8-bit vs 10-bit monitor support?

Okay, I keep seeing in a photography forum that Mac is lagging behind PCs because it still uses 8-bit monitor support and Windows has 10-bit monitor support. I would really love to know from one the the experts in this forum: Is this a true fact, or just hype? Just what is the real difference is between 8- and 10-bit monitor support? Is Apple working on offering 10-bit support, and if so when?

10bit monitor display from Mac Pro late 2013
Can I use "deep color" (10-bit each color) on actual mac-mini?

Similar Messages

It´s thrue that there´s a MB that supports 64 bit and 32 bit processors?

hi.. i have an amd 64 bit but i don´t like it so much because there are no programs to use it well... so i´m thinking to change myself to an intel P4 but i work with graphics and i don´t know what to do...
... a friend told me that there is a motherboard that supports bouth 64 bit and 32 bit processor...
can you confirm this?
if you don´t, please help me..!!
any solution is well recived...
DC

Although someone mentioned about the 865PE Neo3-F which maybe one but no one can confirm this as none of the manufacturers has brought it up yet but the fact that Prescott moving on to 64bit may be possible.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20031027151409.html
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,116136,00.asp
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.html?i=1956

IMac8,1 running Snow Leopard with 64 Bit kernel and dual monitor

I've got an early 2008 Imac with an ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro card running Snow Leopard 10.6.3.
When I run the kernel in 64 bit mode the second display turns on and off periodically. Running in 32 bit mode it's fine.
Is this a known issue?

AFAIK, Mac Pro (2006) is EFI32 and is not capable of booting the 64-bit kernel, but the system is fully capable of running 64-bit applications using the 32-bit kernel.
This question can be confusing and context-dependent, and there can be different reasons for asking about the "64-bitness" of the kernel. Particularly whether the application support for 64-bit is available, and whether the kernel itself is 64-bit.
For 64-bit application support. AFAIK, you have that.
For 64-bit kernel support, and the associated requirements for having 64-bit kernel extension (kext) support for your applications, and AFAIK, you don't have that.
See [Mac OS X v10.6: Starting up with the 32-bit or 64-bit kernel (ht3773)|http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3773] for the mechanisms available for Snow Leopard and Snow Leopard Server, if you want to test your current configuration. AFAIK, you have a 32-bit kernel.
You can join the Apple developer program and then download the developer preview of [Mac OS X Lion release|http://www.apple.com/macosx/lion> if you want to learn more about that topic.

Arch Linux 32x64 bits, Developers and Window Managers Support

Greetings!
After having some time issues due to college that prevented me from this, I wish to have again a rolling-release distro in my computer.
I was in the past a big fan of Gentoo, but now it seems too much work to compile everything from scratch. Also they seemed to have some issues with the developers - the original developer if I understood correctly has quit the project, others were forced to quit due to misbehavior, etc. - and maybe due to some other facts their popularity on distrowatch dropped drastically.
Then this year I've tried Debian Testing... My goodness, that was messy. Tons and tons of bugs on XFCE, like thunar hanging on load and displaying error messages, gedit not removing the ~lock files properly on close, so I had the myfile and ~myfile, and many others. Really, I gave up.
I wish to give Arch Linux I try then. Of course that would be quite stupid to ask if arch linux is the best choice in an arch linux forum, but there are some key points that if you could answer would help me a lot to give it a try:
1. 32x64
"Should I use 32-bit or 64-bit?" is NOT the intended question. Many still prefer 32-bit-pae on a 64-bit capable machine, others prefer 64-bit. I wish to use 64-bit. Made my mind. But I would like to know if the support of 64-bit on Arch Linux is as good as 32-bit and if it comes by default with cross-libs which makes me able to run 32-bit applications natively right out of the box,
2. Developers
About how many and what's their relation with the users? When I've googled for Arch Linux, I've had found a review video on youtube where some guy said in the comments that developer's mind changed a lot in the past 2 years and they introduced many buggy packages that required manual workaround. At the end of his comments, he said "Sympathy? Apologies for the ****? Nope. blame the user for trusting 'pacman -Syu'" Surely I don't know which are these options because I haven't read about pacman yet (just know it's the default package manager) but you get the idea.
Another key question: Is Arch Linux hiring new developers over the time? Replacing the ones that leaves for the many reasons?
3. Window Managers Support
With Gnome3's overall rejection (including mine), we have only two options: Switch to KDE or try other Window Managers. I still wish to have faith on gtk, so the first option is still not considered by me. I don't wish to know "which one is the best", because that's another large discussion just as the 32-bit x 64-bit. Just how good is Arch's support (updated constantly? bug-fixes?) on:
- XFCE
- MATE
- Cinnamon
(Of course there are others like LXDE, Enlightenment, etc. but I've decided to narrow down to XFCE even having quite bad experiences on Debian Testing.)
4. Package Manager
Last, being a rolling-release dist, can I add an option for a specific package to install a specific older version and/or not upgrade when you tell the dist. to upgrade everything? I remember that back on Gentoo I could edit a text file and just type the version of the package I wished to keep and the "update everything" option wouldn't touch the package (worked also to try new versions that were still not stable enough).
Any replies will be very appreciated. Sorry for the long post.
Best regards.

