64 bit info

[Rashkae]

Steve Lamb wrote:

> 
>     Not true.  There is a quantifiable speed difference.  What was noted that 
> 32-bit is tested with years of production use and that there *may* exist 
> programs which a person would want to install which isn't present on 64-bit.  
> Therefore it is more prudent to run 32-bit just to remove that variable in lue 
> of idling faster.  But that's not to say there is no benefit outside addressign 
>> 3.5Gb of RAM.


Ok, I've seen this repeated so many times ad-nuseum.... I just finally 
have to stick my nose back into this topic...


hellooooo, McFly, this is a Linux Mailing list..   I love Linux, use it 
on my personal desktops,, have refurbished several computers for charity 
with Ubuntu Desktops, and run about a dozen small office servers from 
it.... but I'll be the first person to say, if you're concern is about 
some binary only app that may or may not be tested on 64-bit and might 
or might not cause issues,,,, you're in the wrong place to begin with.

I realize that Steve might only be summarizing the debate rather than 
stating his own position, but this seemed like a good place to insert foot.