Im interested in trying Windows 7 RC, but don't know which version to download. Im planning to install it on a MacBook Pro (May 2008), in Boot Camp and in VM.
It has a 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2 GB of RAM.
So when the windows 7 beat was launched, i ended up choosing to download the 32-bit version as I knew it would run, and I wasn't sure if I was compatible or not.
1. I have a 20" iMac 2.4GHz 2GB RAM etc. Is my computer capable of running 64-bit?
2. Whats the difference between 32-bit and 64-bit? Is 64-bit faster?
I'm using LogicPro 9, and it runs on 32-bits mode. And I can't seem to find a way to change that to 64-bits.
Info:
MacBook Pro, Mac OS X (10.7.2)
As jingle-pundits desperately try to denigrate Snow Leopard as a "Service Pack," Apple's new operating system reference release actually expands the reach of the Mac platform in several important and under-reported new directions. Here's the second in a series looking closer at some of Snow Leopard's well-known, but often misrepresented or misunderstood features.
The 64-bit Kernel
It seems fashionable to describe Snow Leopard's new 64-bit kernel as a problem for Mac users with 32-bit EFI (the startup firmware that launches the operating system). It's true, 64-bit Core2 Duo machines prior to 2008 still run Snow Leopard's 64-bit apps using a 32-bit kernel, because Apple's 64-bit kernel requires both a 64-bit processor (a Core2 Duo or better) and 64-bit EFI.
The 64-bit edition of Windows XP or Vista will run on 64-bit Macs with 32-bit EFI via Boot Camp because Windows doesn't use EFI; it still lives in the simpler world of BIOS.
However, running a 64-bit kernel on these machines is of limited benefit. While there are certain advantages with the move to a 64-bit kernel, including new security enhancements, the primary benefit of a 64-bit kernel is being able to directly work with significantly more than 4GB of RAM, something that most existing consumer Macs and generic PCs can't do anyway.
For this reason, Snow Leopard also defaults to running its 32-bit kernel even on consumer models with 64-bit EFI. This prevents mainstream users from running into problems related to incompatible kernel extensions and device drivers (such as printer software), which aren't yet 64-bit.
This problem has helped repress the popularity of the 64-bit editions of Windows over the last several years, but won't hold up 64-bit Mac adoption because there is only one edition of Snow Leopard, one that runs on all Intel Macs and simply adjusts itself to the limitations of the given hardware.
Users who want to run the new 64-bit kernel on late modeled Macs (pretty much anything released after early 2008) can do so by booting with the 6 and 4 keys held down. If you're wondering whether your Mac has a 64-bit EFI firmware, you can type the command "ioreg -l -p IODeviceTree | grep firmware-abi" into the Terminal. The response will identify the machine as either having 32-bit or 64-bit EFI.
64-bit System Apps
What Snow Leopard does do is bring all Core2 Duo, 64-bit Macs (pretty much everything sold since 2007) up to speed with 64-bit system apps, from the Finder and Dock to iChat and Mail to background processes such as launchd and the system-wide spell checker. Running the 64-bit kernel or not, the singular version of Snow Leopard always runs 64-bit apps when running on 64-bit hardware; in contrast, no 32-bit editions of Windows can run 64-bit apps, even on 64-bit capable hardware.
Snow Leopard's upgrade to 64-bit system apps provides an overall speed boost due to limitations in the original design of Intel's 32-bit chips; the move to the new 64-bit x64 processor model, originally developed by AMD, solves these issues. Moving to 64-bit apps on other processor families, such as PowerPC, does not yield the same boost, but rather only incurs additional overhead, one of the reasons Snow Leopard is Intel-only.
Windows XP/Vista/7 users also benefit from running 64-bit apps, but Windows can only run 64-bit apps using the 64-bit kernel provided with the 64-bit "edition." This prevents mainstream generic PC users from realizing the benefits of the move to 64-bits unless they are equipped to make the full jump, which requires lining up 64-bit kernel drivers for all their hardware. This sticky bit has kept 64-bit adoption on Windows very low despite the significant advantages related to making the move.
Snow Leopard does not share this problem, because it has no problem running 64-bit apps using its 32-bit kernel. Additionally, Apple's unique Universal Binary specification packs both 32-bit and 64-bit code into each application, making Snow Leopard's 64-bit capable apps backwardly compatible with 32-bit Macs.
64-bit Third Party Apps
Snow Leopard also lays a strong foundation for 64-bit third party apps. While Leopard could run 64-bit graphical apps and even Tiger could run 64-bit background processes, the delivery of 64-bit Mac apps is just getting started. Even Apple is behind the curve on that front, with iWork, iLife, iTunes, and even its Pro Apps all still in 32-bit land. Microsoft Office and Adobe Creative Suite are also waiting for a 64-bit overhaul.
