32 or 64??
dotancohen at gmail.com
Sun Jan 31 16:34:29 UTC 2010
> Can we please avoid personal attacks here? While it's true that Karl's
> "advice" tends to range from just plain incorrect to the most
> extravagant flights of fancy, that kind of name-calling doesn't help the
> situation (and only makes you look foolish as well).
Especially since Karl is right here.
Have you tried using Wine on 64 bit? Some apps work, some don't.
Flash? I don't know about *buntu 9.10 (I personally use 32 bit) but in
9.04 installing Flash on 64 bit was a headache. Does Virtualbox still
have problems with 64 bit?
Now tell me, what advantage does 64 bit have? Sure, a user _might_not_
have any problems with 64 bit, but then again he might. Why take that
risk when 32 bit works fine?
The final straw for me is that many tutorials and guides directed at
*buntu users assume 32 bit. The user saves himself quite a headache by
stickin with 32 bit, even with 4 GB RAM.
I have a feeling that this thread has turned into another Karl bashing
thread, and that's it. Karl is the new Microsoft now that Windows 7 is
out and *buntheads can no longer complain that W1nder$ suxXx. Grow up.
Give advice that helps the user, not advice that pushes your agendas.
The people asking for advice on the *buntu lists do not need to be
your 64-bit test bunnies, and Karl doesn't need to be your stepping
stone to a big ego. I see some names here that I otherwise respect,
and I am both disappointed and embarrassed to see what is going on
here. I'm not a moderator, I'm a user, so feel free to send me right
to hell but don't forget that Linux mailing lists are a forum for
mature, knowledgeable people to discuss issues. Not for bashing, not
for pushing your agenda (except for the Debian list :) and not for
experimenting on new users.
Please CC me if you want to be sure that I read your message. I do not
read all list mail.
More information about the ubuntu-users