32 or 64??

[Steve Lamb]

anubis wrote:
> http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10_64bit.html

"This is a prerelease version of the Adobe® Flash® Player 10 software 64-bit 
Linux platforms."

     Helps to read the pages you cite.

> There are NO more excuses for this fear of 64bit. Only the truly
> willfully ignorant will avoid 64bit. Because if you can operate a
> browser and a search engine you know this is a dead horse we are
> clubbing.

     Yup, I did search it prior to posting, hence my link.  The top 2
hits on my search were:

#
Flash Player support on 64-bit operating systems
  - Jan 30
Oct 21, 2009 ... Adobe Flash Player is not supported for playback in a 64-bit 
browser. However, you can run Flash Player in a 32-bit browser running on a ...
kb2.adobe.com/cps/000/6b3af6c9.html - Cached - Similar -
#
Adobe Labs - Downloads: Flash Player 10.1
This is a developer prerelease version of the Adobe® Flash® Player 10.1 
software for Windows, Macintosh and Linux. It is being made available for 
developers ...
labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html - Cached - Similar -

     Given that the first is that it isn't yet supported and the second was 
for a PRERELEASE for TESTING purposes my point still stands.

     Furthermore this is just the most visible example.  The salient point is 
that unless one knows for sure all the desired software is 64-bit, or is 
reasonably savvy with Linux, the safer option is still 32-bit *FOR DESKTOPS*. 
  It is a well-known, stable quantity for which one variable is removed, "Was 
this compiled/tested on 64-bit yet?"

     That is not FUD.  That is well founded prudence.


-- 
          Steve C. Lamb         | But who decides what they dream?
        PGP Key: 8B6E99C5       |   And dream I do...
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------