Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Firefox Runs On 64-bit ARM (AArch64)

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Firefox Runs On 64-bit ARM (AArch64)

    Phoronix: Firefox Runs On 64-bit ARM (AArch64)

    While it will still be a while before consumers are able to see 64-bit ARM hardware on their desk, Mozilla's Firefox web-browser on AArch64 (64-bit ARM) is working...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTcxODU

  • #2
    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    it will still be a while before consumers are able to see 64-bit ARM hardware on their desk
    I did it!
    I just put my iPad Air on my desk.

    Comment


    • #3
      Good stuff. I wish ARM called it "ARM64" instead of "AArch64", though. I know they must've thought it would be confused with AMD64, but I doubt it because nobody really uses AMD64, and it would've still been a better compromise than using AArch64. Oh well. Nobody ever accused chip companies of being good with names.

      Comment


      • #4
        If they manage to give us fanless laptops with HiDPI screens nice design and good performance bring it. Some proprietary apps are required though. We already know that there won't be any trouble running the FOSS ones.

        Comment


        • #5
          And still no 64bit Version for Windows ...

          Note: The unofficial Build are no full features Builds. Many features are disabled on x64.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Nille View Post
            And still no 64bit Version for Windows ...

            Note: The unofficial Build are no full features Builds. Many features are disabled on x64.
            Well even Chrome on Windows used to be 32 Bit only untill recently (like a week ago). They said that they had a lot of problems with 64-Bit on Windows.

            http://blog.chromium.org/2014/06/try...anary-and.html

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by blackout23 View Post
              Well even Chrome on Windows used to be 32 Bit only untill recently (like a week ago). They said that they had a lot of problems with 64-Bit on Windows.

              http://blog.chromium.org/2014/06/try...anary-and.html
              Where do they say that they have a lot of problems with 64bit? On your link its the opposite. More Speed, Better Security and less Crashes.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Nille View Post
                Where do they say that they have a lot of problems with 64bit? On your link its the opposite. More Speed, Better Security and less Crashes.
                I assume he means the process of getting everything working on Win64, not necessarily that there's no benefits to it.

                I've been using Nightly (nightly builds of Firefox's latest code) Win64 builds for years now. For all those people who are going to say "nightly builds are unstable", I've never had any issues with them. I really don't understand why it took Chromium so long.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Firefox is really betting behind!

                  No 64 bit support for x86_64 while all other browsers have.
                  Mozilla needs to spend some time on improving the technical inards of Firefox, under the hood features!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by plonoma View Post
                    Firefox is really betting behind!

                    No 64 bit support for x86_64 while all other browsers have.
                    Mozilla needs to spend some time on improving the technical inards of Firefox, under the hood features!
                    They've had support for it for years now, read my post above. I don't think Chrome has this for stable builds yet either by the way.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by plonoma View Post
                      Firefox is really betting behind!

                      No 64 bit support for x86_64 while all other browsers have.
                      Mozilla needs to spend some time on improving the technical inards of Firefox, under the hood features!
                      Code:
                       ~ zypper if MozillaFirefox | grep Arch
                      Arch: x86_64
                      Honestly, x86_64 is one of the most overrated things in browsers. Yes, it can give a very small performance boost, increase the ram usage limit (anyone will complain if a browser uses more than 20mb of ram with 100 tabs open anyway) and gives better ASLR, but there are many things that could improve everything more and require less efforts (Windows is awful when it comes to 64bit).
                      Also, given that this is a Linux site, the 64bit problem is solved already, as Firefox is 64bit on that.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Spittie View Post
                        Code:
                         ~ zypper if MozillaFirefox | grep Arch
                        Arch: x86_64
                        Honestly, x86_64 is one of the most overrated things in browsers. Yes, it can give a very small performance boost, increase the ram usage limit (anyone will complain if a browser uses more than 20mb of ram with 100 tabs open anyway) and gives better ASLR, but there are many things that could improve everything more and require less efforts (Windows is awful when it comes to 64bit).
                        Also, given that this is a Linux site, the 64bit problem is solved already, as Firefox is 64bit on that.
                        Simply opening chrome with no tabs and only adblock increases memory usage by 400mb in my computer

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Krysto View Post
                          Good stuff. I wish ARM called it "ARM64" instead of "AArch64", though. I know they must've thought it would be confused with AMD64, but I doubt it because nobody really uses AMD64, and it would've still been a better compromise than using AArch64. Oh well. Nobody ever accused chip companies of being good with names.
                          AMD64 would be all 64 bit x86 hardware from AMD, Intel and VIA, doubt that there are any unlicensed CPUs around it yet like there is for 32 bit x86 designs like those from DM&P Electronics, like the Vortex86MX+.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Kivada View Post
                            AMD64 would be all 64 bit x86 hardware from AMD, Intel and VIA, doubt that there are any unlicensed CPUs around it yet like there is for 32 bit x86 designs like those from DM&P Electronics, like the Vortex86MX+.
                            I didn't mean the chips are not used, but that the name isn't. Everyone calls it x64. That's why I said not too many people would confuse ARM64 with AMD64, since not many are using AMD64 in conversations to begin with.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X