WHS v2 and PP2 announced...

[S_M_E]

As posted on the WHS forums:

WHS v2 and PP2 are on the horizon.

http://codecapers.blogspot.com/2009/...announced.html

Apparently PP2 will be out this year and WHS v2 will be out in 2010 with support for w7 homegroups and it'll be 64bit only.

I'm already looking forward to v2...

[Skirge01]

Awesome news! Thanks for the heads up. I hope Sage is working on a 64-bit version, though.

[Taddeusz]

Originally Posted by Skirge01

Awesome news! Thanks for the heads up. I hope Sage is working on a 64-bit version, though.

Why? What advantage would there be for having a 64-bit SageTV? It would only complicate matters with drivers and codecs.

[ace007]

Originally Posted by Taddeusz

Why? What advantage would there be for having a 64-bit SageTV? It would only complicate matters with drivers and codecs.

Because when properly written 64bit can provide much better performance. 32bit is old technology and has many limitations.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by Taddeusz

Why? What advantage would there be for having a 64-bit SageTV? It would only complicate matters with drivers and codecs.

32bit was better than 16bit and 64bit will eventually replace 32bit too. Eventually all drivers will be written for 64bit (until we get to 128bit), progress is inevitable.

[stanger89]

I think the question is what sort of improvements are people expecting with a 64 bit SageTV? Sage doesn't use large amounts of memory, doesn't do lots of memory-intensive processing. It doesn't really do anything that would benefit from "64-bit" optomizations.

Of course my question is what's the big deal with PP2 or V2, the link's got nothing more than the OP.

[Slipshod]

Originally Posted by stanger89

I think the question is what sort of improvements are people expecting with a 64 bit SageTV? Sage doesn't use large amounts of memory, doesn't do lots of memory-intensive processing. It doesn't really do anything that would benefit from "64-bit" optomizations.

Seconded. I don't care/need 64bit SageTV. 32bit apps generally work fine on 64bit OSes - I've been running XP x64 for 2 years on my workstation at home. Drivers are another story entirely, and that's what's going to trip me up. I have no idea how I'm going to convince Nextcom to write 64 bit drivers for the R5000.

Of course my question is what's the big deal with PP2 or V2, the link's got nothing more than the OP.

64bit is enough of a big deal for me. I need more RAM for virtual machines!

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by Slipshod

Seconded. I don't care/need 64bit SageTV. 32bit apps generally work fine on 64bit OSes - I've been running XP x64 for 2 years on my workstation at home.

I can't speak for anyone else but I want 64bit apps because I have a 64bit OS and that should be a good enough reason. Sure we could all still be running 16bit apps and browsers but that doesn't make them better. Whether or not there would be performance or stability improvements is academic because there are no 64bit versions to try...yet. 32bit apps and OSes will eventually dry up and go away, for the most part. If the "32bit is fine" attitude was prevalent we may not be switching from analog to digital TV either. Like I said, you can't stop progress, you can only argue that it is or isn't progress and I believe the evolution to 64bit *is* progress just like 32bit was progress.

YMMV...

[Slipshod]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

I can't speak for anyone else but I want 64bit apps because I have a 64bit OS and that should be a good enough reason. Sure we could all still be running 16bit apps and browsers but that doesn't make them better. Whether or not there would be performance or stability improvements is academic because there are no 64bit versions to try...yet. 32bit apps and OSes will eventually dry up and go away, for the most part. If the "32bit is fine" attitude was prevalent we may not be switching from analog to digital TV either. Like I said, you can't stop progress, you can only argue that it is or isn't progress and I believe the evolution to 64bit *is* progress just like 32bit was progress.

YMMV...

So you'd like to have Sage spend time porting, testing, and supporting a 64bit version, even if we don't know if there will be ANY difference in performance or stability... But you don't want them to spend time on making the GUI more attractive and easier to use?

Wow. Just... Wow.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by Slipshod

So you'd like to have Sage spend time porting, testing, and supporting a 64bit version, even if we don't know if there will be ANY difference in performance or stability... But you don't want them to spend time on making the GUI more attractive and easier to use?

That's right, what you call "attractive," I call superfluous but comparing 64bit to "bling" is like comparing apples to oranges. Do you still use a 16bit browser? Did you complain when 32bit OSes first came out and people wanted 32bit apps?

