons of ads that I don't normally see. I normally use DuckDuckGo as my search engine and it wasn't any problem to change my search engine in Vivaldi. My spell checker even works OK in Vivaldi.



  • So yeah, had to try the 64bit version. As expected, the only noticeable difference from the 32bit version is that it consumes a gig of memory more (in my case 5.5GB instead of 4.5GB). Otherwise I wouldn't be able to tell the two apart.

    So, just like any other 64bit browser on Windows so far.


  • Moderator

    @Case:

    So yeah, had to try the 64bit version. As expected, the only noticeable difference from the 32bit version is that it consumes a gig of memory more (in my case 5.5GB instead of 4.5GB). Otherwise I wouldn't be able to tell the two apart.

    So, just like any other 64bit browser on Windows so far.

    Wow. I'm just shocked, I tell you. Shocked. Who could have guessed that what we knew about software yesterday, could still be true today? Astonishing.



  • I know. A shocker indeed.

    Then again, I laughed my ass off realizing that it took Opera over a year to even come up with a 64bit Linux version. 32bit Linux version is still nowhere to be seen (the official solution is to use Opera 12.16), as well as the 64bit version for Windows.

    Vivaldi offered 64bit Linux version with its first public release. Adding 32bit Linux version took 3 weeks, adding 64bit Windows version took 4 weeks.

    I sure hope they know what they're doing and are not wasting resources that could be put to better use on this, but when you think about this, it's kinda hilarious (and sad at the same time).



  • @rat_in_browser:

    LOL, LOL, LOL and MEGA LOL - even 64bit version installs itself in… "Program Files (x86)" directory. What a 2#$%@ crappy installer.

    As I said earlier, recompliling a SW for windows is not just matter of changing a compiler flag, there are a lot of subtle obstacles, this is one of them.



  • @Case:

    I know. A shocker indeed.

    Then again, I laughed my ass off realizing that it took Opera over a year to even come up with a 64bit Linux version. 32bit Linux version is still nowhere to be seen (the official solution is to use Opera 12.16), as well as the 64bit version for Windows.

    Vivaldi offered 64bit Linux version with its first public release. Adding 32bit Linux version took 3 weeks, adding 64bit Windows version took 4 weeks.

    I sure hope they know what they're doing and are not wasting resources that could be put to better use on this, but when you think about this, it's kinda hilarious (and sad at the same time).

    I'm sure vivaldi is putting some pepper on the "back" of Opium guys.

    As usual competition is good for all of the parts involved.


  • Moderator

    @Case:

    I know. A shocker indeed.

    I sure hope they know what they're doing and are not wasting resources that could be put to better use on this, but when you think about this, it's kinda hilarious (and sad at the same time).

    As do I. I'm anxious for them to husband their resources toward the greatest probability of long-term success.



  • @Case:

    So yeah, had to try the 64bit version. As expected, the only noticeable difference from the 32bit version is that it consumes a gig of memory more (in my case 5.5GB instead of 4.5GB). Otherwise I wouldn't be able to tell the two apart.

    So, just like any other 64bit browser on Windows so far.

    Holy Shit!!! what?

    I'm running 64bit only consuming 74mb ram.
    My 32bit Opera 71mb ram

    It depends on the content you have open in your browser so you have no idea what you are talking about.

    Now my Tor which has 20 tabs open with picture content is using 552mb ram
    my Waterfox that has facebook open on it is using 863mb ram.

    You really want to see what they use. Close down your system and restart. only open the two browers no tabs
    open and see what they use. I have no idea how you are getting into GB area. I have never been over 1GB and I
    use many tabs. I'm even using 4 different browsers right now.

    BTW… Memory only a novice would use that term. It is use by people who have no idea what they are talking about and use it for ram and HDD space.


  • Moderator

    RAM usage depends on what you have open, what you have recently had open, what kind of system you have, what ELSE is open, and how much RAM you HAVE.

