ies
Why Apple Went 64-Bit With the iPhone 5s
from the all-about-the-software dept.
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes
Adrian Kingsley-Hughes says it's not just because Apple likes bragging about being first and because a 64-bit processor sounds cooler than 32-bits that Apple used the 64-bit A7 chip in the new iPhone 5s. A shift from a 32-bit processor to a 64-bit part paves the way for iPhones to be fitted out with 4GB+ of RAM down the line, but more importantly the move brings iOS and OS X apps much closer. The architecture for 64-bit apps on iOS will be almost identical to the architecture for OS X apps, making it easy to create a common code base that runs in both operating systems. 'Apple has slowly been bringing iOS-like features to Mac OS for years now: think of Launchpad and Gatekeeper,' writes Sascha Segan. 'The ultimate prize, of course, would be to bring the million-plus iOS apps to Macs. Apple could do that with an ARM-compatible virtual machine on Mac hardware, but it would want the VM, the OS and the associated apps to play nicely in the much larger memory space available on Macs. That means moving the whole system over to 64 bit.' By unifying iOS and Mac OS with Xcode developer tools in a 64-bit space, Apple could once again leap ahead of Microsoft and Google, says Segan. Microsoft hasn't yet been able to leverage its desktop strengths to achieve success as a mobile OS. The 64-bit chips for Android devices aren't ready, and neither is Android itself.
Posted by Soulskill a day ago
apple iphone os
445 Comments
Help
All
Outstanding
Funny
64-bit BS (-1)
Anonymous Coward a day ago
Filtered due to preferences.
Re: 64-bit BS (+1)
Anonymous Coward a day ago
So you didn't even bother to read the summary did you?
Reply Share
Flag
Re: 64-bit BS (+5, Insightful)
jedidiah a day ago
I did. The whole thing is nonsense. You don't have to enforce a single architecture to have common code. Neither do you need to have a virtual machine running the same bit-ness as the host operating system. This is just the usual kind of cluelessness that comes from a community that is proud of being stupid.
Yeah. 64-bit BS.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: 64-bit BS (+5, Informative)
MightyYar a day ago
You are absolutely right. The whole summary doesn't make any sense at all... first of all, the Macs run 32-bit applications just fine. Second, if you can emulate a 64-bit ARM, you can emulate a 32-bit ARM. Third, phone apps would suck on a laptop or desktop.
I suspect they went to 64-bit for the simple reason that it is the direction ARM is going. This processor design is likely to show up in their lower-end products for years after it leaves their flagship device, and the sooner they go to 64-bit, the sooner they can depreciate the 32-bit stuff. Unless the 64-bit chip cost significantly more to design, produce, or unless it has a significant performance penalty, there is no reason to delay making it.
Reply Share
Flag
iOS on Macs (+1)
mozumder a day ago
Apple is most likely going to introduce a system where the display is iOS like an iPad, and the rest of the system is Mac.
There are several options on how they can do this. They can have a separate machine on the display, with ARM/Memory, to keep main CPU powered off when not in use. They could have everything operate from a single x86 cpu like a laptop. They could have both ARM/x86 CPU's sharing a common memory, and so on.
Eventually they will merge, but whatever they do they will have the experience of Windows 8's failures/success to build upon.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: iOS on Macs (+1)
MightyYar a day ago
They could have both ARM/x86 CPU's sharing a common memory, and so on.
That would be a neat setup, if they could run the ARM like a co-processor to avoid emulation. ARM is certainly cheap enough.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: iOS on Macs (+2)
donscarletti 16 hours ago
I like the idea in TFA.
First, implement an emulator to run OSX apps in a windowed environment on iOS, implementing panning and zooming to allow these apps to be viewed on mobile device.
Secondly, install a dynamo in Steve Jobs' coffin, allowing
I think you are missing a important point!
For having a same codebase for 32 and 64 bit processors either you'll need to have a huge HAL (hardware abstraction layer) and inefficient hookes OR the program will have to run in emulation mode, both of these are extremely in-efficient. This inefficiency will be further amplified if the program is of graphics computation of 64 bit colors because generally to make it high performance the programs use direct bit level operations.
--- Commercial Break ---
BREAKTHROUGH: Zero Point Energy harnessed for creating energy from nothing:
http://m.slashdot.org/submission/2946465
donation: minimum $1 to bring it to the people
--- Continue ---
The is why there is bit difference in code base even for little endian and big endian architectures if the performance needs to be good (if you use compiler flags to do the optimizations, forget that it can do a great job at that)
-- I am ex lead programmer of Adobe Acrobat For Linux/Unix platforms and was responsible for fixing architectural and performance issues.
I think you are missing a important point!
For having a same codebase for 32 and 64 bit processors either you'll need to have a huge HAL (hardware abstraction layer) and inefficient hookes OR the program will have to run in emulation mode, both of these are extremely in-efficient. This inefficiency will be further amplified if the program is of graphics computation of 64 bit colors because generally to make it high performance the programs use direct bit level operations.
--- Commercial Break ---
BREAKTHROUGH: Zero Point Energy harnessed for creating energy from nothing:
http://m.slashdot.org/submission/2946465
donation: minimum $1 to bring it to the people
--- Continue ---
The is why there is bit difference in code base even for little endian and big endian architectures if the performance needs to be good (if you use compiler flags to do the optimizations, forget that it can do a great job at that)
-- I am ex lead programmer of Adobe Acrobat For Linux/Unix platforms and was responsible for fixing architectural and performance issues.
