 DistroWatch Weekly |
| Tip Jar |
If you've enjoyed this week's issue of DistroWatch Weekly, please consider sending us a tip.
(Tips this week: 0, value: US$0.00) |
|
|
|
 bc1qxes3k2wq3uqzr074tkwwjmwfe63z70gwzfu4lx  lnurl1dp68gurn8ghj7ampd3kx2ar0veekzar0wd5xjtnrdakj7tnhv4kxctttdehhwm30d3h82unvwqhhxarpw3jkc7tzw4ex6cfexyfua2nr  86fA3qPTeQtNb2k1vLwEQaAp3XxkvvvXt69gSG5LGunXXikK9koPWZaRQgfFPBPWhMgXjPjccy9LA9xRFchPWQAnPvxh5Le paypal.me/distrowatchweekly • patreon.com/distrowatch |
|
| Extended Lifecycle Support by TuxCare |
|
|
| Reader Comments • Jump to last comment |
1 • 32 bit (by G.H. Roberson on 2017-10-09 00:32:41 GMT from United States)
Yeah, Linux is ideal for older hardware.....so now we're going to have no 32-bit Linux OSes but offer a low resource desktop? Windows still supports 32-bit. I little premature, IMO.
2 • 32bit and PAE (by edcoolio on 2017-10-09 00:34:48 GMT from United States)
I use 32 bit distros quite a bit. I hate throwing out perfectly working (older) equipment. 32 bit distros are doing their part in keeping our landfills empty and computers working.
While I'm on the subject, I'd like to give extra credit to a couple of my favorite 32 bit distros with non-PAE capabilities that are my favorite. Bodhi and AntiX. I know there are others, but those two are by far my favorite. I have high hopes for AntiX 17.
Anyways, keep up the 32bit distros!
3 • RE:"32-bit being dropped by distros" (by Linux guy on 2017-10-09 00:40:21 GMT from United States)
i have not owned a 32 bit PC in a long time (15 years?), i dont think you can buy new 32 bit PCs or Laptops, you might be able to find some new (old stock) on newegg of some 32 bit motherboard & CPU, but since 32 bit is getting so obsolete it would be risky, what if other components wont work good with it, you would be better off sticking with what the mainstreem Linux developers are supporting which is what hardware is most popular on the store shelves
4 • 32bit - not just about memory (by Dan on 2017-10-09 00:46:02 GMT from Australia)
there's also the year 2038 problem, i'm pretty sure you can't fit >32bits of time_t into a 32bit value - even with compression :)
also 64bits gives you access to a lot more virtual address space (even without extra physical ram) which is great for aslr as it provides more entropy
5 • @3 (by Denethor on 2017-10-09 01:02:12 GMT from Serbia)
@3 Did you even read the opinion article?! I also have only 64bit hardware (several desktops and laptops) but I use exclusively 32bit distros (mainly debian) because of the RAM consumption.
Many thanks to Nicolae Crefelean for bringing up this serious issue. I thought I was the only one who cared about distros dropping 32bit support. On the bright side, I strongly believe that at least debian will support 32bit for a long time...
6 • 32 bit (by figosdev on 2017-10-09 01:12:29 GMT from United States)
as someone who maintains a fully automated script to produce a custom 32bit iso, i agree that 32bit is worth supporting.
however, a lot of conclusions are being drawn and details are worth mentioning:
* the netinst will still be available
* no one is stepping up to ensure the outgoing 32bit images are any good
* do people really think ubuntu is the ideal distro for 32bit at all?
its the desktop/live desktop theyre ditching. with netinst, someone can come along and produce a perfectly good 32bit desktop for ubuntu. or probably lubuntu.
and if no one does that, its either because 32bit isnt worth supporting anymore (i strongly disagree) or because ubuntu really isnt the best distro for 32bit anymore (something to consider.)
can it be MADE into a good 32bit distro? absolutely. "but i dont have the technical skills."
this is a job that can be made easy to do the technical part. its the volunteering, the community, the sticking to schedules part that has already failed.
its not that i dont think ubuntu should support 32bit-- its that not enough other people think they should. however, this is a very solid opportunity for people that do care to stand up and do something. its possible. its not as difficult as you think.
but its work, and its probably only going to happen if people are willing to do it for free. if not you, then who?
