Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 21st Jul 2011 14:10 UTC, submitted by Jennimc
Mozilla & Gecko clones "Over the last couple of weeks, Mozilla has finally stepped up its 64-bit testing process. There are now five slaves dedicated to building Firefox for Windows x64, which means that from Firefox 8 and onwards, you'll be able to pick up 64-bit builds that are functionally identical to its 32-bit cousins but operating in native 64-bit CPU and memory space." Th 64bit version is about 10% faster, benchmarks show.
Thread beginning with comment 481958
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Old news
by lemur2 on Fri 22nd Jul 2011 03:03 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Old news"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

You're either an idiot or a troll, cause last time i checked a hell of a lot of the market leaders in software, thinking Photoshop and Maya, run on windows and not natively on linux.


This is, of course, a limitation of the software you mention (Photoshop and Maya), it is not a limitation of Linux.

For example, people used to disparage Linux for having no support for professional CAD, it didn't run AutoCAD. Well, now there is a professional CAD application for Linux.

http://www.bricsys.com/en_INTL/bricscad/index.jsp
http://www.bricsys.com/en_INTL/bricscad/comparison.jsp

There is still no Linux version of AutoCAD, but understand that this is a failing of Autodesk (who make AutoCAD), and not Linux per se.

As for Photoshop, meh ... if you want to manage digital photography on Linux use digikam, and if you want to create raster graphics, use krita. 99% of people wouldn't miss out on a single thing, except of course for the significant cost of a Photoshop license.

http://www.digikam.org/drupal/about?q=about/features
http://krita.org/features

Enjoy.

unless you've really been living under a rock for the last 5 years you would know that Windows supports 64bit, and its rather good actually.


Not really. Microsoft doesn't own the source code for many, many Windows drivers, the hardware OEMs do. If the nice, expensive laser printer model you have owned for quite some years happens to be out of production now, but it still works perfectly, and you upgrade to 64-bit Windows, there is a strong risk you may have to scrap your printer.

http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_7-hardware...

It happens with a variety of hardware, not just printers:

http://www.w7forums.com/no-64-bit-driver-workaround-t5505.html

IE has been 64 bit since Win7, so essentially 2008 if you include prebuilds and beta's.


Javascript performance is horribly broken in 64-bit IE.

http://ironvine.com/blog/index.php/archives/ie9-browser-wars/
"So, what’s the conclusion? Simple, IE9 64-bit is shockingly bad, and all the other browsers are, on the whole, pretty evenly matched."

Just keeping it real here.

Edited 2011-07-22 03:21 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Old news
by Spiron on Fri 22nd Jul 2011 06:18 in reply to "RE[3]: Old news"
Spiron Member since:
2011-03-08

I will reply to just one of your posts but will answer both.

The fact that these pieces of software aren't on linux isn't really the issue. There are pieces of FOSS software that fulfill similar roles. But professionals are most likely to use these industry standards on their computers. For example, i have a number of professional photographer friends, and one of them uses FOSS tools and OS's. But when he wants to do top-of-the-line editing he switches back into Windows with Photoshop, because he thinks a better product for doing complex editing in. Another example, everyone making an full-feature animated film that is for cinematic release, either hollywood or independent, use Maya. It is the recognized standard for its field and nothing proponents of Blender say is going to change that anytime soon.

When I said that the 64Bit experience was good on Windows i was speaking from the point of view of someone that does have fairly new hardware, but also from the point of a developer. With any hardware made in the last 3 years it works pretty much as expected, and all the frameworks and system libraries work at least as good as anything on 32Bit versions. And while I cannot say that IE9 64Bit is a good browser i can say that the lack of a decent one from Microsoft should have left it open to other browser makers to make one, but Adobe Flash held them back with their refusal to make a 64Bit plugin. All i was trying to point out was that the ability had been there, it was just that no-one had come along with a good version.

As to the stigma that free != good, a suprising amount of people dislike open-source software because of this reason. It's not a problem with them, perse, it's a problem with how and what we are taught. For example, a shopper sees two speakers, slightly different in size and shape. One is being offered at $15 while the other is being offered for $10. The majority of people will pay the $15 instead of getting the $10 one. Why? Its not because they are different. It's not even really about the varying quality of either speaker. It's just that our society is a consumer-driven one and consumer-logic dictates that if its more expensive then it must be better quality. Because of its general truth among other areas of consumation people also apply this rule of thumb to software without really thinking. And because of the open-source movement this can be a rather large pitfall.

So the problem here isn't the populace view itself but more their unthinking application of it to every area of consumerism including those where it possibly shouldn't belong. Early education is the key here, because after people get to a certain age, and it differs for every person, their ideas get locked in place. But schools are generally resistant to the idea of linux/FOSS powered anything, and that is including the non-government ones. This can also be partly attributed to the stigma.

Another thing to keep in mind about people and software is that most people are not technically minded. A lot of people just use software that is preinstalled on their computer or comes on a disk. If they install other software it is generally other people doing it or the process is soo simple that it's trivial, ala Google Chrome. In such cases it is generally the adverts provided by google/facebook/other that are the reason they're installing the software. Infact, it has been estimated that only ~35% google chrome users care about the speed and other things. The other ~65% use it because they saw the add on google about using a "Faster Internet".

