Thunderbird Windows x64?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
27 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Thunderbird Windows x64?

Patrick Brunschwig
I noticed that there are Windows x64 builds of Thunderbird Daily. What
are the plans for the x64 version? Will Thunderbird 16 be released as
win32 and win64?

Thanks,
Patrick
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

Jeff Grossman-2
On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 15:42:05 +0200, Patrick Brunschwig wrote:

>I noticed that there are Windows x64 builds of Thunderbird Daily. What
>are the plans for the x64 version? Will Thunderbird 16 be released as
>win32 and win64?
>
>Thanks,
>Patrick

Just like Firefox it is probably not a supported build.  They supply
them for testing purposes only but will not release them as a
supported buid yet.  I think they started when the Thunderbird build
architecture moved to the same system that is used by Firefox.

Jeff

p.s.  Also, any extensions you use would need to be compiled as 64-bit
which I doubt any of them are right now.
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

David Boles-2
On 6/16/2012 10:52 PM, Jeff Grossman wrote:

> On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 15:42:05 +0200, Patrick Brunschwig wrote:
>
>> I noticed that there are Windows x64 builds of Thunderbird Daily.
>> What are the plans for the x64 version? Will Thunderbird 16 be
>> released as win32 and win64?
>>
>> Thanks, Patrick
>
> Just like Firefox it is probably not a supported build.  They supply
>  them for testing purposes only but will not release them as a
> supported buid yet.  I think they started when the Thunderbird build
>  architecture moved to the same system that is used by Firefox.
>
> Jeff
>
> p.s.  Also, any extensions you use would need to be compiled as
> 64-bit which I doubt any of them are right now.



FYI  In Windows 7 x86_64 I use, and have used for months, the 64 bit
Firefox Nightly builds and all of the nine extensions that I use work
just fine. Straight from the Mozilla Add-ons site.

I have both the 32 bit and the 64 bit Thunderbird Daily installed and
nine of the ten extensions that I use work with both of them. Straight
from the Mozilla Add-on site.

The *only* Thunderbird extension that I use that *does not appear to
work* is Enigmail. Enigmail used with the 64 bit Thunderbird complains
that it can not find gpg.exe. And I have yet to find a 64 bit Gnupg
package so I do know if the problem is the 32 bit is gpg.exe or Enigmail.
Or a combination of both of them.



--

  David
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

Michael A. Puls II
On 6/17/2012 12:00 AM, David wrote:
> The*only*  Thunderbird extension that I use that *does not appear to
> work* is Enigmail. Enigmail used with the 64 bit Thunderbird complains
> that it can not find gpg.exe. And I have yet to find a 64 bit Gnupg
> package so I do know if the problem is the 32 bit is gpg.exe or Enigmail.
> Or a combination of both of them.

I recently started using Daily x64 builds.

I also recently (but after I started using the x64 builds) tried out
Enigmail.  Not only did I run into the problem of Enigmail not
installing unless I tried the builds from
<http://enigmail.mozdev.org/download/nightly.php.html>, I ran into the
same problem as you. There's no x64 build of GPG/Enigmail that I could fine.

It seems the Daily x64  (or Enigmail) needs to implement some type of
wrapper to make things work.

End result is that I'm sticking with x64 and not using Engimail.

--
Michael
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

Jonathan Protzenko
There was a lengthy discussion on m.d.planning about 64-bit builds for
Windows. The tl;dr is:
- they don't bring any significant benefits in terms of performance,
even less so for Thunderbird because I don't think Thunderbird will
ever run over the 3GB memory limit,
- they use more memory,
- less tested,
- the JITs are better in the 32bit builds,
- they make life harder when having to support plugins.

Yet, users insist on usnig 64-bit builds on Windows, because they think
they're better, even though a thorough analysis yields the opposite
conclusion (see the various messages near the end of the thread).