7 • Too soon to ditch 32 (by Steve B. on 2017-10-09 01:18:02 GMT from United States)
There are too many older machines that benefit from a 32bit OS still operating. These are perfectly good machines to give to a youngster just learning about Linux. I've given 3 to family members 11,12, and 15 years old. They have little monetary value to me, but they were greatly appreciated by the recipients. They get to play, explore, learn, and experiment, without fear of damaging Mom and Dad's computer or the one that they use to do their homework on. If it is broken or just dies, very little financial loss. I just look for another old junker for them. Children are the future, teaching them young that Linux is a viable alternative to Windows or Apple is worth keeping the 32bit desktop OS around, for at least a few more years.
8 • 64-bit is better because … vendors want to sell more hardware? (by Kragle von Schnitzelbank on 2017-10-09 01:21:54 GMT from United States)
Please present comprehensive performance tests to demonstrate before making sweeping generalizations.
"Software runs faster/better" - well, only a few (badly-designed?) things; many things run better on 32-bit hardware … or 16-bit, or 8-bit …
You should use more RAM (to avoid swap etc) - doesn't more RAM mean burning more watts, even at "idle"? Maybe what we need is better SSDs?
There are 8-bit and 16-bit CPUs in many systems, often as dedicated devices like subsystem controllers. Should these be replaced by 64-bit as well, or should we divide (and conquer) operations and sort appropriately?
9 • OpenSUSE 32-bit Desktop : Opinion Chart (by Winchester on 2017-10-09 01:25:32 GMT from United States)
This chart seems to be incorrect.
OpenSUSE Tumbleweed 32-bit Desktop : https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Tumbleweed_installation . (The site may be down for 24 hours between October 13th and October 14th for maintenance.)
Also,didn't Fedora drop 32-bit a while ago ??
And how are Zorin , Mint, Bodhi etc. going to be able to continue 32-bit support while being based on a distribution (Ubuntu) dropping it .... without changing the base or maintaining independent packages??
10 • Torvalds says virtual address space should be vastly larger than RAM (by Aaron Franke on 2017-10-09 01:27:03 GMT from United States)
https://cl4ssic4l.wordpress.com/2011/05/24/linus-torvalds-about-pae/
"Your virtual address space needs to be multiple of the physical one: when you hit 1GB of RAM, 32-bit virtual memory is no longer acceptable. You literally do need more virtual memory than physical."
"Repeat after me:
virtual space needs to be bigger than physical space. Not “as big”. Not “smaller”. It needs to be bigger, by a factor of at least two, and that’s quite frankly pushing it, and you’re much better off having a factor of ten or more."
Even machines with 1 GB of RAM benefit from having a 64-bit OS.
11 • 32 Bit hardware is real old (by LAZA on 2017-10-09 01:38:17 GMT from Germany)
As I explained here
https://forum.manjaro.org/t/list-of-distributions-for-32bit-x86-hardware-wiki/31969
64 Bit hardware is mainstream since 2004!
This is 13 years in the past - so take a step and grow old!
I know, 32 Bit OS would be enough when RAM size is 4 GB or smaller, but this will gone in some years...
12 • Continuing 32 bit OS support... (by Tom Joad on 2017-10-09 02:33:12 GMT from France)
I dunno. I am at sea on this one.
My vote was in favor of curtailing 32 bit support. I don't have and haven't had a 32 bit machine for several years. I know others do have them and use them and like them and want them to continue to run with updated software and such. The comments do mirror that.
But if not now, surely soon? Development resources are always in short supply for most distros. I don't know how much effort it takes to support, develop, maintain and troubleshoot both 32 bit and 64 bit. It surely can not be easy or cheap to do what needs to be done for both in time and money.
That said 64 bit is on the rise and 32 bit is falling by the wayside. We all know that.
Maybe, just maybe it is time to just rip off the band-aid and get on with it. Though I wouldn't be against having 32 bit for a time either.
