Reasons to use x64 and reasons to use Mac

[Psychophanta]

I can not find any serious reason to use Intel x64 OS instead x86, let be windows or linux, BSD...
I can not find any serious reason to use Mac, specially Intel based.

Any support to find some reasons?

[freak]

If you find no reason then be happy with what you use now. No need to spend money on something like a Mac when you don't have any need to.

Personally i use Windows x64 so i can have 8Gb of Ram which allows me to run Virtual machines for testing at a good performance. 4 Gb would probably have done it was well, but since Memory is quite cheap these days why be limited by that ?

I started using a Mac to develop PB on it but i have grown to like it. Apple makes very good (although damn expensive) Laptops.

[Psychophanta]

8GB RAM is a reason for what you do, but as you well realize you also can probably do it with 4GB. The 8GB capabilities are indispensable only for some video production or maybe also for photo managements, audio deep treatments, but few few more things.

Anyway, none of your stated reasons are enough imho.

[case]

give us a good reason to stick with 32 bit os ?

well gives us a good reason to have moved from 8 bit computers to 16 bits then 32 bits ?

this is the same here, better capacity, better treatment speed, more ram etc...

if you don't see the point, go back to 8 bit systems. you'll probly see why we all moved to 32 bits os and why now we goes for 64 bits:)

and why buying 64 bit processors and just use them in 32 bit mode ? that's like buying a new car with 6 gears and using only 5 ^^

my 2 cents it's just all about progress

[Psychophanta]

@case
c'mon... can't compare, i think, the difference between 8bits old systems and x32 is huge in performance.
You are wrong if you think the data bus width is the definitive detail for performance.
An example is: A amiga with a MC68040 is a 32 bit system and the difference with some 16bit systems is almost invisible. And the difference between the 32bit amiga and a 32bit x86 is huge.

Just try to be critic and ask this yourself:
The same invisibility is the current one between x64 and x86 ?

this is the same here, better capacity, better treatment speed, more ram etc...

capacity? what capacity?
Speed?
Only ram, and the change is so tiny...

PD: just an opinion

In my case, i have 64bit processor, but after compare the x86 Windows XP and the x64 one, i found only one serious difference:
- more consumption and heat in the x64.
- incompatibility.
I also compared SUSE linux 64 against 32bit, and the result after using it was the same.
BTW: i use for example registered CoolEdit2.0 for windows quite often, and also over all, simulation programs which require lots of realtime math calculations.

[case]

Only ram, and the change is so tiny...

more ram is more speed , try to use something from a file and try use it from ram, you'll see a difference.

with 32bit os we are limited to a poor 4GB (aproximatively ) of ram.

think of virtualisation like freak said, whith 4gb of ram you'll quickly run into memory used up and diskswap being used slowing down performances.

the same with video editing, more comfort, less diskswap operation.

think of HD video , using a system with a lot of ram mean more comfort to edit.

the only reason that may prevent me using a 64bit system is the lack of x64 compatible applicatons that use the extra memory available.

incompatibility issues are not a point, there's alway incompatibility

DOS->win3.x->win9x->winxp->vista->seven-> etc...

i used ramdisks on my ataris and my amigas this was comfortable to use, it was no morepossible with win32 apps as they are memory hogs and you'll end havin swap used slowing down things . with 64 bits os this will be possible (just waiting for memory availability and mainboard supporting huge amount of ram)

[Fred]

64 bits is the logical evolution. Remember when computers had only 4 Mb of ram ? Now we are exactly at the same point, but 1000x bigger. Every new PC have 4 Gb of ram. And it will increases as well. 64 bits isn't only a 'ram' enhancement. At least on x64 cpu it brings a more effective architecture (more registers, more default commands (you can assume than every x64 processors have at least SSE3)).

And the bigger are the data you handle, the faster will be the native 64 bits application. On an x86, to handle 'quad' types you need very slow routines to multiply, divide, etc. All in all, 32 bits is nearly dead, as was 16 bits at time, and it's a good thing.

[yoxola]

Serious reason to use Intel x64 OS:

You looks advanced and shiny, like a pioneer.

Serious reason to use Mac OS:

You look different, special, like an cyber-geek etc etc...

[Trond]

I started using a Mac to develop PB on it but i have grown to like it. Apple makes very good (although damn expensive) Laptops.

IMHO they are just ordinary laptops with very hard edges to cut your wrists.

64-bit is nice for more ram and more registers (although the calling conventions are silly).

[Psychophanta]

Serious reason to use Intel x64 OS:

You looks advanced and shiny, like a pioneer.

Serious reason to use Mac OS:

You look different, special, like an cyber-geek etc etc...

[Joakim Christiansen]

I just bought myself a Mac Mini btw I have never tested a Mac before (so it can probably be an interesting experience) and I want to use PureBasic on it of course

Yeah, call me insane, I admit it, buying a Mac wasn't something I had planned, it just happened (I'm loosing it...).

[pdwyer]

On windows 2003 server there are lots more reasons too.

Ram is the obvious one but if some apps are having issues with pooled and non pooled page bytes running out then 64bit solves this by adding enourmous capacity to what it was under 32bit.

64bit versions of sql server and exchange are in a league of their own for scale.

Ever tried moving a 100gb file over a network? the system doing the copy will start to have the system non pooled pages climb and depending on what else is running will just die at somewhere between 50 and 300gb. 64bit systems are fine.

For XP, I have 64bit version as I have 8gb of ram. but my hex editor software can't open a 1.7gb file with the 32bit version (and the virtual bytes are under 2gb) if I recompile with 64bit it works like a charm! even though the usage is only about 1.7gb in actuality. The memory alloc for over 1.7gb just fails on 32bit apps on my pc.

It's not critical for me to have 64bit, but it is becoming more useful as time goes on.

A little like the jump from win3.11 to win95. there wasn't much point at first but as time went by it became more of a problem to try to stubbornly stay on the 16bit platform

EDIT: I have no idea what reasons exist to use a Mac though

[Thalius]

i switched to x64 ( Linux ) - and as soon as Windows 7 is out finally also on the win side.

Also because i use VMs to test my stuff. And also to use more than pathetic 1.9 GB of ram. ( yes barely 2 gb !! because if you have a gfx card with 2 GB ram inside your box ... that counts toward the 32 bit adress space too ... ).

So at least under Linux i can use all my VMs and my 8 GB ram and my gfx mem too for now ...

If your perfectly fine with what you have and your hardware isnt limited by the OS - theres no reason to switch indeed.

EDIT: I have no idea what reasons exist to use a Mac though

My ex said female use macs because you can operate em with only one-finger ... tho i still dont get the grasp of that sentence fully by now ... =p

Cheers,
Thalius

[the.weavster]

Don't Mac fan boys give each other high fives whilst making a 'Wooo' noise?

Macs certainly don't make you look different or special, they probably just mark you out as a Morris dancer.

[Psychophanta]

Macs certainly don't make you look different or special, they probably just mark you out as a Morris dancer.

Indeed!
http://homepage.mac.com/laddie/orangepe ... dancer.jpg
Specially now that Mac have been "downgraded" to Intel. Never i would suspected such a shame from Apple company which main flag and feature was ever be opposit to Intel users!