Are you still using 32-bit plugins on PC?

[glokraw]

There are great sound designers and synth creators
who worked in 32 bit whose work won't be eclipsed by the number 64.
There are great 32 bit plugins that were and are innovative.
Using Reaper, such things never cross my mind.
I used a 32 bit plugin earlier this week, and it would takes ages
to replicate what it offered in 32 bit, at 64 bit, from NI, IK, fill in the blank,
not to mention the prices, if such a product even came into existance.

Songs are made one sound at a time in many cases, so the need
for 64 bits is more drama than substance. How many sounds
will someone actually record in a lifetime, in songs that got heard from
beginning to end, let alone heard twice? 3% of those purchased?

I'll use what I like, IK and NI included, but not because of 64.
The numbers mean nothing to the results, in my case.
But a film score expert has to compete in that film score
marketplace, and rightly have an opposite opinion,
and different needs than mine.
We are blessed to be inundated with such powerful tools
and delightful toys

[jamcat]

My view is that someone who is still running a 32-bit host is not someone who purchases new software. They haven't purchased new software in a very long time; perhaps never.
As a developer, you needn't be concerned with those people, because they are not going to be your customers.

[Kongru]

At any rate, the point was that this didnt seem to matter a lot when people were asking for 64bit at a time where 64bit was little more than a novelty. In fact it didnt stop tons of people from begging for 64bit anyway, and now that the situation is sorta reversed all of this suddenly changed? I dont think so.

You're trying to apply a moral argument to a purely technical one. It's not a case of being fair to 32bit users, it's a case of retiring obselete technologies. The reason people were calling for 64bit when 32bit was popular is because it was the way forward - the replacement for 32bit.

You could look at them like USB ports. 32bit is USB 1.0, 64bit USB 2.0 and VST3 is 3.0. If you ordered a brand new computer from a manufacturer today, it would have no USB 1.0 ports. This is because 1.0 ports have been replaced by USB 2.0 and 3.0 ports.

[robotmonkey]

Now that I started to think about, I realized how much I miss Fragmental. It was the most amazing glitch plugin ever made. I wish some developer would take up the code and develop it further in 64-bit. The code was open-sourced long time ago.

[JeffLearman]

My view is that someone who is still running a 32-bit host is not someone who purchases new software. They haven't purchased new software in a very long time; perhaps never.
As a developer, you needn't be concerned with those people, because they are not going to be your customers.

Yeah, that's me, because I don't want to allocate any budget to software at this time. I'm still using old free stuff plus a few things I bought over a decade ago. And you're right: I don't count in this discussion, except I'd like to add my request:

Please continue to host old downloads! Especially ones we've paid for! (Most manufacturers do, thank you very much!)

I'm really pretty happy with how well most old software continues to work on new hardware/OS. No doubt that's not universal and perhaps I've been lucky. But I know that eventually there will be a sunset, and I'll have to deal with it, and I'll bit the bullet and go 64-bit, buy new stuff.

I have to confess that I love how quickly old software runs on new hardware. As a software developer for over 40 years, I've always been amused/dismayed at how we software people fill up the memory and take up the CPU time until the result is barely tolerable, and then the hardware guys bail us out with bigger/better/faster. So what do we do? We add features until it bloats & bogs again.

Of course, I blame the damn customers for wanting new features.

[wagtunes]

You have this all wrong.

Of course i do.

However, we as consumers have to consider the developers time and expense if it's WORTH it for HIM to make 32 bit versions. He is the only one who can determine that.

Have i said anything to the contrary? I said that i could understand not providing a 32bit if there are any technical reasons, (whatever they may be), so isnt that as fair as it gets?

At any rate, the point was that this didnt seem to matter a lot when people were asking for 64bit at a time where 64bit was little more than a novelty. In fact it didnt stop tons of people from begging for 64bit anyway, and now that the situation is sorta reversed all of this suddenly changed? I dont think so.

That is the actual definition of being selfish.

And I find that quite ironic.

So now it is 'selfish' to advocate for everyone to get what they need?

This is crazy...i cant believe what im reading here.

Yes, it is selfish to expect a developer to support 32 and 64 bit IF he doesn't believe it is in his best interests to do so. That's all I'm saying.

If that's not what you're suggesting (that a developer be required to support both) then my apologies for misunderstanding you. But that's what it sounded like.

I only made 2 points.

1. A developer is going to do what it best for him.

2. We need to live with the choices we make.

That's ALL I said.

[ENV1]

You're trying to apply a moral argument to a purely technical one.

Youre trying to justify your argument based on after-the-fact knowledge.

At that time, nobody knew whether 64bit will catch on or not, which means had it flopped then any developer who put time and effort into making their plugins 64bit would have worked for nothing.

Not that it stopped the people wanting 64bit begging for it anyway.

[ENV1]

Yes, it is selfish to expect a developer to support 32 and 64 bit IF he doesn't believe it is in his best interests to do so. That's all I'm saying.

I thought i made it pretty clear that thats not what i expect.

I said if its not a problem, there is no reason not to have both.

[wagtunes]

Yes, it is selfish to expect a developer to support 32 and 64 bit IF he doesn't believe it is in his best interests to do so. That's all I'm saying.

I thought i made it pretty clear that thats not what i expect.

I said if its not a problem, there is no reason not to have both.

And there isnt.

But then there you are at the end stating a conclusion. "And there isn't."

How else is one supposed to interpret that? You're stating there isn't a problem. How do you know there isn't a problem? Maybe a dev can't support both?

If you'd stopped before the last sentence we wouldn't be having this argument.

But you know what? It doesn't matter. Eventually, supporting 32 bit will be like trying to support MS DOS.

[Reefius]

It looks like many people miss the point of the OP, it's not about why you should get rid of your old 32 bit plugins if you can still use them, it's about if development time (and money) should still be spent on future plugins to make them 32 bit compatible. For that my answer is no, mostly since all current DAW's run in 64 bit.

The only people that can't run 64 bit plugins are those running a DAW that's no longer being developed or they run an old version and don't want to upgade. It may sound harsh, but these few people should not hold back future development.

It's basically very simple: if you use an ancient DAW, then also use ancient plugins.

[SLiC]

64-bit VST3 Only here

[AnX]

64bit only for years, haven't looked back

[Calenberger]

It's basically very simple: if you use an ancient DAW, then also use ancient plugins.

Exactly.
By the way: that leads to a far more authentic and consistent sound.

[zvenx]

You're trying to apply a moral argument to a purely technical one.

Youre trying to justify your argument based on after-the-fact knowledge.

At that time, nobody knew whether 64bit will catch on or not, which means had it flopped then any developer who put time and effort into making their plugins 64bit would have worked for nothing.

Not that it stopped the people wanting 64bit begging for it anyway.

Lost for words.
No one knew 64bit would catch on?
Seriously?

I switched relatively late, about 2010/2011 and even I knew years before that it was only a matter of time.
rsp

[Kongru]

You're trying to apply a moral argument to a purely technical one.

Youre trying to justify your argument based on after-the-fact knowledge.

At that time, nobody knew whether 64bit will catch on or not, which means had it flopped then any developer who put time and effort into making their plugins 64bit would have worked for nothing.

Not that it stopped the people wanting 64bit begging for it anyway.

Lost for words.
No one knew 64bit would catch on?
Seriously?
rsp

Exactly. People knew that 64bit computing would be the future as early as 2003. The Playstation 2 was a 64bit console in 2000.

32bit architecture could only address 4gb of RAM, computers in the early 2000s could have half that amount installed - it was clear that 32bit was going to become a huge issue soon unless people started to switch.