Thu, 19 Mar 2009

More 32-bit 64-bit madness

Filed under: Software and Technology by Hari
Posted at 22:17 IST (last updated: Thu, 7 May 2009 @ 18:19 IST)
I have a whole bunch of pet peeves. Sub-optimal 32-bit applications running on 64-bit architectures is one of them. The lack of interest shown by software developers in releasing native 64-bit binaries along with their 32-bit cousins is another. We are in 2009, and we've had 64-bit processors for years now, but still saddled with and forced to use 32-bit applications sub-optimally and sacrificing inter-operability with native 64-bit libraries and vice-versa.

I had written a while ago on flaky 64-bit native support for commercial (and often proprietary) software and the lack of interest that software vendors show for releasing 64-bit binary executables for their software.

With Free Software/Open Source, it is almost as bad if there are no 64-bit pre-compiled executables for Windows. What makes situations even worse is when you badly need 64-bit support for a program for which there is no pre-compiled version available.

It is maddening when you're stuck with a 32-bit DLL and need to call it from a 64-bit process. While compiling from source is probably a tolerable situation in *nix (maybe even desirable for some people - I'm not one of them), setting up a build environment in Windows just so that you can compile from source is almost as bad as visiting a dentist and pulling out all your good teeth. Case in point: I had installed the 64-bit version of Python, but there is no 64-bit precompiled version of PyQt available. Net result: ImportError (due to binary incompatibility of 64-bit Python with 32-bit PyQt). After a lot of googling and searching for a possible solution, I was forced to download the 32-bit version of Python instead. One would have thought that a problem like this would have a better solution, but no - there is no 64-bit pre-built binary installer for PyQt. So one is trapped in the 32-bit universe the more one wants to leave it.

Those of us who were unlucky enough to be landed with 64-bit versions of XP or Vista are the biggest sufferers in this department whether it is sub-optimal performance of games and other application, or the interprocess communication problems I mentioned above.

3 comment(s)

Leave a comment »
  1. I have run into problems with drivers for air cards not functioning properly with 64 bit Vista laptops. A novice like me can barely understand what the problem is, and the 'experts' in the call centers are very little help with these problems.

    Comment by Tim (visitor) on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 @ 08:22 IST #
  2. Tim, did you download the specific 64-bit version of the driver? I think that whatever the problem is, it's ridiculous that people have to deal with such incompatibilities on a technology level.

    Software should have been 64-bit ready for ages, considering how many years have passed since 64-bit processors have become the norm.

    Comment by Hari (blog owner) on Wed, 29 Apr 2009 @ 09:15 IST #
  3. Well, Windows XP and greater have 64-bit versions that haven't taken off. Linux seems to have more 64-bit support.

    I personally think Microsoft should have allowed switching between a 32-bit and 64-bit version of XP and so forth. It would have made the transition easier for developers.

    The next step in the evolution would naturally be 128-bit. If you think 64-bit development is bad, 128-bit development would probably be nonexistent.

    Comment by RT Cunningham (visitor) on Fri, 1 May 2009 @ 11:02 IST #

Leave a comment

First-time comments on this blog are moderated.
Your name*
Email ID*
(wont' be published)
Website
Your comments*
(No HTML allowed)		 :-) :-D :biggrin: :-P ;-) 8-) :-( :mad: |-| :oops: :-/ :-| :roll:
bold italic quote code
Code* captcha Enter the code you see in the image
* required fields