I'll start at the end with #4. Of course on the arch forums you will get people who are biased towards liking arch - but I think if you ask in other communities you will regularly hear that arch's package management system is its greatest strength. Pacman is the primary tool for this, but we also have makepkg for things in the Arch User Repository (AUR), and the Arch Build System (ABS) to recompile anything from the main repos with additional/alternate compilation options.
But for your direct question, there is an option to only upgrade to a particular version of a given package. There is an option in pacman's configuration file for just this purpose. However depending on what the package is, this could lead to problems. Users are discouraged from updating most of their system while keeping some older packages - This can lead to issues with shared dependencies. Of course if you build the package from source (AUR or ABS) yourself, such issues would be easy to resolve. Is there a certain package you know you'd want to keep at an older version? If you tell us what it is, we can give more specific information on how easy/hard it would be to accomplish.
#3: Arch is a DIY distro. You choose whatever window manager / DE you want. I can vouche for XFCE working wonderfully in arch. There are also numerous archers who use mate and cinnamon. I have heard of some problems, but (AFAIK) these have nothing to do with compatibility with arch, rather these are due to upstream issues. In other words, cinnamon, mate, xfce, or any other WM should work just as well on arch as on any other distro. I'd bet our wiki for installing and configuring those WMs are better than those of the distros that bundle the WM with the core install. (In addition to package management, you will find the arch wiki is second to none).
#2: I can't answer with any specifics - other than to say they continue to do an excellent job. I am not surprised by the youtube video - not because I'd agree with it, quite the opposite. But as arch is a DIY distro it puts some responsibility on the user to maintain their own system. If one is not prepared for nor willing to do this, they often become frustrated and end up blaming someone else. Often this is the developers, sometimes it is the forum moderators, other times it is the whole arch community. In every case these accusations are absurd. Your questions on replacement of developers is a good question though - there is a history page on the wiki which might give some insight on this, but I suspect others will have better input on this.
#1: I use i686 (32bit) on two of my computers and it works perfectly. It sounds, however, that a majority of the community uses 64bit (which I just updated to on one of my computers). My 64bit system works perfectly as well, but I don't have any 32bit-only apps. Occasionally there are forum threads about some issue or another with "multilib" applications which are 32bit programs run in a 64bit system. Generally these threads seem to be resolved without much hassle. You can search for some of them yourself: Skype seems to be a common topic of such issues.
All in all, I'd reiterate arch's strengths in it's package management and wiki/documentation. Potential weaknesses could be found by users who are unwilling or unable to take responsibility for their own system. I word this is a bit biased manner - there are many people who have no interest in being responsible for maintaining their own system, a majority of all computer users would fall into this category; most of them would be quite unhappy with arch linux. If you were happy with gentoo in the past and only want to avoid constant recompiling then you probably would be one who could be very happy with arch.
Or an even shorter summary: try it out. If you don't like it, switch.