Anybody got a coin to flip and Jesse can call it in the air. Whaddya think?
13 • 32 Bit (by OhioJoe on 2017-10-09 02:37:03 GMT from United States)
MX Linux is my favorite 32 bit distro. If you want to carry a complete Linux distro in your pocket on a flash drive with persistence, 32 bit is the way to go.
Unless the computer is to old to have USB, then have a very good shot of having your OS with you.
14 • 32 Bit (by Pat Menendez on 2017-10-09 03:59:02 GMT from Canada)
I have a very nice Acer dual core 32 Bit laptop with 17" screen, full size keyboard, all the goodies. Try to get a new laptop with this spec and the price will choke you. Yes, it is unlikely that you could find current model hardware that was 32 bit. Some of us drive older cars too. We don't thrown them in the trash just because the new one has go faster stripes! There are probably millions of 32 bit netbooks that work 100%. There are a lot of good older hardware that is perfectly usable for what people use computers for the most. Checking email and social media really don't benefit by moving to an i7 and 16 gig RAM!!! Be realistic! Don't forget that there are also a lot of low income families all around the world that will not be updating their hardware anytime soon and will be thrilled to get older 32 Bit computers given to them. There are still millions of schools with NO COMPUTERS! I visited a new school in Nicaragua. In computer class, one student sat at the 32 bit computer while 4 students watched. They had one computer for each 4 - 5 students in the class! There are distos (perhaps mostly originating in Europe) specializing in distros for older less powerful computers. There are Education districts in Europe and South America developing their own 32 Bit distros for schools to keep the old computer hardware they have working because there simply isn't the funding to replace thousands of computers. There are still Pentium 4 computers in high school computer labs in Guatemala. Just because most people watching trends and reading articles here have newer hardware and the cash to upgrade to stay current doesn't mean that the majority of computer users in the world do as well. 99.9% of people on this planet will put food on the table and shoes on their kids feet BEFORE they toss their old 32 Bit hardware for the latest 64 Bit hardware! We will need 32 bit OSes for years to come! This isn't to say that every distro maker should maintain 32 Bit distros. That is unrealistic. Compare the numbers of 16 bit computers sold to the number of 32 bit computers sold. Personal computers weren't wide spread and the internet and email really didn't exist till 32 Bit computers were everywhere. 64 Bit is not the all and end all of computing OSes. There are a lot of people still using Windows XP! There are still a lot of people using KDE-4. Linux is supposed to be about choice rather than dictated choice.
15 • Other opinions on 32-bit (by Greg Zeng on 2017-10-09 04:10:13 GMT from Australia)
Tx to Nicolae Crefelean welcoming other opinions on 32-bit. Is 32 bit obsoleted? Not really, for isolated, simple needs & simple users, imho. Only when memory is very limited; or for some IOT devices, or for some anti-green (old) hardware. Moore's Law: old hardware is anti-green. New hardware is much cheaper & efficient, to buy, use, maintain & run (space, weight, power, speeds, heat, vibration, RFI (radio frequency interference, etc). Not all storage is just fast or slow. The older, cheaper storage (HDD, SSD, flash, EPROM, etc) obeys Moore's Law.
The opinion piece in Distrowatch seems to be in favor of ON-LINE virtualization, as suggested by VPS. This is usually a contracted commercial supplier, according to most web search results. Many comparative reviews of VPS exist for Linux users as well, but the Wikipedia "VPS" desperately needs (as usual) any volunteer daring enough to be barraged by the hostility it gives to its volunteer editors, imho. The very poor Wikipedia entry does not mention Linux at all in VPS.
In some SMB & home environments with few and small applications, commercial and on-line VPS can be installed locally; no high-speed internet communications are essential. VPS or not, local-networking-only; OR IOT or full systems; OR high-speed, reliable internet demanded; or not? 32-bit operating systems can be used, if the chosen end-user is ONLY running simple applications.