EDIT:
Maybe this will help...

http://gizmodo.com/5076473/giz-expla...e-about-64+bit

Bott told us that while Windows 7 will have 32-bit and 64-bit versions, its eventual successor, Windows 8 (or whatever it's called) will likely be the first Windows that's exclusively 64-bit. Reportedly, next year's Mac OS X Snow Leopard will be 64-bit down to the kernel.

That's why Apple has been transitioning OS X to total 64-bit over time, and why Microsoft will still ship a 32-bit version of Windows 7. And likely, Bott says, an exclusively 64-bit Windows 8 would have a virtualization setup to run 32-bit apps. "Fortuitously," he told us, "an x64 system with lots of memory should scream at virtualization."

Applications have to be re-written to take advantage of the multiple cores and huge amounts of memory at their disposable, and that transition is going to take some time.

You can't stop progress...

[Slipshod]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

That's right, what you call "attractive," I call superfluous but comparing 64bit to "bling" is like comparing apples to oranges. Do you still use a 16bit browser? Did you complain when 32bit OSes first came out and people wanted 32bit apps?

I'd say wanting Sage to be a 64bit app this year, or next year is most definitely "Bling". It serves no useful purpose other than being "bigger". Heck, you even said that you don't have a real reason to want it:

"I can't speak for anyone else but I want 64bit apps because I have a 64bit OS and that should be a good enough reason."

You may not realize this, but the jump from 16-bit to 32-bit wasn't just about memory, or "bits". There were compelling reasons beyond memory limits to migrate to a 32bit OS and run 32bit applications. Protected Mode in the 386 allowed you to architect an operating system which gave each individual process it's own memory address space. That had a profound impact on OS and application stability since a bug in one process would no longer be able to accidentally overwrite memory in a different process. There is no equivalent "game-changing" feature in the 32-bit to 64-bit jump. It's almost entirely about being able to address more RAM, which is not compelling unless you're going to be constrained by it.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by Slipshod

I'd say wanting Sage to be a 64bit app this year, or next year is most definitely "Bling". It serves no useful purpose other than being "bigger". Heck, you even said that you don't have a real reason to want it:



You may not realize this, but the jump from 16-bit to 32-bit wasn't just about memory, or "bits". There were compelling reasons beyond memory limits to migrate to a 32bit OS and run 32bit applications. Protected Mode in the 386 allowed you to architect an operating system which gave each individual process it's own memory address space. That had a profound impact on OS and application stability since a bug in one process would no longer be able to accidentally overwrite memory in a different process. There is no equivalent "game-changing" feature in the 32-bit to 64-bit jump. It's almost entirely about being able to address more RAM, which is not compelling unless you're going to be constrained by it.

I never said Sage has to do it this year or even next but I do believe that they'll eventually do it.

The point is; transitioning from 32bit to 64bit is nowhere near the same thing as putting makeup on the gui and I'd prefer to have my apps running in a native 64bit architecture than virtualized. Yes, that is enough reason. While we don't know what a 64bit Sage will be like; that's only because it hasn't been built and tested...yet.

Nice try...

[heffe2001]

Wonder if my participation in the first WHS closed beta will get me a spot on the WHS2 betas?

[Skirge01]

Originally Posted by Slipshod

I'd say wanting Sage to be a 64bit app this year, or next year is most definitely "Bling".

Well, since I'm the one who first mentioned a 64-bit Sage, I'll chime in here. As S_M_E has said, 64-bit is the future and my original statement was simply that I hope Sage is working on one. I also never indicated a timeframe.

Ultimately, if I'm running a 64-bit WHS server, I'd like all my apps to also be 64-bit. I've never attempted to run a 64-bit OS because I don't want to mess with the (and my admittedly assumed) hassle of emulating 32-bit under 64-bit. Maybe it works perfectly. I don't know. Will there be a slow-down? I don't know. Will there be compatibility issues? I don't know. I'm not sure I want to be the guinea pig, either. So, if I'm running WHS now and intend to continue doing so when the next version comes out, I'd also like to know that my applications will continue to work as well as they do today.

If someone can tell me that all my 32-bit apps will work flawlessly on a 64-bit OS with more than 4GB of RAM, then I'll shut up about wanting 64-bit apps.