Feature Request - Better Multiple Monitor Support

Lightroom's support for a second display has definitely helped my workflow. I hope the team will consider adding more flexible multiple monitor support in version 4. Here's why.
I've recently experimented with running one of my three screens in portrait mode. When this screen hosts Lightroom's secondary display window in Loupe view, my verticals finally get equal real estate for editing. While I've not done hard statistics on my library, I know more than 50% of my imagery is in portrait orientation.
I'd like to see LR V4 support three or more screens so I could set up as follow:
Screen 1 - main lightroom interface, would not need to be calibrated, for controls and navigation
Screen 2 - Portrait orientation, loupe view - this would be a calibrated display, all develop changes to verticals would be judged on this screen
Screen 3 - Landscape orientation, loupe view - another calibrated display, all develop changes to horizontals would be judged on this screen
If Adobe could make the app intelligent enough to route the image to the correct screen based on orientation (recognizing and respecting cropping that could change orientation) my edit sessions would certainly speed up and I could maximize the productivity of multiple screens.
I'd be happy with this, but I'm also stymied by the need to switch back to Library mode to tag images when my primary workflow has me in develop. Ultimately everything depends on the quality of the image. Before I invest in image-specific meta data, I have to process or at least "test-process" an image. IMO the Quick Develop panel is useless, once you become accustomed to the granular control of the develop sliders, it just doesn't cut it.
In the three monitor setup I described above I'd love to be able to configure screen 1, with a combination of panels from Library and Develop, so I could stay "develop centric" with immediate access to keywording and meta. The two additional screens would intelligently handle image display.
I think this might speed my workflow by 33% and having just returned from a Tour de France project that generated 23,000 images I need all the productivity help I can get.

VeloDramatic wrote:
Thanks for all those votes Rob. Now we just need to get the other 999,999 on board.
Actually, this topic has come up a lot on this forum. At this point, I think we just need to get Adobe on board.
VeloDramatic wrote:
There may be another thread for this one additional thought. If Adobe does improve multiple monitor support, we should be able to optimize our previews for those screens. Even after prerendering 1:1 previews there are issues with DEVELOP doing its own thing (I believe) each time a new image is loaded. I make extensive use of the PREVIOUS button moving through my shoots and there's always a lag of one or two seconds while the develop preview loads before the button is active. In a desktop environment where multiple screens allow landscape and portrait images to be displayed full screen I'd argue that 100% of the host screen resolution would be the ideal preview. Hope that made sense.
Yes, faster switching would be nice. I'm not sure what that would take. As it stands, there's like "9" previews generated when you do 1:1s - 100% down to tiny thumbnails. Still, one at exact monitor size that does not need to be resized at all does seem like it would be the fastest - I'm a bit on a limb though at this point.
Rob

T60 Vista and Dual Monitor Support

I have a Lenovo T60 running on Vista 32-bit. I have the latest Video Drivers, but whenever my laptop comes out of hibernation I lose dual monitor support. Is there a solution to this problem?

The issue you're facing is a combination of a Vista "bug" and the video drivers. If you are using the latest video drivers, check to see that Vista is not managing the TMM - Vista has a bad habit of just remembering the initial setup, therefore when you take your computer off the dock, Vista doesn't like the change and will "conveniently" forget any variation of settings you may introduce.
Read this article on TMM for Vista (.doc file - read the first section)
Hope that helps
Message Edited by icantux on 04-28-2008 08:34 PM

Dual monitor support? for HP Compaq Pro 4300, with Intel HD Graphics 4000 onboard

Hi,
Purchased new Buisness PC for cloud computing, which was HP Compaq Pro 4300 - with Dual Monitor supported.
I have purchased 2x Samsung S24C550VL 23.6 inch LED MHL Monitor (250cd/m2, 1920x1080, 2ms, 2x HDMI, MHL, VGA).
How do I cable these avoiding using VGA for one of them. Can I use a splitter cable as both appear to support DVI-D ? Which of the many cables options/splitters may be best option for extended display?
PC will be operating Windows 7 Professional 64
Regards
Woof !

Hello GoneToTheDogs,
Welcome to the HP Forums, I hope you enjoy your experience! To help you get the most out of the HP Forums I would like to direct your attention to the HP Forums Guide First Time Here? Learn How to Post and More.
I understand you are trying to connect two monitors to your HP Compaq Pro 4300. I am providing you with the HP Support document: Using Two or More Monitors with One Computer in Windows 7, which will walk you through the setup.
I hope I have answered your question to your satisfaction. Thank you for posting on the HP Forums. Have a great day!
Please click the "Thumbs Up" on the bottom right of this post to say thank you if you appreciate the support I provide!
Also be sure to mark my post as “Accept as Solution" if you feel my post solved your issue, it will help others who face the same challenge find the same solution.
Dunidar
I work on behalf of HP
Find out a bit more about me by checking out my profile!
"Customers don’t expect you to be perfect. They do expect you to fix things when they go wrong." ~ Donald Porter

Veriton X4630G Dual Monitor Support

Hi, I have an Acer Veriton X4630G (Windows 7 64 bit) with a single monitor in the DVI port. Acer Chat Support told me I cannot run multiple monitors simultaneously in the VGA or 2 DisplayPort ports. Anyone running at least two panels on this PC? If yes, will it work on any two ports?

