How long will 64bit Ubuntu users have to wait?

[Kilz _]

>>
>>
>> >>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.
>

Maybe for the next few months. But I dont expect that to be thecase when 
Vista is released.
Then it will be a apples to ornges compaison in the minds of a lot of people 
buying/using 64bit computers.

>>
>> >>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.
>

Who cares what you are using.

>> >>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.
>

Just as you gave none.

>>
>> >>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.
>

Just like you.

>>
>> >>
>> >>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.
>

Again just like you telling people they what they want to runs is wrong.

>>
>> >>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.
>
>

Wheres your proof?

>> >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.
>
>

In my case and in a lot of people cases it does. As soon as the 32bit 
version is installed my cdrom stops working. Other people have reported 
random crashes that stoped with the 64bit version. The truth is that 
suggesting a 32bit version is not a cure all that is guarenteed to work.

>>
>> >>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.

Ya right , just like you. deal with it.

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