Slashdot Mirror
ies Why Apple Went 64-Bit With the iPhone 5s from the all-about-the-software dept. Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes Adrian Kingsley-Hughes says it's not just because Apple likes bragging about being first and because a 64-bit processor sounds cooler than 32-bits that Apple used the 64-bit A7 chip in the new iPhone 5s. A shift from a 32-bit processor to a 64-bit part paves the way for iPhones to be fitted out with 4GB+ of RAM down the line, but more importantly the move brings iOS and OS X apps much closer. The architecture for 64-bit apps on iOS will be almost identical to the architecture for OS X apps, making it easy to create a common code base that runs in both operating systems. 'Apple has slowly been bringing iOS-like features to Mac OS for years now: think of Launchpad and Gatekeeper,' writes Sascha Segan. 'The ultimate prize, of course, would be to bring the million-plus iOS apps to Macs. Apple could do that with an ARM-compatible virtual machine on Mac hardware, but it would want the VM, the OS and the associated apps to play nicely in the much larger memory space available on Macs. That means moving the whole system over to 64 bit.' By unifying iOS and Mac OS with Xcode developer tools in a 64-bit space, Apple could once again leap ahead of Microsoft and Google, says Segan. Microsoft hasn't yet been able to leverage its desktop strengths to achieve success as a mobile OS. The 64-bit chips for Android devices aren't ready, and neither is Android itself. Posted by Soulskill a day ago apple iphone os 445 Comments Help All Outstanding Funny 64-bit BS (-1) Anonymous Coward a day ago Filtered due to preferences. Re: 64-bit BS (+1) Anonymous Coward a day ago So you didn't even bother to read the summary did you? Reply Share Flag Re: 64-bit BS (+5, Insightful) jedidiah a day ago I did. The whole thing is nonsense. You don't have to enforce a single architecture to have common code. Neither do you need to have a virtual machine running the same bit-ness as the host operating system. This is just the usual kind of cluelessness that comes from a community that is proud of being stupid. Yeah. 64-bit BS. Reply Share Flag Re: 64-bit BS (+5, Informative) MightyYar a day ago You are absolutely right. The whole summary doesn't make any sense at all... first of all, the Macs run 32-bit applications just fine. Second, if you can emulate a 64-bit ARM, you can emulate a 32-bit ARM. Third, phone apps would suck on a laptop or desktop. I suspect they went to 64-bit for the simple reason that it is the direction ARM is going. This processor design is likely to show up in their lower-end products for years after it leaves their flagship device, and the sooner they go to 64-bit, the sooner they can depreciate the 32-bit stuff. Unless the 64-bit chip cost significantly more to design, produce, or unless it has a significant performance penalty, there is no reason to delay making it. Reply Share Flag iOS on Macs (+1) mozumder a day ago Apple is most likely going to introduce a system where the display is iOS like an iPad, and the rest of the system is Mac. There are several options on how they can do this. They can have a separate machine on the display, with ARM/Memory, to keep main CPU powered off when not in use. They could have everything operate from a single x86 cpu like a laptop. They could have both ARM/x86 CPU's sharing a common memory, and so on. Eventually they will merge, but whatever they do they will have the experience of Windows 8's failures/success to build upon. Reply Share Flag Re: iOS on Macs (+1) MightyYar a day ago They could have both ARM/x86 CPU's sharing a common memory, and so on. That would be a neat setup, if they could run the ARM like a co-processor to avoid emulation. ARM is certainly cheap enough. Reply Share Flag Re: iOS on Macs (+2) donscarletti 16 hours ago I like the idea in TFA. First, implement an emulator to run OSX apps in a windowed environment on iOS, implementing panning and zooming to allow these apps to be viewed on mobile device. Secondly, install a dynamo in Steve Jobs' coffin, allowing
I think you are missing a important point! For having a same codebase for 32 and 64 bit processors either you'll need to have a huge HAL (hardware abstraction layer) and inefficient hookes OR the program will have to run in emulation mode, both of these are extremely in-efficient. This inefficiency will be further amplified if the program is of graphics computation of 64 bit colors because generally to make it high performance the programs use direct bit level operations. --- Commercial Break --- BREAKTHROUGH: Zero Point Energy harnessed for creating energy from nothing: http://m.slashdot.org/submission/2946465 donation: minimum $1 to bring it to the people --- Continue --- The is why there is bit difference in code base even for little endian and big endian architectures if the performance needs to be good (if you use compiler flags to do the optimizations, forget that it can do a great job at that) -- I am ex lead programmer of Adobe Acrobat For Linux/Unix platforms and was responsible for fixing architectural and performance issues.
I think you are missing a important point! For having a same codebase for 32 and 64 bit processors either you'll need to have a huge HAL (hardware abstraction layer) and inefficient hookes OR the program will have to run in emulation mode, both of these are extremely in-efficient. This inefficiency will be further amplified if the program is of graphics computation of 64 bit colors because generally to make it high performance the programs use direct bit level operations. --- Commercial Break --- BREAKTHROUGH: Zero Point Energy harnessed for creating energy from nothing: http://m.slashdot.org/submission/2946465 donation: minimum $1 to bring it to the people --- Continue --- The is why there is bit difference in code base even for little endian and big endian architectures if the performance needs to be good (if you use compiler flags to do the optimizations, forget that it can do a great job at that) -- I am ex lead programmer of Adobe Acrobat For Linux/Unix platforms and was responsible for fixing architectural and performance issues.