I am sorry that you received the response you did. From everything that I am looking at, this desktop should be capable of supporting a dual monitor setup.

Office Standard 2013 Key Management Service host 32-bit or 64-bit version ?

Hello,
I have a 2012 DomainController serving as our KMS host.
I need to activate 2013 Lync 32-bit clients so I will have to install the office 2013 KMS host.
The KMS host download is available in both 32-bit and 64-bit.
Should I download the 64-bit version because the 2012 OS is 64 bit or will I download the 32-bit host since the Office version we use is 32-bit?
BR
Sverre Amundsen

Hi,
Based on my understanding, I suppose that you want to activate 32-bit version of Lync 2013. Is it right?
If so, you can only install 32-bit version of Office 2013 on your PC. The 32-bit and 64-bit versions of Microsoft Office programs don’t get along, so you can only have one type installed at a time. If you mix 32-bit and 64-bit version installed
on the same PC, you might see some errors.
Reference about why can’t I install both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions of Office 2013:
http://office.microsoft.com/en-001/access-help/why-cant-i-install-both-the-32-bit-and-64-bit-versions-of-office-2013-HA103523746.aspx
By the way, there is an article about choosing 32-bit or 64-bit version of Office.
http://office.microsoft.com/en-001/support/choose-the-32-bit-or-64-bit-version-of-office-HA102840825.aspx
Best regards,
Greta Ge
TechNet Community Support
It's recommended to download and install
Configuration Analyzer Tool (OffCAT), which is developed by Microsoft Support teams. Once the tool is installed, you can run it at any time to scan for hundreds of known issues in Office
programs.

ITunes 64-bit runs 32-bit, Secure link to iTunes Store failed, and SyncMapiInterfaceHelper_x64 crashes every time I click 'Info' tab in an iDevice.

Hello everyone,
There are 3 issues I have, as it reads in the title.
1) I am running iTunes on a Win7 64-bit ThinkPad, and iTunes shows up as a 32-bit application in the Task Manager, always. I tried even the complete uninstalling (after removing Bonjour, Apple Mobile Service, deleting the folders, etc.) and yet, it shows up the same way.
2) When I run diagnostics, it says 'Secure link to iTunes Store failed'. I've tried many things from whatever I've read in the forums and nothing seems to be changing that.
3) Every time I click the 'Info' tab on any iDevice (I tried it with a 3GS and a iPod Touch), I get a 'SyncMapiInterfaceHelper_x64 has stopped working' message thrice. I don't know the significance of thrice but it just does come.
I hope someone helps.
Thanks!

