DP 8 HAS BEEN RELEASED

[kgdrum]

So then what's the point in 64 bit? I don't think I'm wrong about the RAM limitation and my cagey dad seems to under the same impression. Maybe it's genetic?

Let's not talk about our messed up gene pool,I suspect it's sumptin we can't explain to the 32bit kernel Luddites.
just kidding DIx and FL

Yes there's ways to get around those limitations,use apps with their own built in server technology and use apps in standalone mode out side of DP but running in the 64bit Kernel if you can has too many benefits not to take advantage of & sooner or later it will be the norm.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

If I am understanding all this - which has been mass debated here before - DP itself cannot address more than 4 GB unless (with DP you are booted in 64 bit mode.

I know some of us cannot boot in 64 bit, but reality is reality.

[kgdrum]

So then what's the point in 64 bit? I don't think I'm wrong about the RAM limitation and my cagey dad seems to under the same impression. Maybe it's genetic?

Dunno, but back when the subject first came, up as an experiment, I loaded close to 12gb (my max) into Bidule running a bunch of Ivory instances (which does not use a sample server scheme). It works. I promise.

Yeah using Bidule or VE Pro is another way to get past these limitations.
My hope is once most of my apps are 64bit and my Mac is in the 64bitKernel,I will not need Bidule or VEPro.
Less complicated to setup and work with and less $$.

[dix]

So then what's the point in 64 bit? I don't think I'm wrong about the RAM limitation and my cagey dad seems to under the same impression. Maybe it's genetic?

Dunno, but back when the subject first came, up as an experiment, I loaded close to 12gb (my max) into Bidule running a bunch of Ivory instances (which does not use a sample server scheme). It works. I promise.

Yeah using Bidule or VE Pro is another way to get past these limitations.
My hope is once most of my apps are 64bit and my Mac is in the 64bitKernel,I will not need Bidule or VEPro.
Less complicated to setup and work with and less $$.

Yes, but it has to be a 64bit version of those apps. I tried the same experiment with the 32bit version of Bidule and hit the 4gb limit just as I do with all 32bit apps. …we shall see what happens, but if Bidule can load more than 4gb (running on 32bit booted system) I don't know why DP would not be able too.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

Well you would be expected to reach the 4GB wall using Bidule in 32 bit. In 64 bit it can and will load more stuff.

The important thing for those still using 32 bit VIs (but probably not plugs) is still having access to those VIs that cannot run in a 64 bit DP actually running in 64 bit on a machine booted in 64 bit.

In that case, Bidule will run those VIs and feed them to DP. Yes, it 's a bit of extra work but then again, if you need a particular VI that is 32 bit, and you have supersized DP projects that choke on 4GB of RAM, that is a fairly painless workaround.

[mike connelly]

The kernel is just one part of OSX, and it has nothing to do with running apps in 64 bit.

Any mac that has a 64 bit cpu chip will run OSX in 64 bit. Some earlier macs can only run the kernel in 32 bit, but the rest of the OS is 64 bit, and 64 bit apps can be run and use as much memory as the machine has.

All mac pros have 64 bit chips, so they'll all be able to run DP in 64 bit and use more than 4 gigs of ram. The only 32 bit intel macs are ones with Core Duo (or solo) which is the earliest imacs, laptops, and minis.

The kernel makes very little difference, and it's not something users generally have to worry about. If the CPU is 64 bit, you get all the important 64 bit features.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

That all sounds very authoritative and technically sound - except - it doesn't explain why you even have the option of booting in 64 bit or why some apps will not run in 64 bit unless you're booted in that mode.

I'm not a high level OS tech geek and really asking about this because I really want to understand it. So am I to believe from your post that you can address more than 4GB of RAM in DP8 when the machine OS booted in 32 bit mode?

[mike connelly]

That all sounds very authoritative and technically sound - except - it doesn't explain why you even have the option of booting in 64 bit or why some apps will not run in 64 bit unless you're booted in that mode.

I don't know why apple did separate 32 and 64 bit kernels, it was probably a dumb move on their part. Their is a slight advantage in performance with the 64 bit kernel booted, but it's tiny and not worth worrying about. Which apps don't run in 64 bit mode in the 32 bit kernel?

So am I to believe from your post that you can address more than 4GB of RAM in DP8 when the machine OS booted in 32 bit mode?

Unless they did something weird in DP8 that's different than most other 64 bit apps, yes. In general, booted into the 32 bit kernel, any mac with a 64 bit CPU can run 64 bit apps and use more than 4 gigs of ram in those apps.