The full thread is
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/mozilla.dev.planning/Giij-AZfUAM/discussion 
and I think the conclusion of the thread is that they are not going to
be supported in the near future. These builds are being produced for
testing purposes only: please, everyone, stick to the 32bit builds,
64-bit builds on Windows provide *no benefit* over the 32-bit builds.

Cheers,

jonathan

On Sun 17 Jun 2012 09:39:12 AM CEST, Michael A. Puls II wrote:

> On 6/17/2012 12:00 AM, David wrote:
>> The*only*  Thunderbird extension that I use that *does not appear to
>> work* is Enigmail. Enigmail used with the 64 bit Thunderbird complains
>> that it can not find gpg.exe. And I have yet to find a 64 bit Gnupg
>> package so I do know if the problem is the 32 bit is gpg.exe or
>> Enigmail.
>> Or a combination of both of them.
>
> I recently started using Daily x64 builds.
>
> I also recently (but after I started using the x64 builds) tried out
> Enigmail.  Not only did I run into the problem of Enigmail not
> installing unless I tried the builds from
> <http://enigmail.mozdev.org/download/nightly.php.html>, I ran into the
> same problem as you. There's no x64 build of GPG/Enigmail that I could
> fine.
>
> It seems the Daily x64  (or Enigmail) needs to implement some type of
> wrapper to make things work.
>
> End result is that I'm sticking with x64 and not using Engimail.
>
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

David Boles-2
On 6/17/2012 4:21 AM, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:

> There was a lengthy discussion on m.d.planning about 64-bit builds
> for Windows. The tl;dr is: - they don't bring any significant
> benefits in terms of performance, even less so for Thunderbird
> because I don't think Thunderbird will ever run over the 3GB memory
> limit, - they use more memory, - less tested, - the JITs are better
> in the 32bit builds, - they make life harder when having to support
> plugins.
>
> Yet, users insist on usnig 64-bit builds on Windows, because they
> think they're better, even though a thorough analysis yields the
> opposite conclusion (see the various messages near the end of the
> thread).
>
>
> The full thread is
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/mozilla.dev.planning/Giij-AZfUAM/discussion
>
>
and I think the conclusion of the thread is that they are not going to

> be supported in the near future. These builds are being produced for
> testing purposes only: please, everyone, stick to the 32bit builds,
> 64-bit builds on Windows provide *no benefit* over the 32-bit
> builds.
>
> Cheers,
>
> jonathan
>
> On Sun 17 Jun 2012 09:39:12 AM CEST, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
>> On 6/17/2012 12:00 AM, David wrote:
>>> The*only*  Thunderbird extension that I use that *does not appear
>>> to work* is Enigmail. Enigmail used with the 64 bit Thunderbird
>>> complains that it can not find gpg.exe. And I have yet to find a
>>> 64 bit Gnupg package so I do know if the problem is the 32 bit is
>>> gpg.exe or Enigmail. Or a combination of both of them.
>>
>> I recently started using Daily x64 builds.
>>
>> I also recently (but after I started using the x64 builds) tried
>> out Enigmail.  Not only did I run into the problem of Enigmail not
>> installing unless I tried the builds from
>> <http://enigmail.mozdev.org/download/nightly.php.html>, I ran into
>> the same problem as you. There's no x64 build of GPG/Enigmail that
>> I could fine.
>>
>> It seems the Daily x64  (or Enigmail) needs to implement some type
>> of wrapper to make things work.
>>
>> End result is that I'm sticking with x64 and not using Engimail.

This is directed at Jonathan Protzenko but since he top posted, and I
don't, this is at the bottom and not directed at Michael A. Puls Ii

---------------

Using this logic we would sill be flying in propeller type airplanes. No
power steering or power brakes or automatic transmissions in cars. Maybe
still be riding horses.

For me the 64 bit Firefox, allowing for all of the debug overhead, loads
faster and renders more quickly.

If there is a x86_64 build of any application that I use I use the 64bit
version.

The world does not wait for anyone. If you don't move on you will be
left behind.