Generally 32-bit operating systems will always be available in Linux. The mainstream operators are for mainstreamers. Linux, BSD & Android-type operating systems are open-sourced, so will allow the minority of 32-bit users to have updated, maintained operating systems for these users. The profit-only commercial suppliers (Apple & Microsoft) do not care about the too-small marketplaces, which now seems to include 32 bit operating systems.
16 • till' year 2038 tears us apart (by mane on 2017-10-09 04:11:35 GMT from Finland)
Dropping 32bit is a REAL deal breaker for me, i've got plenty of hardware laying around but only about fifth of it can boot 64bit os's.
17 • @9 32bit 'Buntus (by Rev_Don on 2017-10-09 04:15:22 GMT from United States)
"And how are Zorin , Mint, Bodhi etc. going to be able to continue 32-bit support while being based on a distribution (Ubuntu) dropping it .... without changing the base or maintaining independent packages??"
All Cannonical is dropping is the Live 32 bit Ubuntu Proper ISO. They will continue to maintaining the packages and all of the other 'Buntu derivatives like Lubuntu, Xubuntu, and Ubuntu Mate will continue to release 32 bit Live ISOs. And let's be honest here, those three are better suited for the older hardware that people tend to run 32 bit on. Ubuntu Mate's Unity theme (not sure what it's called) is actually better than Ubuntu Proper with Unity and exponentially better than the new Ubuntu with Gnome mimicking Unity.
Not sure about Kubuntu though.
Plus there is still the 32bitNetinstall images to work with.
18 • just use the 32-bit mini.iso and zram. problem solved. (by bhotaling on 2017-10-09 04:48:33 GMT from United States)
A couple things: First, Canonical isn't dropping support for 32-bit Ubuntu just yet. Rather, they've decided to stop providing a full live version of their 32-bit ISO for future releases. If you must stick with 32-bit, just download the network installer ISO (what they call their netboot "mini" ISO"). This is actually my preferred method because it also makes it easy to install on to a LVM or MD RAID HDD configuration plus the ISO is small enough to burn to a CDRW (not all old computers have DVD-ROM or boot from USB stick correctly). Also, as for swap space, I'm surprised more people aren't using zram as a replacement. I've recently configured it on my desktop computers hobbled with the Intel 945GC chipset (which has a 2GB RAM cap) and it's working beautifully. Lastly, now that Skype and Google Chrome require 64-bit Linux, I no longer bother with 32-bit. With Firefox 57 spelling doom for so many of my favorite extensions, I've switched to Google Chrome and found replacements for all my favorite FF extensions in the Google Chrome app store. So long Firefox, we had a good run.
19 • 32-bit support: still provided by Debian/Sparky, Puppy, etc. (by Jason Hsu on 2017-10-09 05:37:59 GMT from United States)
I think it makes sense for distros like Ubuntu, Fedora, and ArchLinux to drop 32-bit support. The high Ubuntu overhead makes any Ubuntu derivative an inherently heavyweight distro and thus unsuitable for the old computers that can't run 64 bits or have under 4 GB of memory. A major selling point of Fedora and Arch is newer software than Debian and Ubuntu. People who insist on using newer versions of software are likely using fairly new computers.
Debian continues supporting 32 bits. Lightweight Debian derivatives like SparkyLinux, MX Linux, and antiX Linux will likely continue to support 32 bits for years to come. The same is true for other lightweight distros like Puppy Linux, SliTaz, and TinyCore. Supporting decade-old computers is a major selling point for lightweight distros, so it makes perfect sense for them to continue 32-bit support.
20 • 32bit lives! (by Someguy on 2017-10-09 06:38:45 GMT from United Kingdom)
There is no need for any 64bit OS thanks, inter alia, to the sterling efforts by e.g. US DoJ and European Courts on behalf of non-WIntel cartel commercial interests. 64bit PCs can run 32bit code, as well as 32bit PCs. Everybody gets the advantage this way.
21 • 32-bit support (by Brenton Horne on 2017-10-09 06:54:48 GMT from Australia)
openSUSE Tumbleweed still supports 32-bit, it's Leap that's said sayonara to 32-bit. Like while Ubuntu 17.10 and later do not support 32-bit 17.04 does (which is still supported), as do both presently-supported LTS releases 14.04 and 16.04. So I think it's premature to call Ubuntu's 32-bit support for the desktop dead. Likewise deepin still has 32-bit support, it just requires you to pay for it now.