[Armageddon]

All mac pros have 64 bit chips, so they'll all be able to run DP in 64 bit and use more than 4 gigs of ram. The only 32 bit intel macs are ones with Core Duo (or solo) which is the earliest imacs, laptops, and minis.

My original black MacBook was a Core 2 Duo and was apparently running 64-bit OS/apps (actually, the only two I ever noticed were Adobe Premiere and AfterEffects CS5, which won't even install on a 32-bit system) the whole time, but it was the original 2GHz model and was only capable of using 2 GBs of RAM -- I think the 4 GBs+ delineation didn't happen until they released the Revision 2 motherboards. Still, I'm pretty sure Mountain Lion would have installed on it. On the other hand, I misread the fine print when I bought my current black MacBook (hastily bought off of eBay when the original's Revision 1 motherboard had a complete meltdown!), which is a Core Duo 2GHz, and tragically overlooked the missing "2" between the "Core" and the "Duo". I simply pulled the hard drive from my original and installed it into the Core Duo MacBook, thinking I had purchased a slightly-battered, but still more or less exact replacement computer. I never noticed any difference in speed, but was immediately puzzled when Adobe Premiere and AfterEffects showed up in my Applications' folder as odd-looking icons with slashes through them. D'oh!

Until recently, my next purchase was always going to be a Thunderbolt-equipped iMac with a solid state and 7200 rpm internal drives, plus 16 GBs of RAM ... these days, I'm not so thrilled with the direction Apple is heading with their computers and OS.

[Prime Mover]

The kernel is just one part of OSX, and it has nothing to do with running apps in 64 bit.

ding ding ding ding ding!

In terms of memory usage, the kernel is just another thread in the mix (well, it manages the threads). Running a 32bit kernel doesn't really effect the running of 64bit programs. To be honest, I'm not sure at all what 64bit kernels offer, but I'm certain they don't hinder the memory usage of 64bit applications.

Ahhhh, okay, I looked it up on Apple's FAQ:

Does running a 64-bit kernel have an impact on applications I usually run?

No, but it can have a significant impact on kernel extensions, usually used to enable third-party product hardware and special features. 32-bit kernel extensions will not work when your computer is running a 64-bit kernel. Products that use 32-bit kernel extensions may not work or may not recognize their associated hardware.

So there you have it. Still no sure explanation of why we would need a 32bit kernel, but a definite answer as to whether it will impact applications.

Okay, so one explanation mentions that applications with heavy I/O tasks (software samplers, anyone?) can benefit from a 64bit kernel, because that's one of the few times where the kernel is being asked to address a large amount of RAM (for disk I/O, NOT for memory storage). This doesn't mean that Ivory can't use more than 4GB of memory under a 32bit OS, but it does mean that DFD streaming will be slower, as the kernel has to parse smaller chunks. At least, that's how I'm interpreting these explanations.

So, 64bit kernels have their advantages, but they certainly aren't required for getting the performance benefits of 64bit applications. Think of them as parallel benefits: 64bit apps can use a lot more physical memory, 64bit kernels can do I/O processes a lot faster, and allow kernel extensions to access more than 4GB of memory.

[mike connelly]

Still no sure explanation of why we would need a 32bit kernel, but a definite answer as to whether it will impact applications.

I forgot about this before - the main reason they defaulted to 32 bit kernel for a while was because 64 bit kernel requires 64 bit drivers. So if you had a mac and a firewire audio box, switching the kernel to 64 bit would make that box stop working if it only had 32 bit drivers.

At this point it has been about three years since 10.6 and the first release of the 64 bit kernel, so most third party devices have had 64 bit drivers for a while (with 32 bit included as well). 10.8 drops support for 32 bit kernel so support for that will probably start going away over the next couple years.

[wvandyck]

All PDF manuals are available in the Help menu within DP.

All plug-ins that pass authorization in DP 7 do so in DP 8. It's fast looking like there's no reason to keep DP 7 on my system.

[bayswater]

Thanks. So far then, it looks like running DP 8 in 32 bit mode could be a reliable alternative to trying to run DP 7 and 8 on the same partition.

Yeah it is and the 32bit 8 works well but I came to the conclusion if I'm doing this I want to take total advantage of the system resources and boatload of ram in my Mac,which the 64bit kernel provides.

Yes, I intend to run in 64 bit mode too. I was thinking about situations where a 32 bit plugin has to be used.