How long will 64bit Ubuntu users have to wait?

[Mark Reitblatt]

On 9/30/06, Kilz _ <kilzzz at hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> So you think development sould wait for 10 years for them to disaper? Im
> sure that will help solve Bug#1.

Never said that.


> >>Your suggestion that it helps
> >>few is wrong imho.
> >
> >Yet you repeatedly fail to give an argument why it is beneficial to
> >many. Especially beneficial enough to take precedent over improvements
> >that will help the vast majority of Ubuntu users.
> >
>
> Like eye candy?

I don't see how this is particularly relevant.

>
>
> >>You will deffnatly not see 64bit Vista users chose 32bit
> >>Ubuntu no matter what you say.
> >
> >Sure. Whatever you say. If Vista is a better solution for them, I
> >invite them to use Vista. Computers are tools. Use the best one for
> >the task.
> >
>
> But isnt the goal of Ubuntu to get users to switch? Also there is Bug #1.
> Since it refers to computers in stores. Exactly how many computers in stores
> are 32bit? The vast majority in stores are not 32bit.

The "vast majority" of computers in stores are sold with a 32-bit OS.

>
> >>Once its released you will be playing catch
> >>up.
> >
> >No I won't.
> >
> I know, you will be still using a 32bit computer in 10 years.
>

FYI, I'm actually running an AMD64 processor in my desktop.

> >>3d modeling is quite a popular use of computers. Encodeing is to, both
> >>benefit from 64bit.
> >
> >3D modeling on the desktop not so much. A quick survey of my friends
> >(mostly CS Majors, some Liberal Arts) shows that none of them use 3D
> >Modeling sw on anything approaching a normal basis. And certainly
> >never to a degree that would quantifiably benefit from x86_64 versus
> >x86.
> >
> >
>
> Wow your little circle of friends are a majority?

Never claimed they were. You have utterly failed to give ANY evidence
supporting your claim.

>
> >>That you cant take a and b and look in a list is your
> >>own problem.
> >
> >Please, this still makes no sense. "a and b" doesn't mean anything in
> >English unless you give it "a" and "b" a meaning.
> >
> >
>
> Thats because you came in late, read back. Unless you want to keep looking
> like a jerk.

I have read back. You weren't the person who gave the list. So
referring to it as "a and b" is slightly ambiguous. Considering how
difficult it is to read some of your replies, you shouldn't be
surprised if someone gets confused when you use "a and b" as a
sentence.

The polite thing to do at that point would have been to point me back
to Dimitry's post. You chose instead to insult me. Twice. Try a
showing little civility and respect for those on this list. Unless you
want to keep looking like a jerk.

>
> >>
> >>Thank you for admiting the 64bit version is way behind to the point that
> >>you
> >>recommend the 32bit one.
> >
> >I see nothing wrong with that. If the majority of people use x86
> >Ubuntu, then it only makes sense for it to be the best supported. If
> >x86 is better supported and you have no compelling reason to use
> >x86_64, then the obvious choice is x86. And there is absolutely
> >nothing wrong with that.
> >
>
> Only you have nothing to say about what a 64bit system owner should or wants
> to do.

Why don't you discuss my point instead of crying "But you can't make
me!". It comes off as quite immature.

>
> >>It proves my point that it is in need of a lot of
> >>work.
> >
> >But it doesn't show that work should be done in place of other work.
> >You're arguing in circles here. You're not listening to what you have
> >been told.
> >
> >
>
> Like eye candy? One joke I am starting to see is people calling edgy Eye
> Candy Eft

Still not remotely relevant. It is quite doubtful the people who focus
on eye candy would be interested in adding multiarch support to apt.


> >I don't recall saying otherwise. I was pointing out the irony, which
> >seems to utterly escape you.
> >
>
> Like the irony of Developers wanting to work on yersterdays technology?

Just because a new toy came out doesn't mean all the old toys stop
working. For pete's sake we just had a discussion about whether we
should stop trying to fit Ubuntu onto a single CD! 32bit Ubuntu on
64bit HW doesn't mean you can't use your computer.


>
> >>But I still don't agree with you saying you can dictate what operating
> >>system anyone uses.
> >
> >I still don't recall saying that. I think this is the problem. You
> >aren't listening to what other people are saying.
>
> Excuse me, you have over and over suggested running 32bit. Having a memory
> problem?

Dictate: n, order: issue commands or orders for

Suggesting != dictating. Stop being so combative. THAT's me dictating.
Pointing out that 32bit Ubuntu is a better idea at the moment than
64bit is hardly dictating.

BTW, try posting under a real name. It is quite hard to take someone
who posts under "Kilz_" seriously. The rest of us have the courtesy to
use real names (or at least appear to). Please show us some of the
same courtesy back.

The same goes for a little civility.