    On my 64-bit system, I have 10Gb of RAM to play with. I have Vivaldi, another browser, QuickBooks, a PDF viewer, Evernote, EMail, a calculator and some background programs open. In a session that is ten minutes old, with seven "nothing-special" tabs open, Vivaldi (32-bit) is occupying/reserving 1Gb of RAM out of the total 5.1 Gb of RAM that is in use by the system and all apps combined.

    Edit: Thirteen minutes later, same tabs open and almost no work done, and RAM for Vivaldi is 1.8Gb. In two more minutes, it is over 1.9 Gb. The tab using the MOST RAM (over 900 Mb) is a page with static images of cartoons and some Flash ads.


  • Moderator

    If you want to compare browsers:
    My Opera 12.17 x64 has 3 extensions & 4 tabs opened. (DW.de, 2 PHP.net, chat client). It's using 274MB.
    Vivaldi 1.0.111.2 x86 has 0 extensions & 4 tabs opened (all Vivaldi forum). It's using 644MB.

    No plugins are running.


  • Moderator

    It's to be expected. Opera has been working on some resource optimization, and Vivaldi has not had a chance to do that yet. Chrome uses more than Opera, and Vivaldi, so far at least, uses more than Chrome.



  • @charm3d:

    I'm running 64bit only consuming 74mb ram.
    My 32bit Opera 71mb ram

    Protip: for a more succesful and less obvious troll, keep closer to what's actually possible. Like, you know, above or close to the memory consumption of an empty session. Especially when aiming for that "superior know-it-all" kind of trolling.

    @charm3d:

    It depends on the content you have open in your browser so you have no idea what you are talking about.

    LOL. Dat logic.

    @charm3d:

    I have no idea how you are getting into GB area. I have never been over 1GB and I
    use many tabs.

    It's OK. Don't worry about it. I don't blame you, really. It happens. Maybe next time.

    @charm3d:

    I'm even using 4 different browsers right now. BTW… Memory only a novice would use that term. It is use by people who have no idea what they are talking about and use it for ram and HDD space.

    Well, it's pretty obvious I'm a novice, isn't it? I mean, you're even using four browsers right now! If that's not a sign of clear superiority, I really don't know what is!

    (Honestly, I find your constant trolling a bit annoying at times and would prefer some moderation, but then again, sometimes it's actually quite funny. I love the way you always try to fill your posts with as much self-importance and childish insults to others as possible.)


  • Moderator

    @Case:

    (Honestly, I find your constant trolling a bit annoying at times and would prefer some moderation, but then again, sometimes it's actually quite funny. I love the way you always try to fill your posts with as much self-importance and childish insults to others as possible.)

    You noticed that, too? I wasn't going to say anything this time…



  • BTW, if we are comparing, this is how it looks here right now (Edit: that's Vivaldi 32bit, sorry for not mentioning it). Both browsers have the same set of 53 tabs open, obviously (and pretty similar set of extensions):

    I don't want to try Opera 12.x at the moment (opening all those tabs would be a hassle), but from my previous measurements and experiences I know it tends to use a bit less than twice the memory Firefox does lately, so I guess it would be somewhere around 2 gigs in this case (while being noticeably more responsive than FF, of course).

    BTW the tabs in FF are of course fully loaded for the comparison to be as much fair as possible, not hibernated or whatever they call it when the tab loads only after you activate it (I hate that feature and always disable it, even if it means that the browser starts up a lot slower when you run it).

    A big problem with the otherwise pretty impressive Firefox memory usage is that it tends to grow over time and never come back, eventually crashing the whole browser, though. Which is…not so impressive, of course 😉 And FF support people tend to always blame it on extensions and stuff like that, even though it clearly does it even with a clean browser with no extensions whatsoever.



  • @charm3d:

    [
    I'm running 64bit only consuming 74mb ram.
    My 32bit Opera 71mb ram

    Try to compare apples with apples, maybe your conclusions will look more intelligent.

    What's the point in a comparison between two different programs ?

    Test Vivaldi 32 v.s. Vivaldi 64 OR Opera 32 v.s. Opera 64.

    And do it with the exact same conditions. Same tabs opened, same extensions loaded and so on…


 

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