Have a good day.
--

  David
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

Jonathan Protzenko
This is exactly the kind of reaction we had in the other thread: there
is evidence that the 64-bit builds provide no significant benefit over
the 32-bit ones on Windows (this is untrue for other platforms), yet
users insist on using them, because they think "64-bit is better than
32-bit". This is pure belief, but Mozilla may end up being strong-armed
into wasting significant engineering + testing + infrastructure
resources just because of that belief.

If you really do believe that 64-bit is better than 32-bit, then please
provide hard evidence for that claim using technical arguments (e.g.
profiling, benchmarking, etc.) rather than vague metaphors and
statements without evidence. Right now the benefit seems to mainly
psychological for you.

jonathan
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

Philip Chee
In reply to this post by David Boles-2
On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 14:49:02 +0200, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:

> This is exactly the kind of reaction we had in the other thread: there
> is evidence that the 64-bit builds provide no significant benefit over
> the 32-bit ones on Windows (this is untrue for other platforms), yet
> users insist on using them, because they think "64-bit is better than
> 32-bit". This is pure belief, but Mozilla may end up being strong-armed
> into wasting significant engineering + testing + infrastructure
> resources just because of that belief.
>
> If you really do believe that 64-bit is better than 32-bit, then please
> provide hard evidence for that claim using technical arguments (e.g.
> profiling, benchmarking, etc.) rather than vague metaphors and
> statements without evidence. Right now the benefit seems to mainly
> psychological for you.
>
> jonathan

There are two know advantages though:
1. Fewer OOM crashes.
2. Fewer crapware antivirus products that inject themselves into your
process space and then crash because the entry points they are looking
for have changed.

Phil

--
Philip Chee <[hidden email]>, <[hidden email]>
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org
Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief,
oh Night, and so be good for us to pass.
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

David Boles-2
In reply to this post by Jonathan Protzenko
On 6/17/2012 8:49 AM, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:

> This is exactly the kind of reaction we had in the other thread: there
> is evidence that the 64-bit builds provide no significant benefit over
> the 32-bit ones on Windows (this is untrue for other platforms), yet
> users insist on using them, because they think "64-bit is better than
> 32-bit". This is pure belief, but Mozilla may end up being strong-armed
> into wasting significant engineering + testing + infrastructure
> resources just because of that belief.
>
> If you really do believe that 64-bit is better than 32-bit, then please
> provide hard evidence for that claim using technical arguments (e.g.
> profiling, benchmarking, etc.) rather than vague metaphors and
> statements without evidence. Right now the benefit seems to mainly
> psychological for you.
>
> jonathan


May I ask 'just who are' Jonathan? Are you one of the Mozilla Developers?
 No disrespect intended. I am but a simple user

--

  David
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

Jonathan Protzenko
In reply to this post by Philip Chee
HI,

Re 1., OOM makes more sense for Firefox because the memory usage
increases as you open tabs, but I believe it's hard to reach the 3GB
limit inside Thunderbird, unless you have a very specific use-case. Do
we have a real problem with OOM crashes in Thunderbird?

2. is because there's less crapware compiled for 64-bit?

jonathan
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

Mark Rousell-5
In reply to this post by Jonathan Protzenko
On 17/06/2012 13:49, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:

> This is exactly the kind of reaction we had in the other thread: there
> is evidence that the 64-bit builds provide no significant benefit over
> the 32-bit ones on Windows (this is untrue for other platforms), yet
> users insist on using them, because they think "64-bit is better than
> 32-bit". This is pure belief, but Mozilla may end up being strong-armed
> into wasting significant engineering + testing + infrastructure
> resources just because of that belief.
>
> If you really do believe that 64-bit is better than 32-bit, then please
> provide hard evidence for that claim using technical arguments (e.g.
> profiling, benchmarking, etc.) rather than vague metaphors and
> statements without evidence. Right now the benefit seems to mainly
> psychological for you.

Thing is, technical arguments are not everything in reality. They are
obviously important and can't be ignored but they are not everything.