Snow Leopard's 64-bit kernel enables new generations of Macs that can use far more memory, unlocking new potential and more efficient performance by easing existing bottlenecks and allowing more aggressive caching, particularly for kernel i/o such as disk access. Third party Mac software titles that can benefit from the jump to 64-bits will likely begin to transition to full 64-bit capable binaries at a faster pace than the Windows side overall, because the majority of the installed base of Windows PCs are still running the 32-bit edition of XP, which unlike Snow Leopard, can't run 64-bit apps at all.
Snow Leopard delivers a performance boost to existing users of 64-bit Macs, but it really lays a foundation for 64-bit, high performance computing in the next few years. Thanks to the long standing 32-bit barrier that has held up the PC demand for large amounts of memory, RAM is now cheaper than ever, making the ability to install large amounts of memory that the operating system can actually use something that mainstream Mac users will hold as an advantage over the mainstream of 32-bit PC users.
That's because mainstream generic PCs are limited not just to 4GB of RAM, but also incur additional artificial limitations under Windows, where the operating system takes 2GB leaving only 2GB available for the running application. Mac OS X, like Linux, has always allowed applications the full 4GB available on the Intel architecture. This difference has given Windows a translation lookaside buffer performance advantage in the past, but Snow Leopard's new 64-bit applications erase this lead and instead provide Macs with the upper hand relative to the billion installed base of Windows PCs.
Additionally, as all modern Macs transition to 64-bit apps in a single leap, the Windows installed base will effectively splinter between the mass market of low end, 32-bit offerings (including the large increase in netbooks) and the higher end of 64-bit pros and gamers who will collectively amount to a population not dramatically larger than the Mac installed base, dramatically leveling the competitive playing field in the 64-bit arena.
64-bit Cocoa
Meanwhile, Apple is now arriving back to its original strategy in delivering Cocoa as the primary graphical API for Mac OS X applications. This marks the end of Apple's decade of compatibility appeasement to Adobe and Microsoft, both of whom led a third-party refusal to update existing apps from the old Mac OS routines to the advanced new frameworks Apple acquired from Steve Job's NeXT. Going forward, anyone who wants to deliver 64-bit graphical apps has to build them using a Cocoa interface.
Apple was powerless to force the issue a decade ago, when the Mac platform didn't seem to have much potential left and the new Mac OS X could not offer any guarantees of its survival or success to third party developers. That has all changed. Apple now operates a strong platform that has been rapidly outpacing the growth in generic PC sales by a significant factor for several years now.
Developers now know there is money to be made in shipping third party apps for Mac OS X. Additionally, the tools used to build new Mac apps are essentially identical to those used to develop apps for the iPhone and iPod touch, the leading mobile platform by a wide margin.
Apple's singular focus on Cocoa will greatly simplify the company's development efforts, as it won't be having to move both Cocoa and Carbon into graphical 64-bit land. While Adobe has complained that Apple's decision to freeze Carbon in a 32-bit maintenance mode has prevented it from delivering a 64-bit version of CS4, the simplified Cocoa roadmap will force Adobe to get on the ball with the next release, upgrading Creative Suite in two directions (Cocoa and 64-bit) rather than dragging along the Carbon past into another decade.
Microsoft and other significant Mac developers will also have to get on the Cocoa bandwagon in order to stay relevant on Apple's 64-bit Mac platform for the next decade. The Mac already has much more visibility, market relevance and software profitability than its market share would suggest, thanks in part to Apple's bold capacity to decisively burn its legacy bridges in order to give developers a single, clear option for future development, just as it did on the iPhone.
Of course, Apple itself needs to deliver 64-bit versions of its own Logic Studio, Final Cut Studio, and Aperture, too. The company was previously outpaced by its third party developers in the move to PowerPC, and to a lesser extent, in the move to Intel Macs. Apple's position as both a platform vendor and an application developer should help it to deliver practical, usable tools for its own developers.
Apple's leadership in laying out a strong 64-bit future in Snow Leopard has created a strong foundation that will enable the Mac to move ahead in important ways. However, there's more going on in Snow Leopard than just new progress in supporting 64-bit CPUs. The next segment will look at how Apple has pioneered efficient use of GPUs, and what it means for today's Macs and for coming generations.
Inside Mac OS X Snow Leopard: QuickTime X
Inside Mac OS X Snow Leopard: GPU Optimization
Inside Mac OS X Snow Leopard: Exchange Support
Inside Mac OS X Snow Leopard: Malware Protection
I want to start with the core 64-bit, so I followed the instructions listed here:
[URL]
I applied the second method (the code in terminal):
sudo-systemsetup setkernelbootarchitecture x86_64
I restart my MBP (i5, 8GB RAM ..), and here he is freez on apple logo (startup)
I tried ripping my DVDs onto my macbook and I keep getting a msg saying that it needs 64-bit VLC to rip the dvd? So I go to the link and on the VLC media player download section it says: Note: VLC will not be available for 64-bits Intel-based Macs until further notice. You can safely use the 32-bits package instead.
