Windows XP x64

edge2life · 01-26-2005, 09:00 PM

Do you plan a 64 bits optimized version soon? Windows XP x64 final come out in april

MxxCon · 01-28-2005, 05:34 AM

"optimizing" flashfxp would be like "optimizing" notepad.
it's not cpu or memory intensive to make any difference.

Thany · 02-03-2005, 03:53 AM

So FlashFXP is still a 16-bits application?

I guess when there are more 64-bit CPU's than 32-bit CPU's, an x64 version might be a good idea.

MxxCon · 02-03-2005, 09:35 AM

don't say stupid things.
flashfxp is 32bit app.
16bit application can not access big files, or large memory addresses.

Thany · 02-03-2005, 01:15 PM

I'm not stupid, I was joking (mind the smiley!)

You said 64-bit wouldn't increase performance over 32-bit. So 32-bit also wouldn't gain performance over 16-bit. Do you get the joke now?

MxxCon · 02-03-2005, 04:42 PM

i got the joke, i just don't want people to think that flashfxp is some dos-hack.
it would be virtually impossible to have flashfxp we have now if it was 16bit app.
there is a major performance gain when going from 16bit to 32bit.

Enderandrew · 02-28-2005, 04:03 AM

You are right that this is not a CPU-intensive program. However, I believe that FlashFXP could benefit greatly from a Native 64 bit version.

There have been 64 bit versions of Linux and Windows available for a year, but few software programs have made the jump. By innovating, you could become the first native 64 bit FTP program. In doing so, you will attract many new customers who would normally have never seen or chosen your particular program in the myriad of FTP choices out there currently. That alone is a powerful reason to support a 64-bit version.

Secondly, the leap to a 64-bit version is also a huge leap in technology. I'm not sure why you are dismissive of it. And whether or not the performance gain appears to be huge (since Win x64 can run 32-bit applications and FlashFXP is not a CPU hog), it would still run better as a native 64 bit app, then as a 32 bit app running on an emulated WoW layer.

I don't know that porting a 64 bit version would be extremely difficult, yet it could yield some rather positive results. Furthermore, many businesses are constantly looking for a good FTP program, and I don't know that there is a great industry leader in FTP programs. We use WS_FTP Pro at work, and I'm certainly not in love with the product.

Yet, there are plenty of business servers that have been around for 2 years that exceed 4 gigs of memory. 32 bit operating systems and programs can handle memory addresses above 4 gigs. So the memory only serves to be redundant at that level. A native 64-bit program could be used on high-end business servers that have more than 4 gigs of memory.

Assuming those servers use Intel processors, there would be a HUGE performance increase, since the Intel 64 bit processors have huge problems running 32-bit applications on a system with over 4 gigs of memory.

With these points being brought to light, I hope you will reconsider your position, and at the very least look into the feasibility of a native 64-bit version.

Thanks for a great product!

bigstar · 02-28-2005, 05:40 AM

One of the main reasons is that FlashFXP is compiled with Borland Delphi and there currently isn't a 64 bit compiler. The only way we'd be able to provide 64 bit program is by re-writing FlashFXP in Delphi 2005 and compiling it as .NET. It is my understanding that Borland does not plan on releasing a 64 bit compiler for native Delphi applications.

Thany · 02-28-2005, 06:13 AM

Enderandrew, WoW is not an emulator, it's a wrapper. WoW for 16-bits on 32-bits also doesn't emulate.

Also Intel processors run 32-bits code at the exact same speed as their native 32-bits counterparts. At least, I hope you were referring to Xeons and P4's with EM64T.

Anyway, using Delphi, it's impossible to compile for 64-bit. Too bad Delphi always stays a few steps behind when it comes to new technologies... (except .NET, for some reason)

Enderandrew · 02-28-2005, 07:27 PM

I was not aware of the Delphi problem. That kind of closes the door on this discussion. Either way, thanks for the quick reply.

As far as the Xeons and Pentium 4's on EM64T, the problem seems to occur on systems with over 4 gigs of memory, where the OS can handle 64 bit memory addresses, and yet the application can not.

Thany · 03-01-2005, 02:05 PM

Btw, did you know the P4 is actually slower in 64-bit mode? Here's the benchmarks:

http://www.linuxhardware.org/article...mode=nocomment

Enderandrew · 03-01-2005, 05:13 PM

Personally, I really love this particular FTP program. It's my favorite, and it's never given me any problems.

However, I'm trying to shift towards 64-bit software. I'll probably take an open source FTP program and recompile it myself for a 64-bit version.

0uistyty · 12-29-2006, 07:05 PM

Hi, this post is almost 2 year old.

Is there any update on this subject ? 64bit Windows OS's is already out.

Even if there is no "big" speed improvement, some other ftp client's have there 64bit available.

I know there is nothing "perfect and complete" in this world, but flashfxp supporting ftp over ssh2 in a native 64bit relaese would be very close to it

Best regards and happy holidays