6 ms·

"4GB RAM ought to be enough for anybody." ARMS's Achilles' heel is that it's only 32-bit, and I don't think anyone wants to go back to a segmented address spac

by jbarham 16y ago

"4GB RAM ought to be enough for anybody." ARMS's Achilles' heel is that it's only 32-bit, and I don't think anyone wants to go back to a segmented address space any time soon.

jbrennan 16y ago
That's a great point. Are there any 64 bit ARM chips on the horizon? I don't know much about chips, so maybe it's not even possible given the architecture.
- 1amzave 16y ago
  I don't recall hearing any announced, though I wouldn't be surprised at all if it were currently in the works. The A15 mentioned in the article, however, I believe has something in the spirit of x86's PAE that offers an expanded (36 bits or so?) physical address space, for better or for worse (better in that you can address more memory, worse in that it's kind of an ugly hack and not a great long-term solution).
- ryanpetrich 16y ago
  It's possible, but just like the x86-64 transition it won't be pretty.
  - protomyth 16y ago
    It might go better for ARM given that most of the more tightly controlled software that is delivered on ARMs (app store or custom embedded).
  - mfukar 16y ago
    I'm curious; have you faced any problems in that transition? (seriously, I'm not trying to troll. I've had exactly one - making sure a project of mine would compile as PIC and that was pretty minor after the required reading)
    - ryanpetrich 16y ago
      There haven't been any major issues, it's just been glacially slow. Most software running on capable CPUs is still 32 bit, Visual Studio still doesn't have first class support for 64 bit and my MacBook still runs a 32 bit kernel. I expect ARM's transition to be quite different though--with the highest ends of their business moving in only a couple product cycles, and the lower ends of their business sticking with 32 bit indefinitely.
- protomyth 16y ago
  There were a lot of stories in the 2000 time frame, but nothing seems to have been actually done.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
theclay 16y ago
One of the article's contentions is that the vast majority of users are satisfied with Windows and Microsoft programs as they are right now. Most of those programs are 32-bit. By extension, if they are satisfied with 32-bit programs and don't feel a need to switch, then they won't miss 64-bit architectures.
- sid0 16y ago
  Most Windows sold today is 64-bit, and it allows you to run more 32-bit programs without running out of memory.
  - theclay 16y ago
    Most people could care less about more applications... Virtually all of the computer users that I know limit their use to an office application and a web browser on top of Windows. That's it. The web browser gives them everything they really need. I wonder how many computer owners could even tell you if they have 32-bit or 64-bit or how the two differ. Probably the same percentage that can tell you detailed specs about their car engines. Virtually none. The only computer specs that matter anymore --exempting programmers-- are weight and battery life. A few hardcore gamers still care, but they're in the minority, even for video gamers. XBox anyone?

by jbarham 16y ago

"4GB RAM ought to be enough for anybody." ARMS's Achilles' heel is that it's only 32-bit, and I don't think anyone wants to go back to a segmented address space any time soon.

jbrennan 16y ago

That's a great point. Are there any 64 bit ARM chips on the horizon? I don't know much about chips, so maybe it's not even possible given the architecture.

1amzave 16y ago
I don't recall hearing any announced, though I wouldn't be surprised at all if it were currently in the works. The A15 mentioned in the article, however, I believe has something in the spirit of x86's PAE that offers an expanded (36 bits or so?) physical address space, for better or for worse (better in that you can address more memory, worse in that it's kind of an ugly hack and not a great long-term solution).
ryanpetrich 16y ago
It's possible, but just like the x86-64 transition it won't be pretty.
- protomyth 16y ago
  It might go better for ARM given that most of the more tightly controlled software that is delivered on ARMs (app store or custom embedded).
- mfukar 16y ago
  I'm curious; have you faced any problems in that transition? (seriously, I'm not trying to troll. I've had exactly one - making sure a project of mine would compile as PIC and that was pretty minor after the required reading)
  - ryanpetrich 16y ago
    There haven't been any major issues, it's just been glacially slow. Most software running on capable CPUs is still 32 bit, Visual Studio still doesn't have first class support for 64 bit and my MacBook still runs a 32 bit kernel. I expect ARM's transition to be quite different though--with the highest ends of their business moving in only a couple product cycles, and the lower ends of their business sticking with 32 bit indefinitely.
protomyth 16y ago
There were a lot of stories in the 2000 time frame, but nothing seems to have been actually done.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

theclay 16y ago

One of the article's contentions is that the vast majority of users are satisfied with Windows and Microsoft programs as they are right now. Most of those programs are 32-bit. By extension, if they are satisfied with 32-bit programs and don't feel a need to switch, then they won't miss 64-bit architectures.

sid0 16y ago
Most Windows sold today is 64-bit, and it allows you to run more 32-bit programs without running out of memory.
- theclay 16y ago
  Most people could care less about more applications... Virtually all of the computer users that I know limit their use to an office application and a web browser on top of Windows. That's it. The web browser gives them everything they really need. I wonder how many computer owners could even tell you if they have 32-bit or 64-bit or how the two differ. Probably the same percentage that can tell you detailed specs about their car engines. Virtually none. The only computer specs that matter anymore --exempting programmers-- are weight and battery life. A few hardcore gamers still care, but they're in the minority, even for video gamers. XBox anyone?