Edited 2011-07-22 06:25 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Old news
by lemur2 on Fri 22nd Jul 2011 07:09 in reply to "RE[4]: Old news"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

I will reply to just one of your posts but will answer both. The fact that these pieces of software aren't on linux isn't really the issue. There are pieces of FOSS software that fulfill similar roles. But professionals are most likely to use these industry standards on their computers. For example, i have a number of professional photographer friends, and one of them uses FOSS tools and OS's. But when he wants to do top-of-the-line editing he switches back into Windows with Photoshop, because he thinks a better product for doing complex editing in. Another example, everyone making an full-feature animated film that is for cinematic release, either hollywood or independent, use Maya. It is the recognized standard for its field and nothing proponents of Blender say is going to change that anytime soon.


No problem with any of that. As I said, 99% of people would be able to use digikam/krita instead of Photoshop and miss out on absolutely nothing except the significant cost of a Photoshop license. In the case of pirated copies of Photoshop, all that people using digikam/krita would miss out on is the possibility that they could be fined. For 1% of people, using Photoshop could indeed possibly be a better option. No argument really.

When I said that the 64Bit experience was good on Windows i was speaking from the point of view of someone that does have fairly new hardware, but also from the point of a developer. With any hardware made in the last 3 years it works pretty much as expected, and all the frameworks and system libraries work at least as good as anything on 32Bit versions.


Once again, no argument. For a smallish percentage of machines in use, it is possible that 64Bit Windows is a better experience than 32Bit Windows. But once again, this would represent a minority.

And while I cannot say that IE9 64Bit is a good browser i can say that the lack of a decent one from Microsoft should have left it open to other browser makers to make one, but Adobe Flash held them back with their refusal to make a 64Bit plugin. All i was trying to point out was that the ability had been there, it was just that no-one had come along with a good version.


I don't know what this means. I run a perfectly good version of 64bit Firefox on my Linux desktop. This software was compiled not by Mozilla, but by the maintainers of the Linux dsitribution I run.

As to the stigma that free != good, a suprising amount of people dislike open-source software because of this reason. It's not a problem with them, perse, it's a problem with how and what we are taught. For example, a shopper sees two speakers, slightly different in size and shape. One is being offered at $15 while the other is being offered for $10. The majority of people will pay the $15 instead of getting the $10 one. Why? Its not because they are different. It's not even really about the varying quality of either speaker. It's just that our society is a consumer-driven one and consumer-logic dictates that if its more expensive then it must be better quality.


I can't speak for what antiscience they might "teach" you in American schools, but here in Australia a lot of people can in fact read product info and add up.

Because of its general truth among other areas of consumation people also apply this rule of thumb to software without really thinking. And because of the open-source movement this can be a rather large pitfall. So the problem here isn't the populace view itself but more their unthinking application of it to every area of consumerism including those where it possibly shouldn't belong. Early education is the key here, because after people get to a certain age, and it differs for every person, their ideas get locked in place.


Actually, I have made the observation that ideas about the value of goods are most certainly not locked in place at all. Amongst teenagers, as they turn into adults, there is a distinctly noticeable transition point when it comes to pass that the individuals in question have to pay for it themselves. That event changes their ideas about value-for-money pronto.

But schools are generally resistant to the idea of linux/FOSS powered anything, and that is including the non-government ones.


http://linux.slashdot.org/story/08/04/25/1159232/KDE-Desktops-For-5...

This can also be partly attributed to the stigma.


My oh my, you have drunk the koolaide haven't you?

Another thing to keep in mind about people and software is that most people are not technically minded. A lot of people just use software that is preinstalled on their computer or comes on a disk. If they install other software it is generally other people doing it or the process is soo simple that it's trivial, ala Google Chrome. In such cases it is generally the adverts provided by google/facebook/other that are the reason they're installing the software. Infact, it has been estimated that only ~35% google chrome users care about the speed and other things. The other ~65% use it because they saw the add on google about using a "Faster Internet".


Advertising is indeed a powerful influence that, sadly, can result in people getting ripped off. For this reason it behooves us to point out whenever we can that there are great alternatives in applications (software), that are perfectly legal but not advertised because they are free, which can save people heaps of money with no risk!

Actually, to fail to do so is a dis-service to humanity.

Edited 2011-07-22 07:17 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Old news
by zima on Fri 22nd Jul 2011 07:57 in reply to "RE[4]: Old news"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Another example, everyone making an full-feature animated film that is for cinematic release, either hollywood or independent, use Maya. It is the recognized standard for its field and nothing proponents of Blender say is going to change that anytime soon.

Second sentence is fine (though, as far as industry practices go, that's also Maya on Linux), but as for "everyone" of the first...

http://www.blendernation.com/2010/02/04/%E2%80%98the-se...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Secret_of_Kells#Accolades
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plum%C3%ADferos

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Old news
by Lennie on Fri 22nd Jul 2011 15:23 in reply to "RE[4]: Old news"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

What kind of annoys me is why doesn't Adobe release a version of Photoshop for the Linux-desktop ?

I heared in Hollywood they already use Photoshop on Linux to do frame manipulation.

It might be running on Wine I don't know.

Usually one version older than the last does work on Wine, so I wouldn't be all that surprised.

Reply Parent Score: 2