Who said SketchUp doesn't need to be 64 bit?
-
@unknownuser said:
so chess is 32 bit, that is 16 bits each side, so is Go game 64?
I don't know
But as Go is 19 * 19 : 19 = 8 * 2.375
So Go is 32 * 2.375 = 76 bits
Chees is resolved by computer!
10 power 123 reasonnable estimation numbers of plays
Go Game is resisting!
10 power 600 reasonnable estimation numbers of plays 
Chess is a destructive game you have nothing at the end! Just 2 Kings very tired + a pawn!
Go Game is constructive!
At the end you can see what happend during the play!
A marvelous zen Landscape!
@unknownuser said:
Is that Chinese Checkers?
No Go game is not! This is Chinese Checkers
It's totally other thing!
And Go game is the oldest game in the world and the more intrigating!
with a truelly simplicississmus rule!
Chees has an headache rule : you must remember all different moves of the pieces for a butchery!Go game has a rule so simple than the Game of Life of John Conway!
(for the Little Story John Conway has researced the Game of Life on a Goban! (the cheeker of Go Game
Try Golly (free)
Go game has a very smart and very easy Handicap system!
So Chees is the King of games, Go game is the Emperor of games!
-
@unknownuser said:
Chees is resolved by computer!
Of course that's not true Pilou.
It's true however that with few pieces on the board (I think today we got to 7) the computers with tablebases can solve every position... but pieces are 32. -
You are joking ?
Now you have quasi any chance to win against a computer!
(except unplug it!
Send me your party if you win!
Even World's Champion cry! It's for that you don't see too much computers in human competition!
-
I didn't say that humans have a lot of chances against computers today even if, strategically speaking, humans are by far superior to computers. But that's not really important: cars can run faster that humans but you still can enjoy a 100 m sprint. I just said that chess is not "solved" and the proof is that a computer can still beat a computer (maybe even a human, lets say Carlsen, can win a game against a computer and draw few). So, I mean, you only have the mathematical certainty of the solution of every position only with few pieces on the board.
-
Surely this thread has taken a new direction?
-
It seems so, sorry.
-
Just a little deviation!
Happy Easter eggs!PS
@unknownuser said:a computer can still beat a computer
Good vicious point! Because one of these computers is maybe "the ultima Master one"
-
@pixero said:
Surely this thread has taken a new direction?
i highly doubt anybody from trimble is going to talk about this anymore.. pretty much anything that can be said about it already has.. at this point, it's either going to be 64bit or not and i don't think the end users have any say in the matter.. up to now, the stance is pretty much "if you want sketchup to be 64bit then too bad"
-
sketchup is dying a slow death.
-
You guys never played Go? A whole other world. Huge history and cultural background China -Japan-Korea. Big online presence too. Very addictive. Built-in handicap system helps learning (you get to play for a while without getting slaughtered as in chess).
-
@jeff hammond said:
up to now, the stance is pretty much "if you want sketchup to be 64bit then too bad"
You forgot the part about "shut up and give us money annually for ignoring you. If we're feeling really generous, we'll give you a little tiny bit of what you paid for in the first place, eventually."
-
@airwindsolar said:
@jeff hammond said:
up to now, the stance is pretty much "if you want sketchup to be 64bit then too bad"
You forgot the part about "shut up and give us money annually for ignoring you. If we're feeling really generous, we'll give you a little tiny bit of what you paid for in the first place, eventually."
You need to change your profile license type shows free??
-
@pixero said:
Today I got the proof and I have an image to prove it.
SketchUp ran out of memory.
[attachment=0:n8sxhz9s]<!-- ia0 -->SUoutofmemory.jpg<!-- ia0 -->[/attachment:n8sxhz9s]Nuf said.
You can claim it's enough said if you want, but I'll disagree.
Yes, it's true that SketchUp ran out of memory, obviously. The part that isn't clear is how much it was using at the time, and why it ran out. Without more details, it simply isn't possible to know whether it was truly a result of the 32-bit allocation limits.
