«

Hi there,

impossible wrote:
> So much for the Larry D'Loserites trumpeting the advantages of a 64-bit
> browser. They've been around for years on all platforms but users don't
> see any advantage. Of course, if you pin a Larry D'Loserite down, they
> can't name a single advanatge of 64-bit browsing either. But that never
> stops them from trolling on.

Good to see that you're not trolling then...

> Good to see Ars Technica busting another myth.
>
> http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/new...ght-64-bit.ars

If you had content that would push the limits of 32-bit address space in
the browser, then 64-bit would be a given. I would then question why the
hell the content needed so much space in the first place - downloading
content such as that surely would tax even the best broadband that we
mere mortals can afford to the limit?...

Kind regards,

Chris Wilkinson,
Brisbane, Australia.

"There's this real moron thing I do - its called thinking..."
- George Carlin RIP -

Chris Wilkinson wrote:
>
> If you had content that would push the limits of 32-bit address space in
> the browser, then 64-bit would be a given. I would then question why the
> hell the content needed so much space in the first place - downloading
> content such as that surely would tax even the best broadband that we
> mere mortals can afford to the limit?...
>
You forget that most browsers are used in a business environment these
days. Still, even if they do fairly heavy lifting as some corporate
front end, the work is unlikely to tax a 32 bit browser.

Cheers,

Cliff

--

The Internet is interesting in that although the nicknames may change,
the same old personalities show through.

impossible wrote:
>
> "Chris Wilkinson" <> wrote in message
> news:hj48fc$i2r$...
>> Hi there,
>>
>> impossible wrote:
>>> So much for the Larry D'Loserites trumpeting the advantages of a 64-bit
>>> browser. They've been around for years on all platforms but users don't
>>> see any advantage. Of course, if you pin a Larry D'Loserite down, they
>>> can't name a single advanatge of 64-bit browsing either. But that never
>>> stops them from trolling on.
>>
>> Good to see that you're not trolling then...
>>
>
> There's another thread for that run by the Larry D'Loserites. This one
> is for people who can actually read.
>
>>> Good to see Ars Technica busting another myth.
>>>
>>> http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/new...ght-64-bit.ars
>>>
>>
>> If you had content that would push the limits of 32-bit address space in
>> the browser, then 64-bit would be a given. I would then question why the
>> hell the content needed so much space in the first place - downloading
>> content such as that surely would tax even the best broadband that we
>> mere mortals can afford to the limit?...
>>
>
> Agreed, which is why there are no advantages to using a 64-bit browser
> -- today . That could change, of course. But I suspect that demand for
> 64-bit graphics applications, database programs, and
> technical/scientific software will be far more likely to drive the
> market for 64-bit OS's than anything a simple browser can manage.
>
Graphics apps? Maybe, but the number of people using graphics apps in an
organisation would be small, unless they are a Weta of course. Database
programs? The server would benefit from 64 bit, but all the client has
to do is make requests of the server, which is much lighter work.
Technical/scientific software? That's still a minor usage overall.

The major advantage is the ability to keep more apps in memory and
switch to and fro, but even there there is a limit, a human one this time.

Cheers,

Cliff

--

The Internet is interesting in that although the nicknames may change,
the same old personalities show through.