It is rare for anyone to use a piece of software (where they have a
choice) solely for technical reasons. They may rationalise their
decision in technical terms (and technical reasons may play a big part)
but very often there is sentiment too. In short, people use what they
*like* and people like things for a whole load of reasons apart from
pure technical issues.

The reality is that 64-bit is the future and it is increasingly *what*
*people* *expect* regardless of platform. It is what people think is the
way forward. It is what they like. I think this expectation is
particularly likely to be true for a large proportion of the kind of
users who would even consider Thunderbird at all. They are simply
*happier* with 64-bit apps for their 64-bit OS because that seems
modern. Happy users are surely what we want. It is happy users who offer
the project sustainability, a path to the future.

In this light, surely it is getting to the stage where 64-bit
Thunderbird must be worth it, if only to fulfil 'customer' expectation.
Doing what may well be the technically 'right' thing (i.e. not expending
resources on a 64-bit version) is not beneficial if the customers/users
don't like it, if it makes us look outmoded. Rightly or wrongly, 32-bit
is getting to seem outmoded to many people.

In short, "pure belief", annoying though it may well be to many techies,
really, really matters in terms of long term sustainability and usage.
Image and perception count in users' and wouldbe users' minds, as much
as getting the technology right matters.


--
Mark Rousell

PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
 
 
 


_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

Michael A. Puls II
In reply to this post by Jonathan Protzenko
On 6/17/2012 4:21 AM, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
> Yet, users insist on usnig 64-bit builds on Windows, because they think
> they're better, even though a thorough analysis yields the opposite
> conclusion (see the various messages near the end of the thread).

I use them just because I have Win7 x64 and want to use x64 programs.
It's not for logical/technical reasons. I can test the Daily 32-bit
builds from now on if it's really causing that much of a problem as
mentioned in that link and Mozilla doesn't want anyone to testing the
x64 builds. I can have my x64 fun in the built-in mail client of the x64
version of Opera, so I'm good.

--
Michael
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

Jeff Grossman-2
In reply to this post by Jonathan Protzenko
On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 08:42:08 -0400, David wrote:

>On 6/17/2012 4:21 AM, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
>> There was a lengthy discussion on m.d.planning about 64-bit builds
>> for Windows. The tl;dr is: - they don't bring any significant
>> benefits in terms of performance, even less so for Thunderbird
>> because I don't think Thunderbird will ever run over the 3GB memory
>> limit, - they use more memory, - less tested, - the JITs are better
>> in the 32bit builds, - they make life harder when having to support
>> plugins.
>>
>> Yet, users insist on usnig 64-bit builds on Windows, because they
>> think they're better, even though a thorough analysis yields the
>> opposite conclusion (see the various messages near the end of the
>> thread).
>>
>>
>> The full thread is
>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/mozilla.dev.planning/Giij-AZfUAM/discussion
>>
>>
>and I think the conclusion of the thread is that they are not going to
>> be supported in the near future. These builds are being produced for
>> testing purposes only: please, everyone, stick to the 32bit builds,
>> 64-bit builds on Windows provide *no benefit* over the 32-bit
>> builds.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> jonathan
>>
>> On Sun 17 Jun 2012 09:39:12 AM CEST, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
>>> On 6/17/2012 12:00 AM, David wrote:
>>>> The*only*  Thunderbird extension that I use that *does not appear
>>>> to work* is Enigmail. Enigmail used with the 64 bit Thunderbird
>>>> complains that it can not find gpg.exe. And I have yet to find a
>>>> 64 bit Gnupg package so I do know if the problem is the 32 bit is
>>>> gpg.exe or Enigmail. Or a combination of both of them.
>>>
>>> I recently started using Daily x64 builds.
>>>
>>> I also recently (but after I started using the x64 builds) tried
>>> out Enigmail.  Not only did I run into the problem of Enigmail not
>>> installing unless I tried the builds from
>>> <http://enigmail.mozdev.org/download/nightly.php.html>, I ran into
>>> the same problem as you. There's no x64 build of GPG/Enigmail that
>>> I could fine.
>>>
>>> It seems the Daily x64  (or Enigmail) needs to implement some type
>>> of wrapper to make things work.
>>>
>>> End result is that I'm sticking with x64 and not using Engimail.
>
>This is directed at Jonathan Protzenko but since he top posted, and I
>don't, this is at the bottom and not directed at Michael A. Puls Ii
>
>---------------
>
>Using this logic we would sill be flying in propeller type airplanes. No
>power steering or power brakes or automatic transmissions in cars. Maybe
>still be riding horses.
>
>For me the 64 bit Firefox, allowing for all of the debug overhead, loads
>faster and renders more quickly.
>
>If there is a x86_64 build of any application that I use I use the 64bit
>version.
>
>The world does not wait for anyone. If you don't move on you will be
>left behind.
>
>Have a good day.

