Why is iTunes not 64-bit?

Posted by: John Rougeux

Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 11/30/10 04:58 PM

I just noticed this tonight in Activity Monitor:

Click for large view


Why isn't iTunes 64 bit by now? I would have thought with the release of version 10, that it would have been?
Posted by: padmavyuha

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/01/10 04:04 AM

What's it doing that would benefit from the extra horsepower? If there's not much to be gained, I guess it's a lot easier to just keep it more backwards-compatible by keeping it 32-bit.
Posted by: carp

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/01/10 01:04 PM

I believe we went down this road before , many times.

64 bit is memory addressing - nothing about horse power at all.

So having a cloud base delivery system, such as iTunes, then play back on ya machine - I don't think it will be any better then a 32 bit.
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/01/10 08:34 PM

Originally Posted By: carp
I believe we went down this road before , many times.

64 bit is memory addressing - nothing about horse power at all.

So having a cloud base delivery system, such as iTunes, then play back on ya machine - I don't think it will be any better then a 32 bit.



The more memory you can address... the more powerful your machine.

Think about it.
Posted by: carp

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/02/10 01:32 PM

Originally Posted By: NucleusG4
Originally Posted By: carp
I believe we went down this road before , many times.

64 bit is memory addressing - nothing about horse power at all.

So having a cloud base delivery system, such as iTunes, then play back on ya machine - I don't think it will be any better then a 32 bit.



The more memory you can address... the more powerful your machine.

Think about it.


Not really
I mean, it is just more efficent - not more powerful.
Posted by: padmavyuha

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/03/10 04:16 AM

Not that I want to get caught up in this, but I suppose it depends on your definition of 'more powerful'. To me it's contextual: for a particular given task, I think a useful working definition would be 'gets the job done faster'. So for audio or graphics or maths processing (for example), a true 64-bit application working with a lot of ram will be able to move more stuff around per second than one using only 32 bits, assuming the processor is up to the job.

In a non-processor-intensive situation, such as just playing music through speakers (which a 400MHz G4 with 512Mb of ram will do quite happily in iTunes) then 64-bit is superfluous, I think.
Posted by: carp

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/03/10 01:29 PM

Correct - Pady
Yep depends on ones point of view.

Analogy if I can. Car engines.

You have a 240 horse power engine - throwing in a high octane gas, will make it run faster --> However the engine is still 240 horse power and certainly not more powerful, ya just fooled it or tricked it into thinking, its faster.
Posted by: leftblank15

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/03/10 02:44 PM

The basic limitation is a hard-drive one.
I think the hard-drive access of the library-size of iTunes is a maximum 4 TeraBytes, which, of course, is greater than the 32-bit addressable limitation of 4 GigaBytes.
iTunes is listed in System Profiler as being a 32-bit application, but this pertains mainly to the maximum RAM/virtual-memory-size of the running executable (assuming, of course, that one has a machine with that much RAM/virtual-memory, with room for the other apps and MacOSX Operating System to spare).
You really don't have all of the iTunes library loaded into RAM/virtual-memory at once.
Theoretically, 64-bits can address 18.44 (decimal) ExaBytes (18.44 quintillion unique combinations), but no one person has that much RAM/virtual-memory.
Even Apple's 64-bit executables don't use that full range.
Posted by: padmavyuha

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/04/10 01:43 AM

I have to disagree with your analogy, carp - if you choose to use the word 'powerful' just to describe the rated horsepower of the engine (its measured ability to pull against resistance, a standard which is measured assuming a particular grade of fuel), then yes, that hasn't changed.

But the actual horsepower increases when you use a richer fuel - the engine can do more work with the same hardware when you introduce a richer fuel. It's not a trick, it actually happens.

*edit* Someone mentioned getting a Ferrari and only being allowed to drive it in 1st gear. I suppose the analogy here is that driving around the suburb of iTunes, there's no need to be going at 160mph, so top gear (or 64-bit processing) is irrelevant. It's only in places where you actually could drive the hardware that fast (such as maths/graphics etc. contexts) that it would make a noticeable difference if you could go into top gear.
Posted by: MacGizmo

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/12/10 10:25 AM

While 64-bit memory addressing will speed up certain operations, like applying filters to massive Photoshop images, or encoding video, I'm not sure iTunes would benefit a whole lot from getting 64-bit. Hard drive speed has more to dow with those operations too.

I suppose if you were converting a ton of MP3s at once it **might** benefit a tad bit, but that really requires processor power and hard drive speed, not RAM power.
Posted by: zwei

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/13/10 05:48 AM

It's just taking them a long time to port it from carbon to cocoa. They have more important things like QT to get up and running in 64-bit first. It doesn't really have anything to do with "not needing to be" …as you can see, they have ported much lesser apps to 64-bit (e.g. Textedit, iChat, etc.)
Posted by: padmavyuha

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/13/10 06:38 AM

Well, iChat makes a bit more sense since there's streaming video/audio to process in real time. And 64-bit TextEdit was probably just someone's idea of a joke smile.
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/13/10 06:42 AM

Originally Posted By: padmavyuha
Well, iChat makes a bit more sense since there's streaming video/audio to process in real time. And 64-bit TextEdit was probably just someone's idea of a joke smile.


Unless you use Windows... then it's 64 bit.


http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1047
Posted by: SgtBaxter

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/19/10 05:01 PM

Actually, the "64 bit" iTunes for windows isn't 64 bit at all...



As you can see by the *32, it's still a 32 bit program. Plus a memory hog.
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/19/10 05:07 PM

Weird.. so why does Apple advertise it as 64, I wonder.
Posted by: Jim_

Re: Why is iTunes not 64-bit? - 12/19/10 05:34 PM

They don't say that it's a 64 bit app, just the installer. If you go back to the main Windows iTunes d/l page it is only calling it a 64 bit installer. It does appear to be running 32 bit, so my guess is that if you are running a 64 bit system you either need an installer that will install on 64 bit, and/or a 32 bit app coded to run on 64 bit properly.

Making a 32 and 64 bit installer is not hard, so I'm thinking more so something in the code, maybe, just guessing.