[Taddeusz]

Originally Posted by Skirge01

If someone can tell me that all my 32-bit apps will work flawlessly on a 64-bit OS with more than 4GB of RAM, then I'll shut up about wanting 64-bit apps.

I run Vista Ultimate x64 on my main computer that runs as a SageTV Client. 32-bit apps work flawlessly in a 64-bit OS. I've actually had more trouble with 64-bit media applications (graphedit) than with regular 32-bit applications and games. The reason for this is that there are far fewer 64-bit codecs than there are 32-bit. 32-bit SageTV works flawlessly with EVR video acceleration on my 64-bit OS. Drivers are not a problem for me but codecs would be if SageTV were 64-bit.

I imagine that eventually they will make a 64-bit version. But as has already been said there is no compelling reason for them to develop one now or in the near future. The only gain would be access to more RAM (as if 2GB isn't enough for SageTV) and more registers. These are not compelling reasons compared to the switch from 16-bit to 32-bit.

64-bit for 64-bit's sake is lame when there is no discernible difference between running a 32-bit app on either 32-bit or 64-bit OS's.

[stanger89]

They definitely need to assure 64-bit OS compatibility, as for actually converting/optomizing Sage to 64-bit code, I think that's a complete waste of time (unless necessary for compatibility reasons).

It's like asking for a 64bit optomized email app.

[sandor]

Why doesn't MS just build an OS that will allow 32/64 bit drivers and apps to *both* work?

Apple did it, and continues the transition to a full 64 bit OS with 10.6 - yet "legacy" drivers and apps still function.

[mikehaney]

Originally Posted by sandor

Why doesn't MS just build an OS that will allow 32/64 bit drivers and apps to *both* work?

Apple did it, and continues the transition to a full 64 bit OS with 10.6 - yet "legacy" drivers and apps still function.

Just speculation here, and someone correct me if I'm talking out my rear, but...

I know the reason why 64-bit Vista doesn't allow unsigned drivers is because pressure on MS from the content providers has forced them to put more and more DRM into their operating systems, which could easily be bypassed by an unsigned driver.

Based on that, it reasons that allowing mixed 32/64 drivers would undermine these protections. Sure, you could argue that they could just require signed 32-bit drivers as well, but that would be just as bad as 64-bit only since there are a ton of unsigned 32-bit drivers out there that would stop working.

As for the comparison to Apple - that's hardly valid. Apple has the luxory of tightly controlling what hardware goes in their machines, so they don't have to have drivers support even a fraction of the hardware that Windows does.

[briands]

Originally Posted by sandor

Why doesn't MS just build an OS that will allow 32/64 bit drivers and apps to *both* work?

Apple did it, and continues the transition to a full 64 bit OS with 10.6 - yet "legacy" drivers and apps still function.

You're kidding, right...

Sorry, it was too easy...

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by Skirge01

Well, since I'm the one who first mentioned a 64-bit Sage, I'll chime in here. As S_M_E has said, 64-bit is the future and my original statement was simply that I hope Sage is working on one. I also never indicated a timeframe.

If someone can tell me that all my 32-bit apps will work flawlessly on a 64-bit OS with more than 4GB of RAM, then I'll shut up about wanting 64-bit apps.

Exactly, just like nobody writes apps for Win3.1 anymore, eventually everything will be 64bit, including Sage. 64bit is the future, 32bit will be the past just like 16bit.

Most but not all apps work fine in x64. There are cases of things not playing well with x64 but I don't have an actual list. I could probably find a partial list.

Originally Posted by Taddeusz

I imagine that eventually they will make a 64-bit version. But as has already been said there is no compelling reason for them to develop one now or in the near future. The only gain would be access to more RAM (as if 2GB isn't enough for SageTV) and more registers. These are not compelling reasons compared to the switch from 16-bit to 32-bit.

64-bit for 64-bit's sake is lame when there is no discernible difference between running a 32-bit app on either 32-bit or 64-bit OS's.

Actually there are some 32bit apps that don't run well in 64bit but they are rare (based on the huge number of 32 bit apps) and "more RAM" is *not* the only reason for 64bit. There are other reasons. Speed, stability and scalability, etc are also good reasons.

I can easily image that Sage could benefit from 64bit while transcoding and commercial skipping multiple streams. Until they build/test one we'll never know for sure.