22 • 32 bits support has to continue (by Gio on 2017-10-09 08:08:49 GMT from Italy)
Apart the old question if someone has to throw away some good old hardware still working fine, 32 bit support IMHO has to continue, maybe not for all distros. I just work fine with old netbook and old laptop with MX and Slackware: the real hurdle is when someone force you to switch to 64 bit software (have you heard of Skype?). Moreover there are plenty of new devices (embedded) that are 32 bit (not PAE too), for instance the Vortex ones, and it should be a pity to leave them to some kind of Windows CE etc.
23 • @4 time_t on 32-bit systems (by greenpossum on 2017-10-09 08:27:59 GMT from Australia)
It's not a deal breaker. If it looks like there will be surviving 32-bit systems by 2038, then time_t will be redefined to be 64-bits and the OS and programs recompiled for the new ABI. It may never need to be done. At the moment even lowly systems like RPi3s feature 64-bit CPUs so in another 20 years...
24 • 32 bit (by Alexandru on 2017-10-09 08:30:02 GMT from Romania)
There is a difference between OLD vs NEW HARDWARE and 32bit vs 64bit TECHNOLOGY as not all 64bit means new and not all 32bit means old.
Speaking about 32 bit today very few people still remember that this is generic name for several different architectures: i386, i486, i586, i686. Even if Debian for example still supports 32bit architecture, they dropped i386, then i486 and maintain only the last one or two. The reason? Different instruction set, which in case of older variants needs to be emulated at cost of performance.
Exactly the same happens in 64bit architecture, which starts to show its age. While not manifesting in Linux world, some OSes (please forget me for mention them), such as macOS, required processor models that support SSE instruction set, then SSE2, then SSE3 then SSE4 and now SSE4.1 for exactly the same reason: older instruction set needs to be emulated at cost of performance.
As for 32bit compared to 64bit, did you remember the first 64bit architecture? It was ia64, NOT amd64. And this architecture did not survived EXACTLY BECAUSE it is not backward compatible with ix86.
The same happened when 16bit architecture was replaced by 32bit, which was / is backward compatible with 16bit. But the advantage of 32bit over 16bit was huge enough to quickly drop 16bit architecture. The advantage of 64bit over 32bit is not that large.
The conclusion is the following:
1. The new technology is best when it is compatible with existing one.
2. The old hardware is naturally dropped when the effort to keeping it alive is not worth the gain of running software emulated code instead of native processor instructions.
25 • Overbloat (by John on 2017-10-09 08:39:40 GMT from United States)
Hi All,
I still run DSL 0.7.3 as a terminal server for multiple Linux systems on an old laptop.
50 MBytes. Even at that size it has plenty of unused stuff in it. I boot from a CD. No hard drive needed!
Remote graphics stuff, PCB layout, etc. just works. What else is important?
I am amused by the multiple Gigabyte comments that consider that small??!! And the preaching about why overbloat is 'needed'. By whom? Hardware vendors selling new unreliable stuff designed to allow whomever to take over my PC!!
How about Linux on a 486DX2. Mine still works reliably. Still does useful work. Just keeps running. Remember when you could recompile with a command line option and it worked?
Amazing to watch the overbloat justifications get posted.
John
26 • 32-bit x86 support (by bob on 2017-10-09 08:53:11 GMT from Italy)
Old hardware (like old cars) usually means waste of power. Man and energy power. Today's entry level PCs are relatively cheap and work far better (and draw much less power) than old power hogs. If you want very cheap devices go for ARM boards that work good enough, they are a perfect fit for educational purposes and draw ultra low power.
Finally, I see no reasons to waste precious developer time to support obsolete architectures, they better focus to improve the quality of current ones. Just my opinion, I respect all others.
