Weblog entry #35 for Utumno

java plugin on amd64: happy 5th anniversary!
Posted by Utumno on Wed 27 Feb 2008 at 04:34
Tags: , ,
RFE 4802695 (Support Java Plug-in on 64-bit AMD and Intel) is the top 'Request For Enhancement' in Sun's Bug Database. As of now, it has received 680 votes.

The RFE was submitted on Jan the 14th, 2003. Thus, I am happy to announce that last month we had a chance to celebrate its 5th anniversary.

Champagne and cake anyone?

 

Comments on this Entry

Posted by ajt (204.193.xx.xx) on Wed 27 Feb 2008 at 13:00
[ Send Message | View Weblogs ]
Admitting that 64-bit Linux exists and that enough people use it to warrant a browser plug-in is a bit of a publicity problem for Sun.

Pretty much all AMD and Intel chips available for the past year or so are 64-bit. Debian has had a full stable distribution since Sarge, and most popular distros have an AMD64 version and like Debian have had one for some time.

I'd even bet that amongst serious Linux users 64-bit is in the majority. I don't know what the split is over all Linux users, but even there I'd bet that a higher percentage of Linux users are running 64-bit than Windows users.

Come on Sun, get your finger out and put your money where you mouth is!

--
"It's Not Magic, It's Work"
Adam

[ Parent | Reply to this comment ]

Posted by Utumno (211.72.xx.xx) on Wed 27 Feb 2008 at 19:13
[ Send Message | View Utumno's Scratchpad | View Weblogs ]
Well, it's not about 64-bit Linux. There is no plugin for 64-bit Windows, nor for 64-bit ... Solaris, either.

[ Parent | Reply to this comment ]

Posted by ajt (85.211.xx.xx) on Wed 27 Feb 2008 at 20:23
[ Send Message | View Weblogs ]
I didn't realise it was all 64-bit platforms.

Effectively Windows isn't 64-bit yet, Microsoft could have released Vista as 64-bit only creating a 64-bit Windows market but they didn't so it will be years before Windows becomes 64-bit. So it is probably pointless to make a 64-bit Java plug-in for Windows.

I can't imagine that any sane[0] person is still running a version of Solaris that isn't 64-bit, so if there is no support there then it's a joke.

As I said previously, Linux is increasingly 64-bit, so no support there is a nuisance.

Perhaps Sun aren't prepared to admit that there is such a thing as a 64-bit desktop market? I suppose if you include Windows then that's still true, but Linux/Unix is now mostly 64-bit.


[0] Ironically I run 32-bit Solaris on an old SPARCstation 5, but it's a historic toy not a production system.

--
"It's Not Magic, It's Work"
Adam

[ Parent | Reply to this comment ]

Posted by Utumno (211.72.xx.xx) on Sun 2 Mar 2008 at 01:10
[ Send Message | View Utumno's Scratchpad | View Weblogs ]
ajt, it doesn't matter if a given system is 'fully 64-bit' or not. It only matters if the browser it runs is 64 bit.

[ Parent | Reply to this comment ]

Posted by ajt (85.211.xx.xx) on Sun 2 Mar 2008 at 10:30
[ Send Message | View Weblogs ]
You are of course correct, however running some 32-bit programs on a 64-bit system is always a pain.

You can run a legacy 32-bit applications I agree, however you often end up being forced to run any program they connect to in the same legacy 32-bit mode (the browser as you say in this instance) which now means you have to maintain a non-standard part of your OS by hand.

Or you can install a shim which lets 32-bit browser plug-ins run in a 64-bit browser, which can also be a pain.

It would simply be a lot simpler if there were native 64-bit browser plug-ins available.


--
"It's Not Magic, It's Work"
Adam

[ Parent | Reply to this comment ]

User Login

Username:

Password:

[ Advanced Login ]

Register Account

Quick Site Search