How long will 64bit Ubuntu users have to wait?

[Kilz _]

>From: "Mark Reitblatt" <Mark at Reitblatt.com>
>Reply-To: reitblatt at gmail.com
>To: "Kilz _" <kilzzz at hotmail.com>
>CC: ubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
>Subject: Re: How long will 64bit Ubuntu users have to wait?
>Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 01:03:11 -0500
>
>On 9/30/06, Kilz _ <kilzzz at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>Thanks for editing things I said out. Remember the A and B.
>"Since someone has to have a reason for running the operating system 
>designed
>for their hardware in your opinion. a and some b"
>
>That last sentence makes no sense by itself. Please take the time to
>proofread your emails to make sure they even make sense.
>
>
>>Thats 3d
>>modeling.
>
>Not exactly common on the average desktop I wager. And among those
>that use it casually, I doubt many of them have systems that take
>advantage of the 64bit (48bit) memory space. Or will in the near
>future. We are talking a very very small percentage here. There are
>many other areas for the developers to focus their attention that the
>majority of Ubuntu users will benefit from.
>

The amount of 64bit systems sold is growing. Your suggestion that it helps 
few is wrong imho. You will deffnatly not see 64bit Vista users chose 32bit 
Ubuntu no matter what you say. Once its released you will be playing catch 
up.
3d modeling is quite a popular use of computers. Encodeing is to, both 
benefit from 64bit. That you cant take a and b and look in a list is your 
own problem.

>>But still there is no basis for you to tell a 64bit system owner
>>they have to use any version over another.
>
>Umm. Yes, there most certainly is such a basis. Namely that support
>for the 64bit desktop is poorer than for the 32bit. I thought that was
>the whole point of this train-wreck? You have had your answer: It's
>not an immediate priority. Not a surprising conclusion given that your
>argument consisted of little more than "but 64 is bigger than 32!" and
>"you can't make us use 32bit!".
>

Thank you for admiting the 64bit version is way behind to the point that you 
recommend the 32bit one. It proves my point that it is in need of a lot of 
work.
>>That talk sounds like the modern
>>day Microsoft.
>
>What's with the MS hate? This goes for everyone. It comes off as quite
>childish. "Ooo, Microsoft did A! We MUST do ^A otherwise we are
>EBIL!". Drop the boogy-man. It's not productive. It can serve as a
>(somewhat) decent guideline occasionally (very rarely?), but let's not
>go overboard and make it an infallible litmus test. It's especially
>amusing coming from a Hotmail address with MSN advertisements as a
>signature:
>

I have had this account for 9 years. Some people I have known since my days 
in VChat have it. Just because I prefer to continue to use it does not mean 
I agree with Microsoft. I trust Microsoft as far as I can comfortably spit a 
dead rat.
In my case there is a reason, albeit one you may not know about. At one time 
I was a host for various msn chats. Until they back stabbed the whole group 
of us. I also had a help site one time  in the msn groups that they closed 
because it grew bigger than the "official" one.
But I still don't agree with you saying you can dictate what operating 
system anyone uses.

_________________________________________________________________
The next generation of Search—say hello!  
http://imagine-windowslive.com/minisites/searchlaunch/?locale=en-us&FORM=WLMTAG