🚀 go-pugleaf

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 00:53:22 -0800, Marcel_Vogelzangs@adobeforums.com
wrote:

>Ok Chris thanks for your reaction. We are looking to buy a 64-bit computer system. But everyone we ask told use Framemaker 8 doesn't support a 64-bit computer, even on the Adobe site! This following go's to the adobe site:
>
> <http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewContent.do?externalId=kb403291&sliceId=1&promoid=DNRBQ>
>
>So I was though Framemaker doesn't support 64-bits at all, but we you say you work with it, it fine to me.

Oh dear.  Yes, that's definitely wrong.  FrameMaker runs as a 32-bit
application on 64-bit systems, just like the other Adobe applications
in that list.  I've left a comment in the feedback box, maybe someone
will read it and fix this list.

>Perhaps can you tell me the properties of your system?

I'm running the current patch level of FrameMaker 8 on the 64-bit
edition of Windows Vista Ultimate.  I don't quite recall if I ever
used FM7 on this system, but FM8 definitely works.

By the way, you wouldn't get any better performance from a native
64-bit version of FrameMaker anyway, not unless you are planning to
edit truly gigantic documents.  The 64-bit address space is a great
thing for operating systems because it removes the 4 GB limit
(actually only 3-3.5 GB in practice) that can get annoying when you
run a memory-hungry system like Vista and a bunch of big applications.

But for an individual application like FrameMaker, the 2 GB available
to a standard 32-bit process are usually quite sufficient.  Moreover,
instructions are actually executed more slowly by a 64-bit application
because all data items that hold memory addresses are twice as big. In
fact, moving an application from 32 bit to 64 bit compilation can
easily result in a *slowdown* of 10% or more.
--
http://www.kynosarges.de