Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32

Thread: Ubuntu Is Close To Recommending 64-Bit By Default

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,634

    Default

    Well it is really weird that 64 bit is not the recommended version as you can not boot 32 bit on all systems sold with Win8 preinstalled without enabling the CSM (Secure Boot is basically impossible with CSM enabled, but there are motherboards which support that for legacy gfx cards - you need GOP mode for pure UEFI). So when you want to boot in UEFI mode then this will only work with 64 bit. Hard to recommend 32 bit in those times There are only some 32 bit UEFI Atoms which can not use 64 bit, Intel made a huge mistake to buy 3rd party graphics without working 64 bit drivers, but thats why this exists. I would never buy this crap for Linux.
    Last edited by Kano; 08-29-2013 at 08:49 PM.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    31

    Default Why is Google Earth still 32-bit?

    I agree that 64-bit is better. But one app that I really need to work is Google Earth, and for some reason it just doesn't want to install in 64-bit. Does anyone have a clue why that is? I've searched for answers, and from what people say, it seems that Google Earth is still programmed as 32-bit. Even the 64-bit binary that can be downloaded from Google actually requires a whole bunch of 32-bit libraries to be installed, and even then it just crashes on me. That just makes no sense. If anything, I would expect Google to abandon the 32-bit version, rather than making it the only version that actually functions.
    Last edited by Candide; 08-29-2013 at 09:00 PM.

  3. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    My tablet PC is 32-bit, and I bought it two years ago. Then again, it isn't capable of handling Unity anyway, due to Poulsbo graphics.
    Is your tablet x86? 99% of the tablets on the market are ARM based and are thus 32-bit as there isn't a 64-bit ARM CPU on the market yet.

    Now in a year the first 64-bit ARM CPUs will be out and even AMD will be producing them, however, they will be server oriented. Things like website and email servers that don't see allot of traffic can be run on ARM for far lower power and cooling requirements then even the lowest power X86 CPU.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    715

    Default

    About Time

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    275

    Default

    I think this is overdue. I can understand that recommending the 32-bit version by default is the "safe" choice because it will work with both 32-bit and 64-bit CPUs, but in the x86 world 64-bit hardware has been more common for so long now that I have a hard time imagining that those who use 32-bit x86 don't know they need to look for 32-bit ISOs explicitly.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    Is your tablet x86? 99% of the tablets on the market are ARM based and are thus 32-bit as there isn't a 64-bit ARM CPU on the market yet.
    Yes, it's x86. It's an Intel Oak Trail platform.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    56

    Default Ubuntu is Debian based and has

    Ubuntu is Debian based and has all Wheezy features like multiarch. All those 32bit applications now easily can install their needed 32bit libs ...
    Perhaps some repacking issues of those remain: specifying the proper deps.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Skype and Google Earth are definitely two reasons to stay with 32 bit if you want to stay out of trouble. When I install Ubuntu on friends' computers I always try to install the 32 bit version, it saves me a number of future support calls in the future.

    Personally I run the latest 64 bit version of Linux Mint MATE, mostly because I want to run 64 bit virtual machines. And I have a enough fast connection to download and update all compat-libs.

    Ubuntu Server I have been running more or less exclusively on 64 bit since 2005, on a Pentium 4, without hassle.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    825

    Default

    Ubuntu is close to losing its virginity.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    825

    Default

    I think the claim that the performance improvements come from using 64 bit are wrong or at least exaggerated. Most of the speedup will rather come from the fact that all AMD64 CPUs support SSE/SSE2 so the compiler enables these instruction sets by default when building for 64 bit targets. So the same effect could have been achieved by offering packages in a version compiled for SSE2, which would also benefit 32 bit CPUs like the Pentium M, pre-Nocona Pentium 4 and the "Paris"-Athlon XP.

    Here is a post with an example of the gains that are possible with compiler flags for modern CPUs: https://plus.google.com/112147667258...ts/AedcG5oxhvA

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •