Hashflare 20 cloud mining coming 2018usi tech cease and desistbitcoin price drop
33 comments
Mercato valutario bitcoin charts
Platform 15 Beta 5 May 07, As a result, many people have been wondering how bit software fits into the concept of portable software. We've had a few discussions in the forums amongst the development staff and users and come to what we think are the right conclusions.
Read on for all the details Subscribe to John T. If you know the answer, feel free to skip ahead. If you're confused, don't worry, most people don't know what it is either.
When people say something is bit or bit, they're referring to the smallest unit of information that can be processed on a machine the bit, a 1 or a 0 and how many are dealt with at the same time within the PC and operating system.
Basically, how software is working with data internally. A compiled piece of software is written to work with one or the other, but not both.
And there are PCs out there that are either bit or bit and have either bit or bit Windows on them. Look for the System Type line.
Most software, however, is bit. Because bit versions of Windows have a feature called Windows bit on Windows bit WOW64 that allows them to run bit versions of software in addition to bit software. So, because of this, most popular software like Firefox, Pidgin, OpenOffice. Like anything, bit software has its pros and its cons. With portable software needing to move from PC to PC, these become a bit more pronounced. Keep in mind that we're not talking about bit vs bit OSes bit pros like larger system memory and No eXecute bits don't really apply here and that we're mainly concerned with the apps that most folks use.
Let's run through them:. The cons would seem to far outweigh the pros, so the answer should be simple: There are always exceptions to the rule, though. Some software - particularly system tools - requires that the bit version for bit Windows and the bit for bit. A perfect example of this is JkDefrag Portable. This defrag software interfaces with the OS in a specific way and has separate builds for bit and bit Windows.
Rather than having users need to worry about which version is which as they move PCs, we custom built a GUI and launcher that automatically launch the appropriate version for the current PC. That way, the user uses it just like any other app and, as we try to do with everything, it just works.
Some software does get a tangible speed improvement as a bit app while at the same time not winding up with an excessively large install size. The perfect example of this is the newly-updated 7-Zip Portable release. This new release incorporates both the bit and bit versions of 7-Zip in a single package and automatically launches the appropriate one, just like with JkDefrag.
Since 7-Zip uses the same localization files for both versions, we're able to keep just one copy. So, we end up with an app with all the functionality we want, but still clocks in at about 5mb installed. And working to compress large files is often measured in minutes, not seconds, so, the extra work on our end and couple extra MBs on the user's end makes sense as it can save users time in the long run.
So, what's the best answer for portable app users? After much discussion, we've decided that, as a general rule, doing bit-only portable software is the best approach for nearly all apps and nearly all users. They have low overhead, and they just work on every PC you come across everywhere you go. When we encounter the rare exception like JkDefrag which requires both versions or 7-Zip which benefits from both versions without a big install-size hit , we'll do one of our special hybrid versions so that the right version runs on the right PC.
Apps like JkDefrag which normally require different versions will be one version that just works everywhere. And apps like 7-Zip will work everywhere and give you a little performance boost when you happen to be on bit Windows.
And it all just works with a single packaged portable app. The user doesn't need to change anything, and it works everywhere. As always, we look forward to talking with the broader community on this. Other ideas and suggestions are welcome! For some reason, when this was originally posted, comments weren't properly enabled. I've enabled them now. Sorry for the mix-up. You seem to left out the fact that even though 32 bit is less in size and memory usage, that it loads the Syswow files into memory also to run and translate the 32bit to 64bit.
Therefore to me, it is like running java platform on top of windows, where as, the handshake will slow it down because of the interpretations involved and more memory is being used than just the 32bit programming running. People need to understand that the Syswow files on a 64bit DVD OS for Windows setup actually is about 1 GByte more, thus when these files are installed that alone put a larger footprint on your harddrive and thus these files are also loaded into memory when you run 32bit..
Another thing is that 32bit programs only access 4 Gbytes of RAM and unless it is made aware of larger ram for usage will end up slowing your computer down by running too many apps that are 32bit even is you have 16 Gbytes Ram, 12 GBytes will not be used by the OS.
