64 bit

users
#21

jmadero wrote

No offense at all, I encourage open conversation but I tend to see a one
side conversation "THERE SHOULD BE A 64 BIT FLYING LIBREOFFICE THAT CAN
BAKE ME A CAKE AND CALCULATE A QUADRILLION FORMULAS IN 0.0000001 SECONDS
USING ALL 16 OF MY CORES!" - without the other side of the equation -
"such a product would be incredibly costly and there are thousands of
much more important things to get done that will benefit a lot more
users."

So, having a 64bit Linux version is Ok, creating a 64bit version for MacOS
(starting in LO 4.2) is Ok, but asking for a 64bit Windows build is
selfish...

Interesting. Us Windows users should be ashamed of ourselves...

#22

Does MS provide a 64 bit version of MSO office? The last time I checked,
MSO did come in separate 32/64 bit versions. One of the major benefits
of 64 bit is the database size. But I think Access limits one to 2GB
which is the limit for a 32 bit version.

Often MS is more fanatic about backwards compatibility so their software
is often limited by still supported Windows version. For years the base
version of Windows was 32 bit XP.

#23

Having 64bits binary in linux/macos is natural, as everything around is
64bit, and the toolchain is quite easy to handle.
On windows, there is two issues regarding this:
- 64bit software is not as common as one would expect. Some Java
installation are still 32bit, which would break LibreOffice64bit instantly.
- Building 64bit binary is somewhat tricky on windows; mingw64 is a way,
but when you end up having dependencies that need to be built as 64bit too,
and they don't build easily, it gets tedious, to say the least... assuming
the code would build at all by just switching compiler target. Not sure of
the current state of other "open" solutions like cygwin regarding this. And
using MSVC would be more challenging than anything, as it introduce it's
own set of surprise when going from 32bit build to 64bit build.

And all that just to have a 64bit binary that would only give more work and
no immediate benefit...

#24

Clearly the point didn't come across as I hoped. What I'm saying is that our resources are stretched incredibly thin and IMHO this is a waste of time expending so much energy discussing the potential benefits when we have 5,000 or so open bugs that need addressed, probably at least a couple thousand of which are much more important than a 64 bit version on Windows. That being said, if you want to continue listing all the reasons why we need one to anyone who will listen - feel free to do so, I just personally don't think it's very productive or conducive to the best LibreOffice experience. I would hope that some people who have taken so long listing all the great benefits of 64 bit would spend an equal amount of time triaging the 1,200 bugs that are currently UNCONFIRMED and need testers - the # of Windows bugs in particular in that state is disturbing as most users are Windows users.

All the best,
Joel

#25

And there's also the Open Source Answer: if users think that such a project would be worthwhile they can band together, take the code, and try to port it themselves.

#26

Reminds me of the good old days of DOS, when Lotus had 1-2-3, Ashton-Tate had dBase, and WordPerfect had, well, WordPerfect. Three different programs that each dominated their respective fields. Rather than "office suites" we had integrated programs like MS Works, or Claris Works and Perfect Works. They were truly the one-program-does-everything-but-not-necessarily-well. "Serious" users avoided the "works" programs and used the dedicated, but narrowly tailored program.

Thanks, Tom, for the Gnumeric tip. I just tried it today, and like it. But, then, my spreadsheets are extremely simple affairs.

Speaking of DOS, rather than clamoring for a 64-bit programs running on multi-core processors, I would prefer to go back the fastest computer I ever used... a 286 machine with a 20 meg. hard drive running DOS, PC-Write and "As-Easy-As", a shareware 1-2-3 clone. Man, it blazed!

Virgil

#27

I love to waste my time as I please. And as I know this is an open project,
everyone is free to take their choice about this thread as he/she likes, so
I would pleased not being told about what must be my choice.

If a windows user of LibreOffice (like me) wants a 64 bits versions, is
their right asking for.

Gabriel has done a brief and good explanation about the issues to get a
64bit version for Windows. Allowing understand that it is not an easy task.
(2013-11-08 21:35)

On the last months there is in development a deep work in the calc core, to
get a better performance and set up the basics for further improvements.
What I think will bring more benefits on the performance than a 64 bits
version.

So maybe we should have some patience, leaving the steps going on their own
time.

Meanwhile as always, all help is well appreciated, specially to solve the
application bugs, but everyone can find a way to help, a lot of them for
choice. (http://www.libreoffice.org/get-involved/)

Miguel Ángel.

#28

mariosv wrote

I love to waste my time as I please. And as I know this is an open
project, everyone is free to take their choice about this thread as he/she
likes, so I would pleased not being told about what must be my choice.

+1

mariosv wrote

On the last months there is in development a deep work in the calc core,
to get a better performance and set up the basics for further
improvements. What I think will bring more benefits on the performance
than a 64 bits version.

So maybe we should have some patience, leaving the steps going on their
own time.

I know and I agree, Miguel. I just don't agree with the logic "don't ask for
a 64bit version because it's very time consuming and expensive and you don't
need it anyway".

Why do Linux and Mac people need it more than Windows people? Do they work
with files larger than 4Gb? Isn't the cost per developer hour the same? If
there is no advantage why do developers bother at all?

#29

+ 1

#30

+1, my apologies.

All the best,
Joel

#31

*pedro wrote*My second paragraph:So that's not my logic.My perception of
reading here and there, it is not only compile with a 64 bits tool matter,
but a large code adaptation. I think in some applications like spreadsheets
could be much more appreciated the parallel calculation with several cores.
Maybe someone with experience in Linux can bring a bit of light about if
there is an appreciable difference between 32 versus 64 bits.

#32

Hola Miguel Ángel, all

mariosv wrote

So that's not my logic.

Yes, I understood your position. I'm sorry if it wasn't clear.

mariosv wrote

My perception of reading here and there, it is not only compile with a 64
bits tool matter, but a large code adaptation. I think in some
applications like spreadsheets could be much more appreciated the parallel
calculation with several cores.

Maybe someone with experience in Linux can bring a bit of light about if
there is an appreciable difference between 32 versus 64 bits.

I have no doubt that parallel calculation with several cores and any other
optimization as those being added by Kohei are much more important.

I was simply replying to people in this thread that said there was no point
in having a 64bit build because the only benefit is for files larger than
4Gb.

If there is no benefit why are the LO Devs "wasting" their time creating a
64bit Mac version?

And why did they create a 64bit version for Linux? Just because it is so
easy?

Reagrds,
Pedro

#33

I know and I agree, Miguel. I just don't agree with the logic "don't ask for
a 64bit version because it's very time consuming and expensive and you don't
need it anyway".

Why do Linux and Mac people need it more than Windows people?

They don't. If you had bothered to actually read the responses in this thread, you would understand that compiling 64bit versions on Linux is *trivial*, and on OSX *much* easier than on Windows.

The reason there is none is because it is *hard* to do - *very* hard - and because the benefit is so little, it isn't a high priority.

Yes, you are within your rights to *ask* for it... but when you start demanding someone else do the heavy lifting for FREE, you begin to sound like little children banging on the table that 'I want what I want when I want it!'...

Do they work with files larger than 4Gb? Isn't the cost per developer
hour the same? If there is no advantage why do developers bother at
all?

READ THE DAMNED RESPONSES AND STOP WASTING EVERYONES TIME

#34

Tanstaafl wrote

The reason there is none is because it is *hard* to do - *very* hard -
and because the benefit is so little, it isn't a high priority.

Are you a developer? Hard to very hard? So all FLOSS projects that have a
64bit build are maintained by geniuses?

If the benefit was so little, LO developers wouldn't make 64bit builds for
ANY platform. That is simply bullshit.

Read Carlo Strata's email.

BTW I don't recognize you the authority to shout at me, let alone give
orders.

#35

After this reply I hope anyone whining about Windows users being let down because there's no 64 bit version of OpenOffice/LibreOffice shut the hell up and start complaining to Microsoft. :slight_smile:

#36

Marcello Romani wrote

And all that just to have a 64bit binary that would only give more work
and
no immediate benefit...

After this reply I hope anyone whining about Windows users being let
down because there's no 64 bit version of OpenOffice/LibreOffice shut
the hell up and start complaining to Microsoft. :slight_smile:

Right...

Because all FLOSS projects that have 64bit Windows versions (mentioned in
this email
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/64-bit-tp4081444p4082245.html that some
users choose to ignore) are all run by stupid people who choose to have a
lot of work for no reason...

#37

<sigh>

What is so hard to understand about:

1. Libreoffice is a *huge* project

Yes, some of those projects mentioned are not so small (ie, postgresql), but...

2. There would be *very little* benefit for a 64bit port of Libreoffice for 99.9% of its userbase

Again, as example, Postgresql benefits *greatly* from having a 64bit version, as large (4GB+) databases are extremely commonplace.

4GB+ Writer, or Calc, or Impress, or Base documents are *extremely* rare, and when they are encountered, there is a very large likelihood that it is an extremely poor and even *improper* usage in the first place.

Bottom line: The benefit (none to negligible) of a 64bit version of Libreoffice simply is not justified by the cost (work required to make it happen).

But by all means, feel free to organize a group of developers capable of rearchitecting the massive codebase to make it happen...

#38

Read your own post: "a lot of work for no reason".
First, some of these projects *have* reasons to have a 64bit build. GIMP
can handle large and complicated images, and need to break the 4GB limit
(2GB really on default build). Other needs to handle large quantity of data
and might take advantage of new vectorizations instructions, etc...
Second, it *is* a lot of work. Even in the post you mention, there is at
least two project that kinda struggle with 64bit windows build: firefox,
where they are not really supported, and FreeCAD, which seems to have
dropped support for 64bit windows. It's costly to maintain program that
build for many targets, and cost is an issue with some open source projects.
And last, building a piece of software from the ground up and
maintaining/evolving a (rather large) project for that long are very
different. Here, we're not talking about writting code from scratch, but
you have to make sure that every piece clicks. Going back through *all* the
code to make sure that there isn't a pointer somewhere or an int there that
would suddenly break because some OS API expect another type of value is
indeed "a lot of work", way more than just writing from scratch.
LibreOffice might be a fairly recent project, but it's codebase goes way
back.
And again, all of the work needed to barely have a stable working build
would yield very little benefit. The code don't magically take advantage of
64bit code by just changing the compiler's target.

So, no, other projects didn't decide to have "a lot of work for no reason".
*Some* decided to have 64bit builds from the start, *some* decided to
revamp their code, *some* decided not to, *some* gave up on it. But in
every cases, ressources for such projects are limited, and focusing on
bugfixes and enhancement seems more useful than having a 64bit build for
what is, regarding LibreOffice, no reason.