32 or 64??

[Chadley Wilson]

I have to comment on this, to make a decision about the platform you wish to use 32 or 64 bit, in my experience asking a public forum is only going to spark divided arguments. You see it is a preference more than a requirement. And we are all very eager to show off our skills. So this type of question never gets a straight answer.
64bit will eventually become the standard, and 128bit will be.. well what 64bit is now. So it is not really matter of must or must not. It is a matter of choice.

To the original poster, I assume you have a copy of both the 32 and the 64... if not ask here for someone to sponsor you some discs. ( you might have to drive somewhere and pay a small amount for the convenience). Otherwise if you have a decent line then download them.
You are the only one here who knows what you want to do with your computer. So I say load both... Measure the level of difficulty between the two.
In doing this you gain knowledge so that you don't need us to answer the question.  And you avoid traumatizing yourself with a thread that has gone so far off the handles, it has actually lost the original topic.

Flash player (being the current topic)  is a small factor in your OS, and of the 1000's of applications it is only one. If you are going to base your decision on 1 application, you might find yourself running the one platform that leaves you with doubt about the other.

I suggest to check your CPU and RAM for 64bit compatibility, if both are supported try 64bit first. If it doesn't work for you then switch.
You are always welcome to ask us on the list if you need some support getting something specific resolved.
32 bit will still be around for a very long time, so don't be afraid to use it either.

I would like to make a small suggestion to you, which I am sure fellow Linux community users would agree with.
We are talking about Linux here, Ubuntu takes about 25 minutes to install from CD. That beats windows hands down! My advice is that during the installer you partition your drive.

I usually use a very simple formula for deciding my partition sizes, and it works for me. Here is how I create my Linux disc setup:

/       (10GiB)
Swap    (size ram 4GB in your case)
/home (max - the rest of the free space on the drive)
/mount/windows (if you have a dual boot)

Now make sure you keep all your files nicely categorized in your home folder for example documents in the Documents folder, downloads in the downloads folder.
Load XX bit & play around - get it all working, time the jobs and processes if that makes you happy. If after a week or so if you are satisfied. Then try the other and see.

Just pop in your disc, and make sure the installer does not format your " /home " partition. You might need to log in as root and clean out old profile stuff from the previous installation (that would be `.something` folders). But it isn't always required.

And so you can switch to and from each one as often as you like. You learn a great deal more by working on your own and using web searches. When you are decided - you will have a satisfactory answer. And no-one can argue that from you.

To the community I never use the automatic partitioning, I am old school and like making my own choices in relation to how my box is setup, so I choose my own packages and partitioning. I have no idea what the defaults are so you are welcome to add in here...





Chadley Wilson | Engineer
Research and Development | Pinnacle Africa
Direct: (011) 265 3020 | Mobile: 083 295 4995 | Fax: (011) 265 3277
www.pinnacleafrica.co.za

-----Original Message-----
From: ubuntu-users-bounces at lists.ubuntu.com [mailto:ubuntu-users-bounces at lists.ubuntu.com] On Behalf Of Dotan Cohen
Sent: 01 February 2010 10:08 AM
To: Ubuntu user technical support, not for general discussions
Subject: Re: 32 or 64??

On 1 February 2010 01:00, Johnneylee Rollins <johnneylee.rollins at gmail.com> wrote:
>> That's pretty funny there, pulling some irrelevant random acronym out
>> of the blue like it means something, then when being told that one is
>> unfamiliar with it using the new RTFM that is lmgtfy.
> You're actually wrong about the acronym being random or obscure. It's
> Windows on Windows64-bit.

And how would a Linux user on a Linux mailing list flying a Linux airplane over Linux airspace know that? It is obscure and irrelevant in the context of the forum in which we participate, and it is not common knowledge outside this forum.


> It's the windows compatibility layer. If we talk obscurity, let's chat
> about your at least year old experience with 64-bit computing. You
> vote 32-bit.
>

Until critical software has a 64 bit release, then yes I suggest 32 bit for users. When making decisions for yourself be as daring as you wish. When giving advice to others, play it safe.

--
Dotan Cohen

http://what-is-what.com
http://gibberish.co.il

Please CC me if you want to be sure that I read your message. I do not read all list mail.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

Pinnacle Technology Holdings E-Mail Disclaimer:

This e-mail is confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Pinnacle Technology Holdings any of it's divisions or affiliates. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of it is strictly prohibited.