New Mac OS X and 64-bit kernel

[olegpronin]

so, I'm requesting the 64-bit compability in next beta or release version.

Thanks

[NoOneButMe]

On the todo list. Not likely to happen soon though.

64-bit doesn't mean nearly as much as you think it does.

[tradyblix]

If everyone would like to educate themselves why 64 bit on Snow Leopard is more important than Windows 64 bit, read this article :

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/09/02/inside_mac_os_x_snow_leopard_64_bits.html

[ignas2526]

+1, on new operating system Mac Os X 10.6 Snow Leopard 64bit applications run faster, here is performance boost i got: before upgrading to Snow Leopard, my Activity Monitor was loading 3-4 seconds, after system start, after i upgraded to Snow Leopard (this is not a clean install) Activity monitor loads from 'less than second' to 2 seconds, so 64bit support on Macintosh is a very big deal!

[NoOneButMe]

The speed boosts you're seeing aren't just from 64bit, but other changes as well (to Cocoa and the objc runtime, for example). Moving uTorrent over to the 64bit runtime won't be nearly as big of a speedboost as you're thinking.

[ignas2526]

@NoOneButMe: whatever you calling it, why not to add support for that in UTorrent?

[Ultima]

On the todo list.

Nothing more needs to be said about it.

[alexcyoo]

I just don't understand why you people keep asking for a better Mac version from them....

I'm a mac user and I use Vuze which is just as good if not better in terms of performance; considers the hardware we have today, Vuze is not a problem anymore.

That said, I tried UTorrent with bootcamp and I instantly understand why Utorrent is so famous, it's excellent, I wish that their Mac version could be just as good; however, according to what I read from this forum, that's not going to happen, ever. But hey, most of us are using the Intel nowadays, with parallels or bootcamp, we can get the best out of UTorrent right away, why wait ?

[NoOneButMe]

however, according to what I read from this forum, that's not going to happen, ever.

Dead wrong. Making the Mac version on par with the Windows version is on the todo list. It is, however, a time consuming process to do. Many of these features that are requested took a long time to be done on windows in the first place.

[geekyone]

Considering uTorrent attempts to be a tiny, efficient torrent client, a 64 bit version should not be ignored.

That being said, it should not be a priority. First they need to fix the speed limiting, and a few other problems, such as ratio limiting. Vuze is not as efficient as uTorrent, and Transmission makes my computer occasionally lag (and it's interface sucks). The argument that efficiency doesn't matter because of how powerful computers are now days is ludicrous. If you're running only one application, sure, that might apply, but often torrent clients are run in the background while you do other things, and I can lag almost any computer with my multi-tasking. In fact, efficiency might matter more these days then ever. I remember years ago that applications might lag so much I'd walk away. Now I expect to be able to run 6 at once without lag.

[NoOneButMe]

Considering uTorrent attempts to be a tiny, efficient torrent client, a 64 bit version should not be ignored.

FWIW, 64bit *adds* to the size of uTorrent, making it 50% larger. µTorrent's binary is currently 2,294,144 bytes. The binary size after stripping ppc out is 1,134,508 bytes and with i386 only, its 1,163,648 bytes. x86_64 binaries are larger then i386 or ppc binaries are, usually by 300-500kb.

(binaries can be stripped with `lipo -remove $ARCH originalbinary -output newbinaryname`)

Of course, µTorrent for mac doesn't currently get UPX'd like µTorrent for windows does, so there's no point in comparing sizes on windows and mac.

[angelbunny]

Let me get this strait: File size is more of a priority than speed, efficiency, and compatibility? Sounds like your priorities are a bit different than what I am for.

If file size is such a big issue then instead of having a universal version for download why not have multiple versions available all as individual downloads so the user can choose? Problem solved and file sizes will be much smaller than what they currently are.

Regardless if this is a requested feature or not Apple will remove 32 bit app support down the road regardless if it is 2 years from now or 10 years from now. It will happen.

[NoOneButMe]

No. But adding 64bit support won't necessarily lead to a speedup or greater efficiency or compatibility. Yes, the 64bit runtime is shinier. But, not everything automatically benefits by going 64bit. Downloading doesn't need to access all that ram that may or may not now be available. 64bit computers can run i386 binaries still. It doesn't lose compatibility.

When Apple removes 32bit support, It will be reevaluated. But, 2 years is a pretty long time from now. Especially given its just a guess of yours. And note that not even all of Apple's applications are 64bit yet.

[angelbunny]

Adding full 10.6 support (which is 64 bit) will use the 64 bit API of the OS. Maybe the backbone of µtorrent will run the exact same speed but the front end will run much quicker. The difference in speed would be most noticeable as less loading times and a more snappier interface. However, I doubt it will use less CPU cycles. It is a minimal issue but it would take less than 5 minutes to compile µtorrent as a native application. Having a discussion about it and thinking the pros and the cons take longer than actually doing it. There really is no excuse when all you have to do is hit the compile button.

[Ultima]

My advice to you: don't pretend to know whether or not µTorrent's source code is 64-bit ready. If it were as simple as you said, there wouldn't need to be a discussion -- don't take us to be completely ignorant.

A 64-bit transition does not translate to automatic speed improvements. If an application doesn't need to take advantage of the extra bits of addressable memory, then there are barely any advantages to transitioning to 64-bit from 32-bit. I fail to see where "less loading times and a more snappier interface" would be a consequence of such a transition. Is the UI so perceivably slow to you?

No, we're not saying it won't be happening -- we're simply saying that you're making it out to be a bigger deal than it really is. Releasing a 64-bit version of the application is already on the todo.

[NoOneButMe]

Adding full 10.6 support (which is 64 bit) will use the 64 bit API of the OS

Pray tell what API OS X has in 10.6 that will only run on 64bit.

The difference in speed would be most noticeable as less loading times and a more snappier interface.

However, I doubt it will use less CPU cycles. It is a minimal issue but it would take less than 5 minutes to compile µtorrent as a native application.

µTorrent is already a native application. It is written in C and ObjC. It has a Cocoa UI. This is what it means to be a native Mac application. Compiling µTorrent as 64bit is far from a "minimal issue" as you seem to think. It will take far longer then 5 minutes of work to compile µTorrent as 64bit.

Having a discussion about it and thinking the pros and the cons take longer than actually doing it. There really is no excuse when all you have to do is hit the compile button.

It is not as simple as adding a build target to Xcode or gcc and hitting Build and Go. Its not always changing `int` to `NSInteger` and unsigned int to `NSUInteger` and compiling. It is insulting that you think the only reason this isn't being done is because its not desired.

Also, may I remind you that I only said that adding 64bit will increase the binary size after someone tried to claim it would make the binary size smaller. I never pretended to claim it was an argument against adding 64bit support. Also a reminder: I'm not a developer of µTorrent, so someone who works for Bittorrent can easily come in and say "you're wrong, here's a 64bit build". I do work on other applications though, so I do have an inkling of an idea as to what I'm talking about in regards to code.

[skate7129008]

if your Apple machine is slow enough to notice uTorrent lagging then you might want to consider upgrading your machine... iTunes isn't in 64Bit? neither is Safari? dont waste time on making uTorrent 64 bit, just keep up the good work and make it as good as your amazing Windows version! thanks for your hard work

[geekyone]

Good point. Everyone asking to make uTorrent 64 bit should go complain to Apple about iTunes. uTorrent seems to be snappier than Transmission or Azureus to me. No speed problems. iTunes however, is slow as hell to launch, and occasionally lags in the UI. Problem solved.

[ignas2526]

Actually Safari already in 64bit...

[NoOneButMe]

iTunes and Apple's pro apps aren't. The point is, "64bit means its faster" isn't necessarily true. And that uTorrent won't be 64bit right away.

[Firon]

You won't see it go 64-bit until the Windows version does.