The case of running a portable app from a DVD you are describing is quite niche and, unfortunately, not one we support any longer. Some of our original apps like Firefox may still run from a read-only optical drive, but as optical drives are being phased out in consumer PCs, we no longer test for nor support this setup.
Syswow is shared, so bit apps don't encounter a penalty beyond the first one. The vast majority of our apps and the vast majority of Windows apps in general aren't even available in bit builds, so most apps that most users are using are bit. All of that is moot anyway, because the portable launcher FirefoxPortable. Even if you're running a bit build of Firefox or Chrome, it's running a bit EXE first to launch it.
As for the 4GB memory limit, that's something we already allow for. So every app that could come into a memory crunch is already running at bit. Lastly, this is a 6 year old topic, so some of the data in the main post has obviously changed and some of the comments may no longer be relevant. IMHO, this is the best way. Because, as you said, there are programs that would be too large to contain both 32 and 64bit versions, and there are, also, those who do not greatly improve performance when used in 64 bits.
So the best way is to do as you said and create hybrid versions of applications that "worthwhile". The only real thing bit support is needed for on bit systems is drivers, some apps use 'em usually for maintenance and such apps don't tend to be very portable. So most apps don't need to be bit.
The main gain from using bit apps when you don't need to is that they can make use of more than 2gb of memory, but this usually isn't a problem for most apps or most users. So, I definitely think most portable apps should be bit only and even for drivers you might be able to get away with just the bit driver with the bit app I believe most programs that utilize a driver will do this already OpenVPN takes this approach so you just need the two versions of only the driver.
By these rules a bit version of 7-Zip isn't really needed since the only component it has that needs bit AFAIK is the shell extension which we wouldn't include anyway. But if it does give a performance boost I suppose that could help; it could have optimizations for bit and being it is computationally expensive when compressing files that would be a good case for it.
In general, we'll only do the bit version. Instead of debating bit vs bit, why not make the bit Q-Dir portable apps launcher eg Q-DirPortable. We only go through the process of this when there is either a requirement or a measurable performance gain. Because it does increase the size of the install unnecessarily in most apps and does introduce "one more thing that could go wrong". That plus the combined version is only 2. I did not package Q-Dir nor am I involved in its creation If Q-Dir needs this for similar reasons, ask the dev in the dev test topic.
As John said, an online installer can't download multiple files, and Q-Dir's bit and bit builds are separate downloads. The only way I could package both the bit and bit builds would be via an offline installer, and the Q-Dir dev hasn't responded to my e-mail requesting permission for this. If you want to get in touch with the Q-Dir dev and ask, maybe we could make some progress. IMHO, a user making a request is a bit different, and perhaps more powerful, than another dev making the same request.
We should probably take this conversation into the Q-Dir Portable beta thread , since we're off-topic here. If you're developing a portable app, you should take a look on the PortableApps.
Although I don't know, it is important that the settings for a 64bit and 32bit application should be compatible. The user may choose to optionally install a 64bit version as well, maybe exclusively through the updater? The argument of space on USB flashdrive is important but keep in mind that we also have to look ahead.
Flash size increases when prices per GB fall. An option for 64 bit should be optional. Having the infrastructure for handling 32bit and optional 64 bit in place will smooth the transition when more apps require or desire 64 bit. At some time in the future you eventually run against the 64bit wall anyway. Making the platform aware and support both versions will eventually be a good thing. Personally I don't feel the need for 64 bit but understand it might be wise to add premelary support early.
I'm asking this because I'm getting a new machine at work, and I run portable apps for a huge chunk of my daily tasks web, email, etc. As outlined above, in almost all cases, bit software will run fine on a bit OS.
It is only rare cases like JKDefrag where you must use a matching version. Most new PCs are bit now. And they're all running bit versions of Firefox, LibreOffice, Piding, etc.
There are a few rare exceptions that require a bit version on bit Windows, generally system level apps. For stuff like that, we include both the 32 and bit version of the app and have the launcher automatically use the right one. I'm uninstalling my PortableApps. I'm counting on you guys!