The galaxy note 4 could be the first 64bit Android smartphone.

[syoumans54]

I don't see the point in complaining about the advancement in technology. Whether it's mobile or anything else. If you have the choice between 32bit vs. 64bit, why wouldn't you go 64bit every time? It's not like it's going to cost a premium, it will cost the same as every other smartphone. It's your right not to buy it, but to complain about it just seems to be dumb and trolling at this point.

[Misanthrope]

I don't see the point in complaining about the advancement in technology. Whether it's mobile or anything else. If you have the choice between 32bit vs. 64bit, why wouldn't you go 64bit every time? It's not like it's going to cost a premium, it will cost the same as every other smartphone. It's your right not to buy it, but to complain about it just seems to be dumb and trolling at this point.

 

64bit applications actually do inherently need more memory to run, which is then confronted with the reality of current mobile phones and limited memory avaiable on them. More over everybody (Thanks to Lawlz) always misinterprets my objections when it comes to mobile devices and tech: I am not opposed to tech advancement, I just dislike advancement for the sake of advancement, getting more and more tech (and incidentally bigger and bigger pricetags) for the sake of benchmarks and reviews when there's actually no truly demanding mobile applications that can take advantage of that, this is particularly dumb when in order to cram in better processors and such they gimp features that could actually benefit from that raw power like really high end camera censors on the phone. 

 

To me is like telling me "Why are you so opposed to technological advancement dude!" when we're discussing carbon fiber toilet seats. Or to give you another example: I much rather fucking have more 1440p screens for computers instead of going to waste on mobile devices. I wouldn't care if we had both but alas, were's my fucking 1440p monitors!?

[79wjd]

So where's the down side? There doesn't have to be an immediate upside.

 

We're looking at Cortex A57 now which is a huge performance leap. RISC ULP processors are catching up.

Theres no downside...a 64 bit processor is a good (and logical step). The issue is when people (*cough* apple fan boys/employees *cough*) use it as "proof" that the iPhone is superior, because a 64 bit processor will run twice as fast as any 32 bit processor--even when theres less than 4gb of ram and when all the applications are 32 bit. 

[harrynowl]

Theres no downside...a 64 bit processor is a good (and logical step). The issue is when people (*cough* apple fan boys/employees *cough*) use it as "proof" that the iPhone is superior, because a 64 bit processor will run twice as fast as any 32 bit processor--even when theres less than 4gb of ram and when all the applications are 32 bit. 

I know that's my point, the other guy seems upset that phones are 64bit. I agree companies will take advantage of something being a bigger number for marketing but there's no reason to not want it

[LAwLz]

*rails in the fish hook line* Yes! Lawlz bites! 

 

EDIT: Lols aside, check my example: we actually had AMD 64 processors for over a decade now and just now they are becoming necessary: the argument that this phone will be "future proof" because it supports 64 seems a bit beyond wishful thinking: Samsung (like all mobile vendors) actually encourages forced obsolescence and you'll be lucky if you get any updates and support at all 3 years down the road or a battery to replace the one that will undoubtedly die within that timeframe and realistically speaking I don't think even 3 years is enough for mobile 64 bit applications to become relevant and even if they do pop up, in 3 years the hardware would be so outdated anyway it wouldn't matter at all.

You sure know what bates I prefer.

 

I never said anything about the current phones being future proof.

What I meant when I said we will need 64bit in the future is that it's best to make the transition as soon as possible. Not just because I don't want to end up with the mess that is Windows 32/64 split on the software side, but also because the sooner we make the transition the better the technology will be when we actually need it.

I've told you this before and I will tell you again, when we start thinking that something is "good enough", progress stops. advancements for the sake of advancements are important because the things deemed unnecessary sooner or later becomes necessary.

Fast Internet connections wasn't needed back when it was mostly text. Connections kept getting faster though (even though it was mostly "advancements for the sake of it") and that's why we today have things like NetFlix.

 

Okay, let's say mobile applications won't be 64bit in 3 years. We still need to introduce it in hardware now because if we only introduce it in hardware 3 years from now, it will be launched as a high end feature and will be really expensive. If we introduce it as a high end feature now, by the time it is needed it will be seen as a basic feature and will therefore not cost a premium. Just look at how quickly high PPI screens has fallen in price (at least on phones). Even low end budget phones has higher resolution than flagships had 3 years ago. The Moto G would not have a 720x1280 screen if that was one of the new features in the M8 and Galaxy S 5.

 

 

 

I much rather fucking have more 1440p screens for computers instead of going to waste on mobile devices. I wouldn't care if we had both but alas, were's my fucking 1440p monitors!?

We don't need 1440p monitors. Stop trying to push advancements just for the sake of advancements. 1920x1080 is more than enough.

[Misanthrope]

You sure know what bates I prefer.

 

I never said anything about the current phones being future proof.

What I meant when I said we will need 64bit in the future is that it's best to make the transition as soon as possible. Not just because I don't want to end up with the mess that is Windows 32/64 split on the software side, but also because the sooner we make the transition the better the technology will be when we actually need it.

 

Android is basically a fork of Linux so it has had proper 64 bit support for decades so I don't think you need to worry about those 32/64 software issues like we had em with windows though.

 

The rest of your post ignores my argument (as usual) of no app support so I'm ignoring it.

[Maxibonbits]

I don't really think anyone needs this though.

You need 64bit for Virtualisation. Time to run windows, iOS and possibly desktop applications on your smartphone.

[LAwLz]

Android is basically a fork of Linux so it has had proper 64 bit support for decades so I don't think you need to worry about those 32/64 software issues like we had em with windows though.

 

The rest of your post ignores my argument (as usual) of no app support so I'm ignoring it.

Android isn't really a "fork of Linux". It's more complicated than that.

Most of my post was dedicated to explaining why we should push for 64bit CPUs BEFORE apps can use it. I don't think it will take 3 years from that Android is 64bit compatible to see 64bit apps take advantage of it by the way.

Since it's Java, Google could potentially upgrade a lot of code in third party apps to take advantage of the new instructions without the developers having to do anything. A lot of developers will probably jump on board the 64bit train very quickly as well.

[Misanthrope]

Most of my post was dedicated to explaining why we should push for 64bit CPUs BEFORE apps can use it.

 

I know, I just completely disagree with that entire notion: "If you build it, they will come" is not an acceptable approach for anybody but people selling the technology, not the people using it which end up being guinea pigs.

 

You need killer apps that constantly push the boundaries of what is possible and then some. This is a pretty simple concept: theoretical and potential advances have no place in a consumer market, there needs to be a very real and very practical reason for consumers to use technology, period. 

[Lyons]

All these 'tech enthusiasts' against change and innovation - just sad. The mobile market is the only real innovator at the moment, roll with it.

[geforceftw]

So where's the down side? There doesn't have to be an immediate upside.

We're looking at Cortex A57 now which is a huge performance leap. RISC ULP processors are catching up.

Edit: nevermind

[coder-guy22296]

iPhone doesn't run Android mate.

iphone 5s has a 64bit processor

[geforceftw]

iphone 5s has a 64bit processor

that it does