That one's normal. On 64-bit systems, iTunes is a mix of 32-bit and 64-bit componentry. The itunes.exe is 32-bit.
Oh, okay. Thanks!
Could you walk us through what happens when you try to connect to the Store, please?
The issue is when I run diagnostics. I happened to run it last night while updating my 3GS to iOS 6, and there was a 3194, and a search to solve that, led me to running the diagnostic.
I was wondering how it affects me because I haven't faced any issue in downloading or browsing the AppStore. The transcript of the 'Run diagnostics', for networks is as below:
Microsoft Windows 7 x64 Ultimate Edition Service Pack 1 (Build 7601)
LENOVO 7673W1T
iTunes 10.7.0.21
QuickTime 7.7.1
FairPlay 2.2.19
Apple Application Support 2.2.2
iPod Updater Library 10.0d2
CD Driver 2.2.3.0
CD Driver DLL 2.1.3.1
Apple Mobile Device 6.0.0.59
Apple Mobile Device Driver 1.62.0.0
Bonjour 3.0.0.10 (333.10)
Gracenote SDK 1.9.6.502
Gracenote MusicID 1.9.6.115
Gracenote Submit 1.9.6.143
Gracenote DSP 1.9.6.45
iTunes Serial Number 0024A7C4128947B0
Current user is an administrator.
The current local date and time is 2012-10-03 03:21:16.
iTunes is not running in safe mode.
WebKit accelerated compositing is enabled.
HDCP is supported.
Core Media is supported.
Video Display Information
Intel Corporation, Mobile Intel(R) 965 Express Chipset Family
Intel Corporation, Mobile Intel(R) 965 Express Chipset Family
**** External Plug-ins Information ****
No external plug-ins installed.
Genius ID: 15442555d5b073dd49a48bf144616e26
iPodService 10.7.0.21 (x64) is currently running.
iTunesHelper is currently not running.
Apple Mobile Device service 3.3.0.0 is currently running.
**** Network Connectivity Tests ****
Network Adapter Information
Adapter Name:    {3FCCDDC1-FFD0-4B3D-BF7A-A962D6AD5746}
Description:    Intel(R) PRO/Wireless 3945ABG Network Connection #2
IP Address:    192.168.0.100
Subnet Mask:    255.255.255.0
Default Gateway:    192.168.0.1
DHCP Enabled:    Yes
DHCP Server:    192.168.0.1
Lease Obtained:    Wed Oct 03 02:58:46 2012
Lease Expires:    Wed Oct 03 04:58:46 2012
DNS Servers:    192.168.0.1
Adapter Name:    {AB3C7DD5-0434-424D-9481-7C12BFC73792}
Description:    Intel(R) 82566MM Gigabit Network Connection
IP Address:    0.0.0.0
Subnet Mask:    0.0.0.0
Default Gateway:    0.0.0.0
DHCP Enabled:    Yes
DHCP Server:
Lease Obtained:    Thu Jan 01 05:30:00 1970
Lease Expires:    Thu Jan 01 05:30:00 1970
DNS Servers:
Active Connection:    LAN Connection
Connected:    Yes
Online:        Yes
Using Modem:    No
Using LAN:    Yes
Using Proxy:    No
Firewall Information
Windows Firewall is on.
iTunes is NOT enabled in Windows Firewall.
Connection attempt to Apple web site was successful.
Connection attempt to browsing iTunes Store was successful.
Connection attempt to purchasing from iTunes Store was successful.
Connection attempt to iPhone activation server was unsuccessful.
The network connection timed out.
Connection attempt to firmware update server was unsuccessful.
The network connection timed out.
Connection attempt to Gracenote server was successful.
Last successful iTunes Store access was 2012-10-03 03:15:42.
Nothing about the 3rd? It is pretty confusing as to why it appears because there don't seem any answers all over the web about it.

Windows 7 64 Bit or 32 Bit on Boot Camp ?

Hey,
I have the 21.5" new iMac and I've decided to dual boot it with my Windows 7.
I'm trying to decide if I should install my 32 Bit version or my 64 Bit version.
I know you have to have 4 GB of memory or more in order to run 64 Bit but isn't 64 Bit REALLY messed up ?
Any help is appreciated.
Thanks.

Hi and welcome to Discussions,
Quite a lot of people have already installed Windows 7 32-bit and 64-bit even without official support from Apple.
The hatter has an ongoing thread full of helpful tips about Windows 7 http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1866970&tstart=15
64-bit Windows 7 should be quite fine on your Mac, but as you already know it is only needed if you have more than 4GB RAM and/or 64-bit Windows programs to run.
Regards
Stefan

Upgrading Solaris 10 from 32-bit to 64-bit in a VirtualBox VM

Hello,
I am running 32-bit Sol 10 u5 x86 as a guest in a Sun VirtualBox (Vbox) virtual machine on a 32-bit WinXP host with 64-bit VT-capable Xeon processors, and am considering upgrading Solaris 10 to 64-bit using the latest version of Vbox (2.0.0). After installing WinXP Professional x64 and the 64-bit version of Vbox, will I have to completely re-install Sol 10 to get it to run in 64-bit, or is there some way to get it to 64-bit without a re-install? The Vbox forums suggested that I post this question on a Solaris forum, as they don't know the answer.
They apparently also do not know if Windows XP x64 is a compatible host OS on which to run 64-bit guests. They list only Vista, Linux, and OpenSolaris as supported 64-bit host OSs. Has anyone used WinXP x64 as a host for Vbox 64-bit guests? Due to policy, Vista is not available to me on my system/network.
Thank you...

The x86 installer will place both 32-bit and 64-bit code on the disk.
The loader fired by GRUB will attempt to detect the proper hardware and launch the correct kernel.
Other portions of the upgrade could conceivably cause a problem, but having the CPUs go from 32-bit only to 64-bit capable shouldn't be an issue. You don't have to make any changes.
Darren

In what way is iTunes for 64-bit windows 64-bit?

