...Sorry, that should have read: My iMac (2.66 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo) bought in early 2009, came with Leopard pre-installed (10.5, 2007)
Ian On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 4:28 AM, Ian Clark <[email protected]> wrote: >> Which Macs or OSXs are 64 bit? > > Can't answer that directly. > > 64-bit introduction has been gradual, having gone hand-in-hand with > going-over to the Intel chipset from powerPC. Snow Leopard (10.6, > 2009) is the first to proclaim more-or-less complete 64-bit support, > plus discontinuing support for powerPC machines, like my daughter's > Mac Mini, which I bought for her in 2004. My iMac (2.66 GHz Intel Core > 2 Duo) came with Leopard pre-installed (10.5, 2009) and I upgraded to > Snow Leopard as soon as it was released -- with zero problems (except > a minor one with J, which I've documented on our wiki). > > But my iMac still supports 32-bit apps without fuss. So I baulk at > calling it a 64-bit machine. Perhaps "optionally" 64-bit? Or > "optionally" 32-bit? Apple have done a good job with making all this > invisible to the user, even of 3rd-party apps, rightly judging it's a > turn-off for non-nerds. > > QUOTE from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_10.6#64-bit_architecture > 64-bit architecture > Mac OS X Tiger added limited support for 64-bit applications on > machines with 64-bit processors; Leopard extended the support for > 64-bit applications to include applications using most of Mac OS X's > libraries and frameworks. > In Snow Leopard, most built-in applications have been rebuilt to > leverage the 64-bit x86-64 architecture (excluding iTunes, Front Row, > Grapher and DVD Player applications).[24] They will run in 32-bit mode > on machines with 32-bit processors, and in 64-bit mode on machines > with 64-bit processors. > UNQUOTE > > ...the best summary of the situation I've been able to find in haste. > BTW Wikipedia (rather than apple.com) seems to be the best summary > source for Mac technical gen. > > Rough'n'ready criterion: if the Mac hardware spec has the word "Intel" > in it, it's 64-bit, provided you run it with a 64-bit MacOS and 64-bit > software. If it's got "powerPC" in the hardware spec it's 32-bit, > period. > > QUOTE from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh > The current Mac product family uses Intel x86-64 processors. Apple > introduced an emulator during the transition from PowerPC chips > (called Rosetta), much as it did during the transition from Motorola > 68000 architecture a decade earlier. All current Mac models ship with > at least 2 GB RAM as standard. > UNQUOTE > > Rosetta is still important on Snow Leopard, for people like me who run > heritage software, like back-copies of MS Excel 2004. (...Actually I > think that's my only app that needs it.) Apple assumes you won't want > Rosetta unless you're a dinosaur, so you have to install it > explicitly, after many grudging disclaimers. At least it's free. > > QUOTE from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Mac_OS > * Mac OS 10 (Cheetah) > * Mac OS 10.1 (Puma) > * Mac OS 10.2 (Jaguar) > * Mac OS 10.3 (Panther) > * Mac OS 10.4 (Tiger) > * Mac OS 10.5 (Leopard) > * Mac OS 10.6 (Snow Leopard) > * Mac OS 10.7 (Lion) > UNQUOTE > > Ian > > > > On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 3:24 AM, Brian Schott <[email protected]> wrote: >> Ian, >> >> Which Macs or OSXs are 64 bit? >> >> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Ian Clark <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> I guess neither Eric or Chris get a 64-bit mac for testing so that there >>>> was no J64. >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