That might be true, but if you find a bug that is specific to the
64-bit build, it might take a while, if ever, to get fixed.  You could
be using an insecure or buggy build for a while just to say that you
are running a 64-bit version.

If the 64-bit build has no benefit over the 32-bit version, how is
using it being left behind.  Not sure I follow.

Jeff
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

Mark Rousell-5
In reply to this post by Mark Rousell-5
On 17/06/2012 17:44, Mark Rousell wrote:
> The reality is that 64-bit is the future and it is increasingly *what*
> *people* *expect* regardless of platform. It is what people think is the
> way forward. It is what they like. I think this expectation is
> particularly likely to be true for a large proportion of the kind of
> users who would even consider Thunderbird at all. They are simply
> *happier* with 64-bit apps for their 64-bit OS because that seems
> modern.

In respect of my comments above, witness the message below from this
very thread, posted one minute after my message above. ;-)

-<quote>-----------------------------------------------------------------
On 6/17/2012 4:21 AM, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
> Yet, users insist on usnig 64-bit builds on Windows, because they
> think
> they're better, even though a thorough analysis yields the opposite
> conclusion (see the various messages near the end of the thread).

I use them just because I have Win7 x64 and want to use x64 programs.
It's not for logical/technical reasons. I can test the Daily 32-bit
builds from now on if it's really causing that much of a problem as
mentioned in that link and Mozilla doesn't want anyone to testing the
x64 builds. I can have my x64 fun in the built-in mail client of the x64
version of Opera, so I'm good.
-<quote>-----------------------------------------------------------------


--
Mark Rousell

PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
 
 
 


_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

Jeff Grossman-2
In reply to this post by Jonathan Protzenko
On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 09:53:18 -0400, David wrote:

>On 6/17/2012 8:49 AM, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
>> This is exactly the kind of reaction we had in the other thread: there
>> is evidence that the 64-bit builds provide no significant benefit over
>> the 32-bit ones on Windows (this is untrue for other platforms), yet
>> users insist on using them, because they think "64-bit is better than
>> 32-bit". This is pure belief, but Mozilla may end up being strong-armed
>> into wasting significant engineering + testing + infrastructure
>> resources just because of that belief.
>>
>> If you really do believe that 64-bit is better than 32-bit, then please
>> provide hard evidence for that claim using technical arguments (e.g.
>> profiling, benchmarking, etc.) rather than vague metaphors and
>> statements without evidence. Right now the benefit seems to mainly
>> psychological for you.
>>
>> jonathan
>
>
>May I ask 'just who are' Jonathan? Are you one of the Mozilla Developers?
> No disrespect intended. I am but a simple user

Yes, Jonathon is the one who created the Thunderbird Conversations
add-on.