View 3 Replies View RelatedI have an Intel iMac running OS 10.5.8. I've purchased 10.6.3 to install. I have, however, lots of strange stuff all over my Mac, much of it brought over from older Macs and OS's over the decades and not visited (via Get Info) from dates before I bought this unit, 11/'07. Is there a way to ID and get rid of the useless detritus from the past before I do a second backup to a flash drive? I also have an external LaCie drive, but there's so much junk on both drives!
Info:
iMac, Mac OS X (10.5.8)
How to reboot 64 to 32 bits Lion?
Info:
iMac, Mac OS X (10.7.3)
I've seen an eMac advertised (the very first gen) and I was wondering whether if I bought it, it would be able to support various bits of hardware I have kicking around. Here is the list:
-160GB Hitachi Deskstar ATA/IDE hard drive, 7K160 I think (I know that only 60gb will be visible)
-6x Tray loding DVD drive. I think its from the first gen iMac
-PC100 168 pin ram (I think its pc100 otherwise it might be pc133)
Apple's site about Snow Leopard says that 64-bit *apps* under Snow Leopard will be more secure than ever due to several things:A more secure function argument-passing mechanism and the use of hardware-based execute disable for heap memory.
Memory on the system heap is marked using strengthened checksums, helping to prevent attacks that rely on corrupting memory.
Nerdly question, but does anyone know if any of these types of security enhancements require the 64-bit *kernel* (not just a given app)? My white Macbook (C2duo) is unlikely to run 64-bit unless Apple lets it in their final release (it apparently won't so far as they haven't written drivers for my lowly machine).
Anyone else with the GM of Snow Leopard?
Have you tried the arch=x86_64 modification to the com.apple.boot.plist ?
When I use arch=x86_64, I get 100% true 64 bits on my Macbook Pro and my iMac, but my 2009 Mac Mini is stuck in 32 bits.
I don't know when this started, but in the binary view of the OS X Calculator the bits aren't showing anymore (0 or 1).
I haven't found a solution yet. Could I reinstall the calculator?
Info:
MacBook Pro, Mac OS X (10.7.3)
Clicked itunes in dock the icon bobs up and down then nothing.
the same thing happens with an album design software supplied by a local photo lab both were working perfectly last week. All other software is fine.I have verified and repaired permissions and disks several time and it say every thing is Ok. No goodI reinstalled both bits of software from new copies. No good.Reinstalled Snow Leopard and up dated as required. No good.Used 3rd party software called Permissions/Preference. No good
I've heard Office:Mac isn't that great, and doesn't make up for what iWork 09 is missing. So I'm wondering what people think about it and why does it get such a bland reputation? Also, do people use a combination of the above? Such as iWork and Office:Windows? Both Offices? I do mainly word processing, some soft Excel work (no hardcore giant spreadsheets...yet), and general PowerPoints for presentations. I have access to cheap iWork/Offices (school discount) and a family pack of the top-level edition of Office:PC (family) so it isn't a big deal to get any of the above.
Lastly, what's the difference between Camino and Firefox? I use Firefox currently and love it, mainly due to the add-ons (weather at the bottom, Gmail alert, skins, page views, other customizations). Tabs seem to be on all browsers these days, so are there any other key differences?
I'm looking for a new monitor to go with my MBP, and I'm stuck trying to choose between the ones listed above.
The 2407WFP is a couple of years old now I guess, but it's the rev A04 version, which supposedly fixed the (few) problems with what was otherwise meant to be a great screen. It's an sPVA screen.
I've heard good reviews of the G2410, with its LED backlighting. It's still a TN panel and I hear so much bad stuff about them.
The 2209WA is an eIPS panel which I like the sound of, but it's smaller and lower resolution.
The F2380 is a cPVA panel, the image quality looks better but I've heard bad things about blacks on this panel.
I have Windows 7 Ultimate x64 RTM via BootCamp on my Unibody Macbook.
Specs:
2.0 Core 2
4GB DDR3
The 64-bit kernel was used for both the 32 and the 64-bit SL tests.
The 64-bit version of Geekbench for Mac is a slightly older version (2.1.2 vs 2.1.4) not sure if that makes a difference.
The Difference between Win7 x64 and SL x64 was very small. What I found interesting was the large difference between the 32-bit tests.
I wanted to let you know of my experiences attempting to install Windows 7 Professional on my brand new iMac 27".
I purchased the machine new on 10/24/2009. It has the ATI 4670 video card, not the Nvidia.