I keep finding conflicting info on this topic. There appears to be a version of iTunes for 64-bit Windows, but task manager shows itunes.exe as being 32-bit.
In what way is this installer 64-bit? Does it install 64-bit drivers for iOS devices and iTunes, but the program is still 32-bit?

The itunes.exe process itself is 32-bit (on a 64-bit install). Most of the iTunes program files are also 32-bit.
The miniplayer is 64-bit, and there are 64-bit plugins for Outlook. (You'll see those items in the iTunes folder in your "Program files" rather than in the iTunes folder in your "Program files (x86)".)
The GEAR drivers itunes uses for burning will be the 64-bit versions on a 64-bit system.
The iPod service will be 64-bit on a 64-bit system.
Apple Mobile Device Support is 64-bit (so you'll have the 64-bit Apple Mobile Device Service, and usbaapl64.sys and netaapl64.sys rather than usbaapl.sys and netaapl.sys, on the 64-bit system.)
Some of the bonjour componentry on the 64-bit install will be 64-bit.
Most everything else is 32-bit (QuickTime, Apple Software Update, Apple Application Support).
(Apologies for inaccuracies ... it's been a wee while since I checked the noir-household 64-bit Vista box for locations. The precise details of what is 32-bit and 64-bit can change between versions. For example, one of the big changes between the itunes 8.x 64-bit versions and the itunes 9.x 64-bit versions was the iPod Service going 64-bit.)

Migration from 32-bit to 64-bit on Oracle 9.2.0.5

Hi guys.
I have two question for migration 32 bit to 64 (x86_64) bits on Oracle 9.2.0.5 for SAP 4.7 Enterprise?
1.- When i migrated 32 bits to 64 (x86_64) bits is necesary migrated to Oracle 10 ?
In the note SAP Note 960769 - Windows: Migration from 32-bit to 64-bit (x86_64), say that, pag 4:
" Oracle:
=====================================
On Windows Server 2003 X86_64 (64-bit), you may only use Oracle 10g Release 2 (10.2) software for X86_64 (64-bit) as a database. Note 949116 describes the installation (homogenous system copy) of old products that were not originally released on Oracle 10g Release 2 (10.2). If you want to make the copy using the backup/restore procedure, for which the source database was not yet upgraded to Oracle 10.2, see Note 932722"
But, in the pam matrix say that support for 9.2.
I confused for the information.
2.- In the case that is not necessary to migrate to oracle 10, i can execute the migration to 64 bits the SAP 4.7 with the procedure Backup/Restore?
I don´t have the new server, the server for the migration is the same. The procedure you want to follow is:
1.- Backup Offline all server.
2.- Delete the server, i install the server on Windows 2003 64 bits.
3.- Install SAP 4.7 on kernel 64 bits.
4.- Restore de backup offline (only data): datafiles, archive log, redo log.
Aprecciated for the help.
Best regards,
Desiré

Hi,
According to Note:814834
#Note that there is currently no 64-bit support for the x86_64 platform
for Oracle 9.2 because Oracle does not provide a 64-bit DB client for this purpose,
and, in addition, 64-bit operation of the DB server is not supported.
This means that this DB version can only be used in conjunction with SAP components on
Windows 32-bit on x86_64 hardware in 32-bit mode.
For more information, refer to the "Oracle" section in the note.
Furthermore, it states 32bit SAP instance can connect ot a 32 bit Oracle 9.2 or 10.2 database instance.
So for your case, its better to upgrade your current database to Oracle 10.2 and then proceed with migration.

How to convert 64-bit to 32-bit oracle 8.1.7

We are planning to upgrade our O/S version from AIX 4.3.3 to 5.2
The limitation is that AIX 5.2 and 8.1.7.4 64-bit are not certified. We are also running Oracle Financials 11.0.3 so we cannot upgrade to 9.2.X versions.
Can anybody tell me how to convert Oracle 8.1.7 64-bit to 32-bit? ( before upgrading to AIX 5.2)
Is there a performance degradation between 64-bit and 32-bit RDBMS?

Javed, I suggest you open an iTAR with Oracle support. For one thing I believe you will need a different binary. You may already have the install CD since I believe we received both and choose 64 bit.
HTH -- Mark D Powell --

8-bit vs 10-bit monitor support?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for