Personally, if it is to have an unstable browser or full of malfunctions, I prefer that they stay with the 32-bit version which works perfectly. I don't see what 64-bit could add to a browser yet
What I find odd, all the same, is that they have been taking the lead since X years for the 64-bit version of Firefox on Windows, while that poses (or at least does not seem to pose) any problem under the other operating systems – and that there are plenty of other software whose porting in 64 bits under Windows did not seem to pose any particular problem.
After, I agree with you on the rest of your comment, although with the developments in terms of streaming / 3D in your browser® / etc I tell myself that the addressing limitations in 32 bits (ie, 4GB in no sign) may pose a problem within a few years.
That's why I stipulated "for now"
@ 5COMM: you see a difference between an Office x86 and x64 you? If this is the case, it is because you have an extraordinary retinal persistence
Ok for x64 in the case of OS, was only for addressing the RAM. Question speed … Beuh … Not convinced. Question security … It's just the signature of the pilots that changes the game but it still does not prevent viruses from installing and putting the box in the OS.
It is true that we must go ahead otherwise (and I agree with you), we would still be at 16 bits But hey, as long as big changes (Cfr comment of lidstah) are not in the news, so stay on a 32 bit application which is well fashioned and functional
I'm not at all a specialist in terms of "register", memory & co addressing, it's clear, but just like that by chance, a 4K video on YT, it must weigh more than 4GB, it's happening how with a 32 bit browser?
For Office 32 or 64, I doubt that we can perceive the difference if only because our positions are far too efficient.
What I did notice is that everything in 64bits weighs heavier (it shows quickly with a shit co @ and when you're addicted to the latest software / drivers & co versions)