How long will 64bit Ubuntu users have to wait?

[Kilz _]

>From: Matt Zimmerman <mdz at ubuntu.com>
>To: ubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
>Subject: Re: Re: How long will 64bit Ubuntu users have to wait?
>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 12:51:09 -0700
>
>On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 01:33:49PM -0500, Kilz _ wrote:
> > >From: Matt Zimmerman <mdz at ubuntu.com>
> > >To: ubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> > >Subject: Re: Re: How long will 64bit Ubuntu users have to wait?
> > >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:20:12 -0700
> > >
> > >On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 06:36:09PM -0500, Kilz _ wrote:
> > > > Just how long do you expect 32bit systems to be in a majority when 
>even
> > >the
> > > > cheap processosrs are now 64bit like the celeron D? How long are the
> > > > developers going to develop for what is rapidly becoming a thing of 
>the
> > > > past.
> > >
> > >Hopefully not long.  When development shops like Adobe develop for 
>64-bit
> > >Linux, your problem will be solved. :-)
> >
> > I don't think I will hold my breath waiting for adobe to develop for 
>64bit
> > Linux. But with the release of Vista I do see more companies releasing 
>64bit
> > software for Microsoft's os. All my problems do not directly relate to
> > proprietary software. Wine is not proprietary, it runs proprietary 
>software.
> > But the wine package is open source and in the 32bit version. Also the
> > proprietary software that is a problems is in the 32bit version. Said 
>32bit
> > applications can run on the 64bit version. But they don't "just work".
> > But how long do you think .deb based distributions (Ubuntu, Debian) will
> > continue to see 32bit as a priority over 64bit?
>
>Mixing of 32- and 64-bit software (at least on x86_64 systems) is a special
>case, as it attempts to address what is inherently a temporary problem.  It
>is very likely that desktop systems will standardize on the x86_64 
>platform,
>and when there is enough momentum behind that transition, it will become 
>the
>standard development platform as well.  At that point, there will be no 
>need
>to use 32-bit software on your desktop, and technology for supporting mixed
>systems will be obsolete.
>
>So you can see why one would want to minimize the investment made in
>developing such technology.  OpenOffice.org is one area where this was
>unavoidable.  You feel the same way about Flash and a few other things, but
>I'm less convinced.  Fortunately, this is an open project where anyone can
>contribute, so you don't need to convince me, or anyone else in particular.
>You only need to convince someone who is willing and capable to do the 
>work.
>
>Developers are users, too, so if this need is truly pervasive in the user
>community, a like-minded developer shouldn't be hard to find.
>
>--
>  - mdz
>
>--
>ubuntu-devel mailing list
>ubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
>https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

I agree that the need to run 32bit applications its a temporary situation. I 
would love to have everything work without having to run 32bit applications. 
Unfortunately some of those applications are hard to get the developers or 
owners working on creating 64bit versions. Look at flash for example, there 
isn't even a version of flash for 32bit Linux, let alone 64.
How long do you think (in time or versions)it will take for desktop systems 
to standardize on the 64bit platform seeing that few 32bit processors are 
being sold by Intel and AMD?
Getting a developer interested imho is easier said than done. That's the 
reason for the request for making a limited amount of 32bit applications 
available. If someone does not ask, and it will never get coincided. If it 
isn't coincided, it will never be done.
Am I wrong in believing that a goal of Ubuntu is to get users who may use 
Windows to use Ubuntu? To make it simple for those same Windows users to 
setup Ubuntu?

_________________________________________________________________
Try the new Live Search today!  
http://imagine-windowslive.com/minisites/searchlaunch/?locale=en-us&FORM=WLMTAG