Jeff
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

David Boles-2
In reply to this post by Jeff Grossman-2
On 6/17/2012 1:01 PM, Jeff Grossman wrote:

> On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 08:42:08 -0400, David wrote:
>
>> On 6/17/2012 4:21 AM, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
>>> There was a lengthy discussion on m.d.planning about 64-bit builds
>>> for Windows. The tl;dr is: - they don't bring any significant
>>> benefits in terms of performance, even less so for Thunderbird
>>> because I don't think Thunderbird will ever run over the 3GB memory
>>> limit, - they use more memory, - less tested, - the JITs are better
>>> in the 32bit builds, - they make life harder when having to support
>>> plugins.
>>>
>>> Yet, users insist on usnig 64-bit builds on Windows, because they
>>> think they're better, even though a thorough analysis yields the
>>> opposite conclusion (see the various messages near the end of the
>>> thread).
>>>
>>>
>>> The full thread is
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/mozilla.dev.planning/Giij-AZfUAM/discussion
>>>
>>>
>> and I think the conclusion of the thread is that they are not going to
>>> be supported in the near future. These builds are being produced for
>>> testing purposes only: please, everyone, stick to the 32bit builds,
>>> 64-bit builds on Windows provide *no benefit* over the 32-bit
>>> builds.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> jonathan
>>>
>>> On Sun 17 Jun 2012 09:39:12 AM CEST, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
>>>> On 6/17/2012 12:00 AM, David wrote:
>>>>> The*only*  Thunderbird extension that I use that *does not appear
>>>>> to work* is Enigmail. Enigmail used with the 64 bit Thunderbird
>>>>> complains that it can not find gpg.exe. And I have yet to find a
>>>>> 64 bit Gnupg package so I do know if the problem is the 32 bit is
>>>>> gpg.exe or Enigmail. Or a combination of both of them.
>>>>
>>>> I recently started using Daily x64 builds.
>>>>
>>>> I also recently (but after I started using the x64 builds) tried
>>>> out Enigmail.  Not only did I run into the problem of Enigmail not
>>>> installing unless I tried the builds from
>>>> <http://enigmail.mozdev.org/download/nightly.php.html>, I ran into
>>>> the same problem as you. There's no x64 build of GPG/Enigmail that
>>>> I could fine.
>>>>
>>>> It seems the Daily x64  (or Enigmail) needs to implement some type
>>>> of wrapper to make things work.
>>>>
>>>> End result is that I'm sticking with x64 and not using Engimail.
>>
>> This is directed at Jonathan Protzenko but since he top posted, and I
>> don't, this is at the bottom and not directed at Michael A. Puls Ii
>>
>> ---------------
>>
>> Using this logic we would sill be flying in propeller type airplanes. No
>> power steering or power brakes or automatic transmissions in cars. Maybe
>> still be riding horses.
>>
>> For me the 64 bit Firefox, allowing for all of the debug overhead, loads
>> faster and renders more quickly.
>>
>> If there is a x86_64 build of any application that I use I use the 64bit
>> version.
>>
>> The world does not wait for anyone. If you don't move on you will be
>> left behind.
>>
>> Have a good day.
>
> That might be true, but if you find a bug that is specific to the
> 64-bit build, it might take a while, if ever, to get fixed.  You could
> be using an insecure or buggy build for a while just to say that you
> are running a 64-bit version.
>
> If the 64-bit build has no benefit over the 32-bit version, how is
> using it being left behind.  Not sure I follow.



I have yet to see, me personally, a bug that was in the 64bit build that
are not also in the 32bit build. Not saying there are none. Only that I
have not seen one. This is in Firefox Nightly 64bit used for many
months. I can not speak of Thunderbird as the 64bit is so new.

You want to use 32bit software on multi-core 16gig machines, if you have
one, then help yourself. Enjoy.

--

  David
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

Jeff Grossman-2
In reply to this post by Jonathan Protzenko
On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 17:44:55 +0100, Mark Rousell wrote:

