Martijn @ opensource

I use a custom kernel on my linux desktop with bigmem support, so more than 4GB on a 32bits Linux environment shouldn't be a problem. Only the available address space per proces is limited to 2GB afaik ,but that should be enough for most applications.

I am running the same version as you (Ubuntu x64) and I haven't experienced much crashes of my browser. I am using Firefox as main browser.

Bigmem is an ugly hack/solution to gain more space to address. I prefer the full 64Bit power also.

Another test when developing Java with Glashfish server, the 32Bit with Bigmem patch can't compete with the power of a 64Bit kernel. It's blazingly fast!

I join the statement, I think it's absolutely ridiculous that a 32 Bit version can be made available, but 64 Bit is out of the picture.

Adobe, SHAME ON YOU

Im terribly sorry to hear that you have to start a separate virtual machine for browsing (in the worst case scenario). I guess this is a major problem which affects over 95% of PC users and should be fixed asap.

> Niche powerusers just aren't worth the extra development cost. Also in true open source spirit, since Adobe has released it's Flash format: build your own if you're not happy with the way things work.

If you want to use Flash Player do it in your host, not your VM.

But wait, then you have to install a sorts of libraries to run a 32-bit Firefox.

Let me power up my Windows computer (Vista 64-bit). Do I need tons of libraries to install Firefox 32-bit?

Nop...

And from another point of view: when does your browser needs more than 2 GB's of memory? Right. Never.

So it's a fail from Linux, and a double fail from you.

Stop bitching, you are a niche market, and you can't expect a company (who wants to gain money, that's their business model) to make software for that market…
Use a mainstream OS, and think mainstream (that is: my browser never uses more than 500MB of memory, so why the hell do I need a fully blown 64-bit version of it?)

I posted this on my own blog 2 days ago: and it's actually the same I write here ^
http://kristofmattei.be/2...gins-and-64-bit-browsers/

"Let me power up my Windows computer (Vista 64-bit). Do I need tons of libraries to install Firefox 32-bit?"

Actually, yes you do. Windows Vista x64 just makes them available by default (which means a pure 64bit system isn't possible on Vista even if you wanted to).

"And from another point of view: when does your browser needs more than 2 GB's of memory? Right. Never."

He isn't talking about his browser. He's talking about his system, which - in addition to a browser - needs to run applications that do need more than 2GB/4GB.

"you are a niche market"

Obviously with sheep like you who blindly follow what market leaders force upon them, who and who don't like choices and think Microsoft makes "da best OS EVAR!!!1!!1" it will stay that way...

@Herko_ter_horst:

About follow the market leader.

Do I have problems with my browser? No
Do I have problems with my wireless? No
Do I need to apply 234235 modifications to get a driver running? No

How many ways are there for me to install a program? 1. Double click the exe. No RPM shit, no DEB shit, no TAR.GZ shit.

About the 32-bit libraries. What space do they take? 200MB? Oeh noes, 200MB of your new 1TB disk.

Like I said: the only (AND ONLY) reason for Firefox to run in 64-bit mode is to use more than 2GB of virtual memory.

You blame me of following the market leader, well I don't seem to have problem with anything of the above ^.

There is NO 16-bit code in Vista x64, it's not even supported.

If you Linuxlovers would stand op and demand 1 version, instead of 23425 differant distro's, then you would have a reason to ask for a decent version (which is available).

And still then you don't have a reason to ask for a 64-bit version because the 32-bit version works perfect.

FYI, I've run Ubuntu as only OS for .5 years, and it is now that I take my conclusions. It sucks, and as long as there is no decent planning, no decent management, it still will suck, and no big compagny will put money in an OS which changes it's kernel every release (I am refering to drivers now).

And installing a .deb... You need this lib, and that lib. Ow wait you need the dev version, and you need to compile that first, and make a symlink here, and there, and modprobe that.

Well I install .NET framework on a computer and my program runs.

@M-Opensource
Windows x64 is native 64-bit. It just includes a WoW64 (Windows(32) on Windows64) layer that allows all 32-bit applications to still run. So indeed, this is emulated. But the OS is still native 64-bit if you run 64-bit applications. Furthermore, 16-bit applications no longer run on the x64 Windows editions. They removed the 16-bit subsystem (there was no need, but they just wanted to remove support for all this old stuff).

And from another point of view: when does your browser needs more than 2 GB's of memory?

Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.

If you Linuxlovers would stand op and demand 1 version, instead of 23425 differant distro's, then you would have a reason to ask for a decent version (which is available).

Different distributions are hardly the cause for the lack of a 64-bit version. There are enough ways to make a distribution-independent version of your software.

But that's not an argument even if the above weren't true, because they distribute their 32 bit software now as well!

And installing a .deb... You need this lib, and that lib. Ow wait you need the dev version, and you need to compile that first, and make a symlink here, and there, and modprobe that.

That's probably the single most false statement I've seen in a while. If you install a debian package, the packagemanager resolves dependencies for you. This is something Windows cannot do by the way. What you're saying is only true if you want to compile software from source, but most programs come in debian packages so that's hardly an issue.

You demonstrate a huge lack of understanding of the issue here. It's not impossible to run Flash on a 64 bit Ubuntu machine, but you'll have to take a huge detour because for some weird reason Adobe does not have a 64 bit version and that's silly.

=====
Before we start another rantathon :
* I like 64-bit computing.
* I like(d) GNU/Linux.
* This is THE ONE TRUTH. You can't disagree (no really, don't even think about it).
=====

Adobe just targets the largest group of users with the least amount of work. It's neither silly nor a crusade against FOSS or 64-bit computing. No amount of moaning/bitching/screaming/blogging and/or God complex is gonna help you combat that. In their eyes you're just being an annoying cunt.

"Normal" people (read : Windows and OS X users) use 32-bit libraries, 32-bit browsers and 32-bit plugins to the browse the web on their 64-bit operating systems. Not one of _these_ users (we're talking about > 97% of the Earth's webbrowsing population here) has ever needed more than 2GB per browser process. Google Chrome and IE 8.0 further eliminate this problem by using more than one browser process. You might also notice very few people in this gigantic population giving a crap about the memory spent loading in 32-bit libraries, nor the space on the hard disk they take up. -> No problems here

"N00b" GNU/Linux-users use 64-bit browsers, decent 64-bit wrappers for 32-bit libraries (rejoice ! nspluginwrapper doesn't suck as bad anymore) and 32-bit plugins. This gets the job done just as well as any 32-bit GNU/Linux system can. -> No problems here

Only the the best, the smartest, the superhuman elite use 64-bit browsers and crappy makeshift reverse-engineered flash-plugins. There's also a group refusing to use "this garbage", referring to both Adobe Flash and the makeshift pieces of shit trying to emulate it. It's hard to discern which group is less insane : the "fascist" group or the cellar dwellers without access to the Youtubes. -> Adobe doesn't care about you

The last important group to discuss is the BSD-user. The simplest way to view them is as ascended human beings. They no longer need any browsers, or plugins. They _are_ the machine (which elimates the need for a God complex). -> No problems here

you're ony hope is gnash, because adobe will not make a 64bit version for gnu/linux

Appendix A :

97% population estimate is based on both (32 and 64-bit users).

Just give Opera a try, it can use 32bit plugins.

he still needs to install extra libs for 32bit plugins

Wat is de reden om in het engels te bloggen op een nederlandse site?

this one works great
http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html