4 ms·

As mentioned in the bug and other locations, Firefox's x64 builds are pre-release nightlies only and not anywhere near ready for primetime. They still get a lo

As mentioned in the bug and other locations, Firefox's x64 builds are pre-release nightlies only and not anywhere near ready for primetime. They still get a lot of bug reports that are x64 only and don't have resources dedicated to it because Firefox OS and Metro mode have higher priorities. For folks in the bug saying that this will make them somehow abandon Firefox, if 64-bit is really that important to them, they'll have to use Internet Explorer only and deal with many popular plugins not working (Adobe Reader, Quicktime, etc). Opera has an experimental Win64 build from February that is now out of date with known security issues. No further progress has been made or release schedule announced. Chrome, Chromium and Iron are 32-bit only and have no 64-bit builds, not even pre-alpha experimental ones. Apple has abandoned Safari for Windows entirely. So, as far as 64-bit browsers on Windows... you've got IE and that's it. UPDATE: As correctly pointed out below, there is a snapshot (alpha, incomplete, unstable) build of current Opera for Win x64. Apologies on the incomplete information in this post originally.

barrkel 14y ago
Plugins not working is a security / reliability bonus, from my perspective; every few months, I have to hunt them down and delete / disable them. At least it's easier to disable them in Firefox than in Chrome.
- mh- 14y ago
  chrome://plugins
Osiris 14y ago
Your information about Opera is incorrect. The current release (12.11) has a x64 build (http://snapshot.opera.com/12.11-1661_windows.html http://snapshot.opera.com/12.11-1661_windows.html). Why the downvote? The link takes you to the download for the 64-bit Windows version that was just released
- JohnTHaller 14y ago
  I stand corrected, I was basing it on the out of process plugins page that they used to keep updated: http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/64-bit-opera-and-out-of-process-plug-ins/ http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/64-bit-opera-and-out-of-p... Opera does have a Snapshot Win x64 build available which they describe as "Cutting edge, alpha quality, incomplete, and often contain critical bugs". This does sound a lot like the now-discontinued Firefox Win x64 nightlies (aka nowhere near stable). (PS - You get an upvote from me. Not sure why someone downvoted you.)
  - anonymfus 14y ago
    Download button on main page of www.opera.com provides x64 version for me if I use browser with Win64 and x64 in user agent http://www.opera.com/download/get.pl?id=35259&thanks=true&sub=true http://www.opera.com/download/get.pl?id=35259&thanks=tru... It is not experimental.
  - anonymfus 14y ago
    http://www.opera.com/docs/changelogs/windows/1200/ http://www.opera.com/docs/changelogs/windows/1200/ — Changelog for 12.00 release includes official 64-bit support.
  - gsnedders 14y ago
    Page now updated. :)
  - adasiko 14y ago
    "As correctly pointed out below, there is a snapshot (alpha, incomplete, unstable) build of current Opera for Win x64." (c) JohnTHaller "Update, November 22nd 2012: Please note that Opera 12.00 final shipped with 64-bit and OOPP support, and that as of version 12.02, OOPP is disabled for Windows 32-bit." (c) Opera.com You are wrong :P
- sliverstorm 14y ago
  Fact is, sometimes people downvote you simply because they don't like what you have to say, not because it is wrong or even questionable.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
yuhong 14y ago
AFAIK IE10 can automatically select 32-bit or 64-bit processes as needed: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ieinternals/archive/2012/03/23/understanding-ie10-enhanced-protected-mode-network-security-addons-cookies-metro-desktop.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ieinternals/archive/2012/03/23/under...
- meaty 14y ago
  It doesn't actually work properly from our preliminary testing which causes us a number of problems thanks to some legacy ActiveX crap we've been trying to kill for years.
jlgreco 14y ago
Both Chrome and Chromium have x86_64 builds for Linux, do you know what it is about windows that makes it so hard to ship a 64 bit build?
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- azakai 14y ago
  Firefox also has x86_64 builds for Linux, and OS X too. I don't know why 64-bit Windows is a particularly difficult combination for apparently all browsers (but IE).
  - jlgreco 14y ago
    I have to assume it is probably a problem for IE too, but MS is the only browser vender really in a position not to be particularly bothered by whatever it is that could be causing that trouble. I too have no idea what that trouble could be though.
    - azakai 14y ago
      Well, Microsoft does have only a single target platform, unlike most other browsers, perhaps that's the main issue. Microsoft also only targets recent Windows versions with new IE releases, also unlike most other browsers.
  - rat87 14y ago
    I don't think it's necessarily that it's more difficult but that there is less demand. On linux distros (especially since most stuff is open source) they try to get everything be 64 bit on 64 bit installs, some distros don't even ship 32 bit system libraries by default. That's why linux users wanted 64 bit flash so much(you need 64 bit plugins for a 64 bit browser although there was a hack called nspluginwrapper to let you use 32 bit flash in 64 bit fiefox). I'm guessing there is a somewhat similar push on OS X to get all 64 bit software on a 64 bit os. On windows, firefox is just a single installed program(unlike linux where firefox's library might be shared with thunderbird, etc.), and a number of apps are 32 bit, and thats fine. Plus there is a larger selection of plugins many of which may never get a 64 bit version. Also I may be wrong but I think that browsers these days have a lot of per architecture optimizations targeting x86 and separately arm(x86-64 optimization being a lower priority), so that 64 bit browsers may actually be slower.
makomk 14y ago
Chrome can get away with being 32-bit-only because it uses multiple processes for rendering, which means that it can make use of many times more RAM than a single 32-bit process ever could. It'll quite happily use 64 gigabytes of RAM or more if you have enough tabs open. Firefox can't do this.