>On 17/06/2012 13:49, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
>> This is exactly the kind of reaction we had in the other thread: there
>> is evidence that the 64-bit builds provide no significant benefit over
>> the 32-bit ones on Windows (this is untrue for other platforms), yet
>> users insist on using them, because they think "64-bit is better than
>> 32-bit". This is pure belief, but Mozilla may end up being strong-armed
>> into wasting significant engineering + testing + infrastructure
>> resources just because of that belief.
>>
>> If you really do believe that 64-bit is better than 32-bit, then please
>> provide hard evidence for that claim using technical arguments (e.g.
>> profiling, benchmarking, etc.) rather than vague metaphors and
>> statements without evidence. Right now the benefit seems to mainly
>> psychological for you.
>
>Thing is, technical arguments are not everything in reality. They are
>obviously important and can't be ignored but they are not everything.
>
>It is rare for anyone to use a piece of software (where they have a
>choice) solely for technical reasons. They may rationalise their
>decision in technical terms (and technical reasons may play a big part)
>but very often there is sentiment too. In short, people use what they
>*like* and people like things for a whole load of reasons apart from
>pure technical issues.
>
>The reality is that 64-bit is the future and it is increasingly *what*
>*people* *expect* regardless of platform. It is what people think is the
>way forward. It is what they like. I think this expectation is
>particularly likely to be true for a large proportion of the kind of
>users who would even consider Thunderbird at all. They are simply
>*happier* with 64-bit apps for their 64-bit OS because that seems
>modern. Happy users are surely what we want. It is happy users who offer
>the project sustainability, a path to the future.
>
>In this light, surely it is getting to the stage where 64-bit
>Thunderbird must be worth it, if only to fulfil 'customer' expectation.
>Doing what may well be the technically 'right' thing (i.e. not expending
>resources on a 64-bit version) is not beneficial if the customers/users
>don't like it, if it makes us look outmoded. Rightly or wrongly, 32-bit
>is getting to seem outmoded to many people.
>
>In short, "pure belief", annoying though it may well be to many techies,
>really, really matters in terms of long term sustainability and usage.
>Image and perception count in users' and wouldbe users' minds, as much
>as getting the technology right matters.

I understand all of that, but with a project that already is short
developers to handle the load, how can anybody justify splitting that
short amount of developers between handling 32-bit and 64-bit
versions.  I would prefer to spend all of the resources on making the
32-bit versions better especially if there is no added benefit to
running the 64-bit versions.  Until Thunderbird, or Mozilla in
general, get more developers they need to pick their battles and the
have chosen to concentrate on 32-bit versions.  Which I agree with.

They are supplying 64-bit versions, which they don't even have to do,
but do not expect any support if you use them.  And, if you use the
64-bit version, that is just one less user to help solve any problems
that might exist with Thunderbird.

Jeff
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

David Boles-2
On 6/17/2012 1:29 PM, Jeff Grossman wrote:

> On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 17:44:55 +0100, Mark Rousell wrote:
>
>> On 17/06/2012 13:49, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
>>> This is exactly the kind of reaction we had in the other thread: there
>>> is evidence that the 64-bit builds provide no significant benefit over
>>> the 32-bit ones on Windows (this is untrue for other platforms), yet
>>> users insist on using them, because they think "64-bit is better than
>>> 32-bit". This is pure belief, but Mozilla may end up being strong-armed
>>> into wasting significant engineering + testing + infrastructure
>>> resources just because of that belief.
>>>
>>> If you really do believe that 64-bit is better than 32-bit, then please
>>> provide hard evidence for that claim using technical arguments (e.g.
>>> profiling, benchmarking, etc.) rather than vague metaphors and
>>> statements without evidence. Right now the benefit seems to mainly
>>> psychological for you.
>>
>> Thing is, technical arguments are not everything in reality. They are
>> obviously important and can't be ignored but they are not everything.
>>
>> It is rare for anyone to use a piece of software (where they have a
>> choice) solely for technical reasons. They may rationalise their
>> decision in technical terms (and technical reasons may play a big part)
>> but very often there is sentiment too. In short, people use what they
>> *like* and people like things for a whole load of reasons apart from
>> pure technical issues.
>>
>> The reality is that 64-bit is the future and it is increasingly *what*
>> *people* *expect* regardless of platform. It is what people think is the
>> way forward. It is what they like. I think this expectation is
>> particularly likely to be true for a large proportion of the kind of
>> users who would even consider Thunderbird at all. They are simply
>> *happier* with 64-bit apps for their 64-bit OS because that seems
>> modern. Happy users are surely what we want. It is happy users who offer
>> the project sustainability, a path to the future.
>>
>> In this light, surely it is getting to the stage where 64-bit
>> Thunderbird must be worth it, if only to fulfil 'customer' expectation.
>> Doing what may well be the technically 'right' thing (i.e. not expending
>> resources on a 64-bit version) is not beneficial if the customers/users
>> don't like it, if it makes us look outmoded. Rightly or wrongly, 32-bit
>> is getting to seem outmoded to many people.
>>
>> In short, "pure belief", annoying though it may well be to many techies,
>> really, really matters in terms of long term sustainability and usage.
>> Image and perception count in users' and wouldbe users' minds, as much
>> as getting the technology right matters.
>
> I understand all of that, but with a project that already is short
> developers to handle the load, how can anybody justify splitting that
> short amount of developers between handling 32-bit and 64-bit
> versions.  I would prefer to spend all of the resources on making the
> 32-bit versions better especially if there is no added benefit to
> running the 64-bit versions.  Until Thunderbird, or Mozilla in
> general, get more developers they need to pick their battles and the
> have chosen to concentrate on 32-bit versions.  Which I agree with.
>
> They are supplying 64-bit versions, which they don't even have to do,
> but do not expect any support if you use them.  And, if you use the
> 64-bit version, that is just one less user to help solve any problems
> that might exist with Thunderbird.


