MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Go to iPodDailyNews

MacDailyNews Poll

Have Apple tablet rumors delayed your planned MacBook/Pro/Air purchase?(trends)

5 Day Most Commented

Microsoft: You're not cool; you're the opposite of cool; stop making your employees dance (w/ vid) (192)
Microsoft CEO Ballmer grilled about Apple at annual shareholders meeting (66)
Why do workers have to suffer with Windows PCs at work when they have superior Macs at home? (58)
PC World: Is Psystar's judicial deathblow a win for consumers? (57)
Washington Times: Apple's new Magic Mouse really is magic (54)

Opinion Archive

October 2009
Is Psystar’s real mission to publicize that running Apple’s Mac OS X on generic PCs is possible?
March 2009
Dell launches overdone, overpriced, overweight, OS-limited Apple MacBook-wannabe ‘Adamo’ laptop
November 2008
Apple should buy Sprint

Current Headlines

Fri, Nov 20, 2009 - 08:55 PM EST — AAPL: 199.92 (-0.59, -0.29%) | NASDAQ: 2146.04 (-10.78, -0.5%)

Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard: 64-bit right down to the kernel

Tuesday, October 28, 2008 - 11:34 AM EST

"Build notes leaked on the web of a prerelease version of Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard indicate that the software only supports enabling its new 64-bit kernel on certain machines, including the Xserve, Mac Pro, and MacBook Pro, but this does not mean Snow Leopard's kernel will be limited to 32-bit operation on consumer machines," Prince McLean reports for AppleInsider. "Instead, it means that the early developer build of Snow Leopard does not yet supply 64-bit kernel extensions for some of the critical components of the MacBook and other consumer machines. When released to developers around spring and to end users a few months later, Snow Leopard will support using a 64-bit kernel on all Intel Macs with 64-bit CPU, such as the Core 2 Duo."

"Snow Leopard will deliver the first 64-bit kernel for Mac OS X. Earlier versions of the operating system, including today's Leopard, can run 64-bit software but do so using a 32-bit kernel. More accurately, whether running on 32 and 64-bit CPUs, Mac OS X loads the same kernel image and run it as a 32-bit process, although when run on 64-bit hardware, the 32-bit kernel switches into 'long mode compatibility mode,'" McLean reports.

"By exposing 64-bit development tools and concepts years in advance, Mac programmers have had time to build a more mature understanding of how things work. If Apple had attempted to simply deliver a 100% 64-bit OS in one fell swoop, it may never have come together. Apple would have run into many of the same catch-22 problems that have held 64-bit Windows from gaining mass adoption," McLean reports.

"On Mac OS X Leopard and in Snow Leopard, Apple designed the kernel to run both 32 and 64-bit software natively with no compatibility layer running, and all supporting files and libraries can be organized in the same application bundle. That means developers can distribute a single installer that works on any Mac, and that users won't need to make sure they've obtained the correct binary for their machine. This promises to go a long way in making the transition to 64-bit Mac software very smooth and virtually invisible to most users," McLean reports.

Much more in the full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader "Chuckles the Microsoft CEO" for the heads up.]

Reader Feedback: = registered.
Unregistered users: Feedback from multiple usernames are subject to deletion. Off-topic and posts from suspected astroturfers will be removed.

Oct 28, 08 - 10:50 am Comment from: @ Rattymouse

Apple's vaporware is always better than Microsoft's vaporware.

Oct 28, 08 - 10:50 am Comment from: Radius

@Rattymouse

Because it is going to be actually produced within this decade.

Oct 28, 08 - 10:52 am Comment from: MadMac

@Ratty

Because it's Mac OS X, plain and simple.

Oct 28, 08 - 10:55 am Comment from: ericdano

This is better than Windows 7 as there will be just TWO versions of OS X 10.6, one for servers and one for everyone else. Compare that to the 50 million versions of Windows (Home, Ultimate, Kitchen Sink)........

Oct 28, 08 - 10:56 am Comment from: BillH

"and this is better than Windows 7 HOW????"

"On Mac OS X Leopard and in Snow Leopard, Apple designed the kernel to run both 32 and 64-bit software natively with no compatibility layer running, and all supporting files and libraries can be organized in the same application bundle. That means developers can distribute a single installer that works on any Mac, and that users won't need to make sure they've obtained the correct binary for their machine. This promises to go a long way in making the transition to 64-bit Mac software very smooth and virtually invisible to most users."

Oct 28, 08 - 10:58 am Comment from: Jimithy

Is it just me, or does every version of Mac OS X claim to be "more 64-bit" than the last?

Oct 28, 08 - 11:00 am Comment from: spyinthesky

Ratty you must be soooo very forgiving with that sort of optimism or have you simply been on that addictive Microsoft branded coffee again?

Oct 28, 08 - 11:02 am Comment from: macaholic

more 64 bit-ier and crackalackin!!!