barrkel 14y ago

Plugins not working is a security / reliability bonus, from my perspective; every few months, I have to hunt them down and delete / disable them. At least it's easier to disable them in Firefox than in Chrome.

mh- 14y ago
chrome://plugins

Osiris 14y ago

Your information about Opera is incorrect. The current release (12.11) has a x64 build (http://snapshot.opera.com/12.11-1661_windows.html http://snapshot.opera.com/12.11-1661_windows.html). Why the downvote? The link takes you to the download for the 64-bit Windows version that was just released

JohnTHaller 14y ago
I stand corrected, I was basing it on the out of process plugins page that they used to keep updated: http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/64-bit-opera-and-out-of-process-plug-ins/ http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/64-bit-opera-and-out-of-p... Opera does have a Snapshot Win x64 build available which they describe as "Cutting edge, alpha quality, incomplete, and often contain critical bugs". This does sound a lot like the now-discontinued Firefox Win x64 nightlies (aka nowhere near stable). (PS - You get an upvote from me. Not sure why someone downvoted you.)
- anonymfus 14y ago
  Download button on main page of www.opera.com provides x64 version for me if I use browser with Win64 and x64 in user agent http://www.opera.com/download/get.pl?id=35259&thanks=true&sub=true http://www.opera.com/download/get.pl?id=35259&thanks=tru... It is not experimental.
- anonymfus 14y ago
  http://www.opera.com/docs/changelogs/windows/1200/ http://www.opera.com/docs/changelogs/windows/1200/ — Changelog for 12.00 release includes official 64-bit support.
- gsnedders 14y ago
  Page now updated. :)
- adasiko 14y ago
  "As correctly pointed out below, there is a snapshot (alpha, incomplete, unstable) build of current Opera for Win x64." (c) JohnTHaller "Update, November 22nd 2012: Please note that Opera 12.00 final shipped with 64-bit and OOPP support, and that as of version 12.02, OOPP is disabled for Windows 32-bit." (c) Opera.com You are wrong :P
sliverstorm 14y ago
Fact is, sometimes people downvote you simply because they don't like what you have to say, not because it is wrong or even questionable.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

yuhong 14y ago

AFAIK IE10 can automatically select 32-bit or 64-bit processes as needed: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ieinternals/archive/2012/03/23/understanding-ie10-enhanced-protected-mode-network-security-addons-cookies-metro-desktop.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ieinternals/archive/2012/03/23/under...

meaty 14y ago
It doesn't actually work properly from our preliminary testing which causes us a number of problems thanks to some legacy ActiveX crap we've been trying to kill for years.

jlgreco 14y ago

Both Chrome and Chromium have x86_64 builds for Linux, do you know what it is about windows that makes it so hard to ship a 64 bit build?

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
azakai 14y ago
Firefox also has x86_64 builds for Linux, and OS X too. I don't know why 64-bit Windows is a particularly difficult combination for apparently all browsers (but IE).
- jlgreco 14y ago
  I have to assume it is probably a problem for IE too, but MS is the only browser vender really in a position not to be particularly bothered by whatever it is that could be causing that trouble. I too have no idea what that trouble could be though.
  - azakai 14y ago
    Well, Microsoft does have only a single target platform, unlike most other browsers, perhaps that's the main issue. Microsoft also only targets recent Windows versions with new IE releases, also unlike most other browsers.
- rat87 14y ago
  I don't think it's necessarily that it's more difficult but that there is less demand. On linux distros (especially since most stuff is open source) they try to get everything be 64 bit on 64 bit installs, some distros don't even ship 32 bit system libraries by default. That's why linux users wanted 64 bit flash so much(you need 64 bit plugins for a 64 bit browser although there was a hack called nspluginwrapper to let you use 32 bit flash in 64 bit fiefox). I'm guessing there is a somewhat similar push on OS X to get all 64 bit software on a 64 bit os. On windows, firefox is just a single installed program(unlike linux where firefox's library might be shared with thunderbird, etc.), and a number of apps are 32 bit, and thats fine. Plus there is a larger selection of plugins many of which may never get a 64 bit version. Also I may be wrong but I think that browsers these days have a lot of per architecture optimizations targeting x86 and separately arm(x86-64 optimization being a lower priority), so that 64 bit browsers may actually be slower.

makomk 14y ago

Chrome can get away with being 32-bit-only because it uses multiple processes for rendering, which means that it can make use of many times more RAM than a single 32-bit process ever could. It'll quite happily use 64 gigabytes of RAM or more if you have enough tabs open. Firefox can't do this.