For instance, it's possible that SketchUp was well below the 32-bit allocation threshold and that other misbehaving apps or a bug in the OS prevented SketchUp from allocating any additional memory when there was still plenty of ceiling available. As an example, there was a leak in the Apple WindowServer process on the Mac a few years back that caused out-of-memory errors with SketchUp 8 if the user remained logged in for too long without a reboot. Severe memory fragmentation and poor management by the OS can cause this problem as well; if SketchUp were to ask for too large a chunk of memory to be serviced in a contiguous allocation, a failure would result. Finally, it's also possible that SketchUp ran out of memory due to a memory leak in SketchUp that caused it to chew up all of the 32-bit mapped memory incorrectly. Of course such an issue would clearly be a bug in SketchUp that we'd need to address, but while it's true 64 bits worth of memory would help, there's no guarantee it wouldn't simply run out again after exhausting the whole machine memory (which for most people is what, maybe double what they can access via 32-bit, particularly considering that SketchUp is compiled for large address awareness).
It's absolutely possible you hit the 32-bit ceiling and that a 64-bit binary would fix it. However, without further details, it is not possible to know the nature of why this problem occurred with any certainty, or to have any clear proof that a 64-bit application would be immune. That's why say it's just not quite "enough said." I'm not trying to be contrary, just scientifically accurate.
For all those insisting a 64-bit SketchUp binary is the holy grail, although I won't go into the details that we engineers have turned blue explaining in the past, I'll add one more data point that I don't think anyone has openly considered. Given the size, complexity, organization and nature of the SketchUp application code, I personally estimate it would take on the order of two to three man years to reliably port it to 64-bit and achieve an equivalent level of reliability from the end product. That means that even if we were to apply our entire SketchUp client engineering team in that endeavor, it's probably a still several months worth of work just to perform the appropriate modifications, say nothing of the testing effort. One must consider that to add 64-bit support would increase our testing surface by at least 2X, taking time away from anything else QA might light to test.
To put this differently, the point is that one must consider whether the production of a 64-bit binary alone provides enough benefit to warrant sacrificing all of the other things that might be accomplished with such effort. Although many SketchUcation users are traditionally very outspoken about their preference for a 64-bit application (even if many of them don't actually understand the full implications), this community is only a drop in the ocean compared to the multiple millions of active SketchUp users in the world, and I very much doubt that anywhere near even 5% of world-wide Pro users would see tangible gains from adding 64-bit support (let alone Make users).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that we should never port to 64-bit; in fact, I have been a long-time proponent of the notion that we should. I'm just pointing out the incredibly high cost of that effort. It's not something to be undertaken lightly.
Andrew
-
@unknownuser said:
Although many SketchUcation users are traditionally very outspoken about their preference for a 64-bit application (even if many of them don't actually understand the full implications), this community is only a drop in the ocean compared to the multiple millions of active SketchUp users in the world, and I very much doubt that anywhere near even 5% of world-wide Pro users would see tangible gains from adding 64-bit support (let alone Make users).
Hmmm, I'd like to see this challenged, I believe most people with a computer manufactured this millennium would want it, especially folks that use 3rd party integrated software.
-
@andrews said:
Given the size, complexity, organization and nature of the SketchUp application code, I personally estimate it would take on the order of two to three man years to reliably port it to 64-bit and achieve an equivalent level of reliability from the end product. That means that even if we were to apply our entire SketchUp client engineering team in that endeavor, it's probably a still several months worth of work just to perform the appropriate modifications...
Interesting argumentation - how long did it take to implement the revolutionary arc tool or all those fancy additions to layout?
But maybe you're right... x64 will not be very helpful for sketchup without high (or at least higher) poly support and faster saving - files with more than 100MB are almost unworkable with activated autosave.
Btw. it's 2014 now, Win XP x64 is available since 2005...
-
Increase just the hard size memory don't resolve some problems of 32 bits with widows 8 ?
-
Tracking
-
won't it have to go 64bit eventually?
how much longer will OSX support 32bit apps?
like- can you even run a 16bit application on OSX anymore?(real questions-- I don't know)
-
@unknownuser said:
To put this differently, the point is that one must consider whether the production of a 64-bit binary alone provides enough benefit to warrant sacrificing all of the other things that might be accomplished with such effort.
.
And all the other man-hour eating things being actively pursued, or planned for the immediate future, are...? -
A good point well made. 64 bit can take a flying leap if subD, quads and proper UV mapping is in the works.
Advertisement