Oct 28, 08 - 11:14 am Comment from: Nathan

@ Jimithy
'Is it just me, or does every version of Mac OS X claim to be "more 64-bit" than the last?'

Well whether claims are made or not, this on IS 64 bit. The kernel (the basis of any operating system) is 64 bit. The only thing most people don't understand is that you can run 32-bit programs seamlessly in a 64-bit environment. There is no compatibility issues if the coding was done right in the OS.

Vista has not been a very good example of this.

Oct 28, 08 - 11:15 am Comment from: shill

@Rattymouse

Widows 7 is better for you as M$ is obviously paying you for every post like this that you make.

Oct 28, 08 - 11:23 am Comment from: mr. I Love Bits

But I want 128 bits. Its 64 bits better. Man this sucks

Oct 28, 08 - 12:03 pm Comment from: almux

Simply genius!

Oct 28, 08 - 12:19 pm Comment from: ragarcia

Yeah, what happened to 128-bits.

I mean if my SSL communications to Amazon can be in 128-bit, why can't Apple just get off their butts and give me 128-bit directly on my OS?

Sheesh, if Amazon can do it, you would think Apple could do it too?!

Oct 28, 08 - 12:21 pm Comment from: Marc

so will snow leopard be as good as Nintendo 64?

Oct 28, 08 - 12:33 pm Comment from: doc

128

That's the ticket!

I always wanted to have access to one trillion terabytes of addressable memory. I'm only asking to address more storage than all of the assessable internet as addressable memory. Maybe then JAVA will not lock up my system all the time and having 170 open windows will not slow the system to a crawl!

Oct 28, 08 - 12:58 pm Comment from: GranitW

@Jimithy

'Is it just me, or does every version of Mac OS X claim to be "more 64-bit" than the last?'

That's the point. Apple has been doing a very long transition to 64bit since Mac OS X 10.2.8, unlike MS who just jumped the gun.

Oct 28, 08 - 01:01 pm Comment from: Jimy

It'll scroll like butter!

Oct 28, 08 - 01:16 pm Comment from: Skeeter

its about time!

Oct 28, 08 - 01:25 pm Comment from: TruthMan

How many times has OS X been "64 bit" now? Is this the third time?

Has Steve Jobs gotten his 3 GHz Intel processor yet?

PowerPC rules!!!

Oct 28, 08 - 01:57 pm Comment from: Digits McGee

…and breathing air is better than chlorine gas HOW????

Oct 28, 08 - 02:17 pm Comment from: Thinker

@ TruthMan
"How many times has OS X been '64 bit' now?" At nearly every OS X product launch since the introduction of the Power Mac G5...

"Has Steve Jobs gotten his 3 GHz Intel processor yet?" The answer to you question is yes. In certain configurations, both iMac and Mac Pro come with 3.0+ GHz processors.

"PowerPC rules!!!" While PowerPC is definitely a good platform, it's obvious that switching to Intel processors was the correct decision for Apple. The kind of market penetration that Apple has achieved in the past couple of years is a direct result of the PowerPC to Intel switch.

Oct 28, 08 - 02:30 pm Comment from: Cubert

@ Jimithy,
Yes, because it is. Read the article to understand Apple's slow transition. Snow Leopard is the culmination and will be fully 64-bit compatible. No further steps to take after its release.

Oct 29, 08 - 06:57 am Comment from: taxi

so while osx has gone from 32 bit to 64 bit, windows has gone from 32 bit to 2 bit?

Reader feedback page 1 of 1 pages:

MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

MacDailyNews Poll

5 Day Most Commented

Opinion Archive

Current Headlines

Latest Joy of Tech

MacNN

AppleInsider

Macworld UK

TUAW

MacRumors

Yahoo! Finance AAPL

iTunes Top 10 Albums

Mac OS X Downloads

Fri, Nov 20, 2009 - 08:55 PM EST — AAPL: 199.92 (-0.59, -0.29%) | NASDAQ: 2146.04 (-10.78, -0.5%)

Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard: 64-bit right down to the kernel

Reader Feedback: = registered.
Unregistered users: Feedback from multiple usernames are subject to deletion. Off-topic and posts from suspected astroturfers will be removed.

Add Your Feedback:


Emoticons \| Allowed HTML Tags Remember my info Notify me of follow-up comments? Please enter the "MDN Magic Word" you see in the image below:

MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

MacDailyNews Poll

5 Day Most Commented

Opinion Archive

Current Headlines

Fri, Nov 20, 2009 - 08:55 PM EST — AAPL: 199.92 (-0.59, -0.29%) | NASDAQ: 2146.04 (-10.78, -0.5%)

Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard: 64-bit right down to the kernel

Reader Feedback: = registered.Unregistered users: Feedback from multiple usernames are subject to deletion. Off-topic and posts from suspected astroturfers will be removed.

Add Your Feedback:

Reader Feedback: = registered.
Unregistered users: Feedback from multiple usernames are subject to deletion. Off-topic and posts from suspected astroturfers will be removed.