I made four seperate attempts to install Windows 7 Professional 64-bit. Each attempt fails the exact same way. When Windows Setup is on the final reboot prior to completing the install, it starts up and displays a message, "Starting Services". Then it displays a message box stating that a problem occurred and windows needed to reboot to continue setup.
On a side note: I also have a copy of Windows 7 32-bit Professional. After formatting the BootCamp partition, the 32-bit version installed with zero problems (black screen aside). If you plug a second monitor into the Mac the display is actually on that monitor.
If anyone can offer any advice on how to overcome installing the 64-bit version, that is what I really want. I'm holding off on activating this copy of windows for a few days to see if anyone can offer a solution to the problem installing the 64-bit edition.
I bought Windows 7 today (Premium version) and it came with both a 32-bit disc and a 64-bit disc. I'm just wondering if there are any real significant advantages to using the 64-bit version. The specs of my MBP are in my sig.
View 3 Replies View RelatedI was one of the ("new converts") XP people who got Macs for the first time because of some very fabulous advertizing and Apple's image as a company with superior products. But after 1 year of using a Mac, I have come to believe that a computer is a computer is a computer.
Latest OS whether it is windows or OSX, would always have learnt something from its predecessors and competitors and in some extent would be better. Some new OS represent a big step forward (windows XP or leopard), others a small step (vista or snow leopard). Microsoft suffered because they took a small step forward with XP when Apple took a big step with leopard and now it is Apple's turn to suffer when Microsoft takes a big step with Seven vs. Apple's small step forward with SL.
I went for a better product switching to Mac at that time when time comes around for my next computer; it won't be a Mac just because I am a Mac user. It will be whichever is a better product at that time in both features and value. Whether it is a PC or a Mac, because a computer is a computer is a computer.
Is it just me or do any of you have a different tactile experience with laser mice on a Mac OS vs. Windows? I have both loaded operating systems on my new MP and it just feels like the mouse tracks better in Windows... like it's just snappier as if it had a higher refresh or sampling rate. I've actually always noticed this going back and forth between Macs and PCs for years -- the mouse just works better in Windows -- maybe Windows has better mouse drivers or something because it just feels more responsive. I should try an old ball mouse to see if it's the optical factor. My mouse on the Mac just feels ever so slightly choppy. Maybe I need one of those special optical mouse pads(?)
View 23 Replies View RelatedSaw this article in The Onion the other day comparing OS X 10.5.6 "Snow Leopard" to Windows 7.
the compression kinda makes the text hard to read, haven't posted an attachment before so I hope you all can read it
Don't know if the new Mac Pro's are going to use the new Intel i7's but check out the youtube vid below a Mac Pro 2.66ghz vs i7 2.66GHz
View 24 Replies View RelatedBased on the beta versions, which one is superior in which area?
View 24 Replies View RelatedAnyone have pro's or cons of vm fusion verses parallel 5.0? What are you running? 27" iMac i7 and MBP 15" 3.06. I will be running windows 7..
View 1 Replies View RelatedWhen I want to finish a session of using Vista in VirtualBox. If I "x" out the application, "it says "save in state" or something like that and "power off machine" is power off machine different than shutting down windows? What's best to do and what does what? I'm assuming also that I can't just close virtualbox and come back to it later without windows being shut down or affected?
View 1 Replies View RelatedCould I get some feedback on what the community feels is the better of these two programs and why. I want to run Win 7 and have been trying Virtual Box and it's just not working out for me.
View 7 Replies View RelatedCurrently, I installed windows xp via Bootcamp and it's having no issues. However, I also have parallels 5 and windows 7 so i was wondering if I should delete the bootcamp partition and install win7 via parallels instead?
View 9 Replies View RelatedI'm playing Left 4 Dead on Windows 7 x64. Frame rates are down compared to Vista x64 SP1. Not what I was expecting. Playing both on same low quality settings.
I'm running on a Radeon x1600 (MacBook Pro). As far I remember the graphics drivers are the same version under 7 and Vista (i.e. the Boot Camp driver).
I'm taking a class with a professor who uses Windows. We're using Excel (2003) tomorrow in class, and I'd like to use my Excel Mac to do the class.
Is there a big difference with the Mac version versus the Windows counterpart? Enough to make a significant difference?
i have been a long time macbook pro user and I finally got around to installing bootcamp to run some windows software for school. I'm sure that many of you have noticed how the acceleration path for the mouse tracking on OSX feel "different" than Windows and my problem is that I prefer the OSX method of tracking and can't stand the fidgety nature of windows tracking (especially while using the new buttonless trackpads which work great on OSX but fail miserably on windows). I did a search on google and found that there are many ways to get the OSX tracking to "feel" like windows using software like USBOverdrive but I couldn't find any solutions for my problem which involves the opposite, getting windows tracking to feel like OSX.
View 2 Replies View Related