Their choice of course. I did not say I was angry. But Mac has duel arch
and Linux has duel arch for both Firefox and Thunderbird.

As I said in this thread I, as in me, has never seen a bug that was not
in both and solved the same way. Repeat. Me. I have even helped to track
several of them down. And as I said about Thunderbird I do not use the
64bit version only because Patrick (Enigmail) has sufficient problems
with four versions of 32 bit Enigmail for 32bit Thunderbird and I value
his extension.

You have a great day.
--

  David
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

Philip Chee
In reply to this post by Philip Chee
On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 16:26:34 +0200, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
> HI,
>
> Re 1., OOM makes more sense for Firefox because the memory usage
> increases as you open tabs, but I believe it's hard to reach the 3GB
> limit inside Thunderbird, unless you have a very specific use-case. Do
> we have a real problem with OOM crashes in Thunderbird?

Dunno. The Instantbird component used to leak like crazy. I think
Florian has fixed most of them.

Phil

--
Philip Chee <[hidden email]>, <[hidden email]>
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org
Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief,
oh Night, and so be good for us to pass.
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thunderbird Windows x64?

Philip Chee
In reply to this post by Jeff Grossman-2
On 18/06/2012 01:03, Jeff Grossman wrote:

> On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 09:53:18 -0400, David wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 10:03:27 -0700, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
>>> This is exactly the kind of reaction we had in the other thread: there
>>> is evidence that the 64-bit builds provide no significant benefit over
>>> the 32-bit ones on Windows (this is untrue for other platforms), yet
>>> users insist on using them, because they think "64-bit is better than
>>> 32-bit". This is pure belief, but Mozilla may end up being strong-armed
>>> into wasting significant engineering + testing + infrastructure
>>> resources just because of that belief.
>>>
>>> If you really do believe that 64-bit is better than 32-bit, then please
>>> provide hard evidence for that claim using technical arguments (e.g.
>>> profiling, benchmarking, etc.) rather than vague metaphors and
>>> statements without evidence. Right now the benefit seems to mainly
>>> psychological for you.
>>>
>>> jonathan
>>
>>
>>May I ask 'just who are' Jonathan? Are you one of the Mozilla Developers?
>> No disrespect intended. I am but a simple user
>
> Yes, Jonathon is the one who created the Thunderbird Conversations
> add-on.

That's not actually answering his question.

Phil

--
Philip Chee <[hidden email]>, <[hidden email]>
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org
Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief,
oh Night, and so be good for us to pass.
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-thunderbird mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-thunderbird
12