5 ms·

2009! They thought they could get it done in time for Snow Leopard GM!

• hugi 12y ago
  Apparently, Mac OS X isn't exactly a priority for them.
  • codezero 12y ago
    I think that for most purposes 32 bit had worked without much issue so it's a matter of cost vs benefit. Can you think of any issues that people face because Chrome was 32 bit? So far I'm seeing Java 8 integration, which is probably a tiny fraction of their users. Also it's not really breaking since those users can just use Firefox for that purpose. They obviously don't consider this a loss.
    • cozzyd 12y ago
      This is true for almost any application (very few things NEED 64 bits).
    • comex 12y ago
      Security is a big one. 64-bit address spaces are inherently harder to exploit, plus, IIRC, on OS X in particular, ASLR in 32-bit processes has some weaknesses that were never fixed.
      • codezero 12y ago
        Good point! To stay on my angle, are there Chrome specific security bugs that are in the most recent builds that are exacerbated by 32bit builds?
  • coldtea 12y ago
    Or, you know, 64 bit for a single platform isn't exactly a lifechanger they should devote their resources in.