27 • 32-bit is everywhere still needed (by Guido on 2017-10-09 09:12:43 GMT from Philippines)
Thanks for the nice opinion article. I live now in the so called "third world". Many people here can not afford to buy new 64-bit PCs or laptops every 5 years or so. Older hardware is still needed and does a very good job. Even in governmental offices they still use Windows XP! No money to buy something better. So thanks to Debian, Lubuntu, Xubuntu and others for the great work. (I also use Lubuntu 16.04 32-bit - works fantastic).
28 • @15 Greg Zeng (by Anthony on 2017-10-09 11:15:45 GMT from United States)
"Moore's Law: old hardware is anti-green."
Not exactly. More's law doesn't mention "greenness" at all; actually, it isn't really about prices (though it is usually quoted that way). It's basically about the number of components in integrated circuits.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law .
Also, newer devices (usually) being more energy-efficient won't necessarily decrease total operating costs, in some cases it may actually increase them.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebound_effect_(conservation) .
29 • 32 bit (by Romane on 2017-10-09 11:16:55 GMT from Australia)
Very well written article, nicely presented, clear and logical arguments.
But I also understand distro's dropping 32-bit support. 64-bit has been around for that long now that at least one of the questions "they" will be asking themselves is questioning the logistics of continuing 32-bit support, among others.
Problem when one starts getting ancient - things start sounding like things that one has heard before. Yet, 16-bit computing went the bye-bye's anyway eventually after 32-bit computing became affordable to the general Joe.
So, flip a coin and wait to see if it lands and stops on its edge.
Sooner or later, 128 bit. At that point, regardless how many fully functioning and smoothly running 32-bit machines, the logistics will kill off 32-bit to go to the same bit-heaven in the sky as 16-bit departed to.
Personally, if you prefer and are happier with the 32-bit computing, I say "Go for it". But start planning for the day some-when when the future rolls over us into the past and the 32-bit passes into the oblivion of the history books forever.
Technology must continue to move forward, whether in leaps and bounds or incrementally. If it does not, then it will stagnate, and stagnation is the equivalent of going backwards. It is just that some people are earlier adopters than others.
30 • security and 64bit (by sam on 2017-10-09 11:57:11 GMT from United Kingdom)
I was surprised not to see any mention of security in the piece on 32 vs 64 bit. There are plenty of hardware security features in newer chips that you will miss out on if you run 32 bit software, and the smaller address space limits the effectiveness of address randomisation. This is especially important for servers.
I see a place for niche lightweight distros for old hardware, but mainstream distros should be pushing people onto 64 bit software.
31 • 32 bit (by bob_hayden on 2017-10-09 12:14:30 GMT from United States)
I have hardware capable of running 64bit OSs but when I did that I saw no advantage and many ancient programs I still need would not run. So I have switched back to 32bit.
32 • KaOS (by Winchester on 2017-10-09 12:59:55 GMT from United States)
From the review :
" While using KaOS I often pondered what the distro adds to running a distro like Arch Linux with the Plasma desktop. Both are rolling release distros that ship with the Pacman package manager and the latest and greatest versions of the KDE Plasma desktop ... "
What about the security hardened kernel which ships with the latest KaOS ??
Also,which of the two is more stable ??
I agree that the e-mail client problem in KaOS is a legitimate issue for many but,the default location of the desktop panel is hardly worth mentioning as it can easily be changed according to preference.
I wouldn't mind a little bit more software in the KaOS repository and stable versions of LibreOffice and VLC.
33 • 32bit supporting distribution: void linux (by P.Th on 2017-10-09 13:40:37 GMT from Germany)
Void linux also seems to sutain support for i686 architercture (along many others like armv6,armv7,aarch64).
It is definetely worth a try if someone is looking for an alternative.
34 • 32-bit Linux (by 6r00k14n on 2017-10-09 13:41:19 GMT from United States)
Kill 32-bit builds, and you take away a big bonus that Linux provides, using older hardware.
I don't think every distro should bother attempting to maintain a 32-bit build if the intended purpose makes older hardware obsolete (things like A/V editing, multimedia, and high-end gaming), but the Debians and Fedoras should at the very least provide a 32-bit net-install iso for new releases, so that standard desktop computing or setting up a personal server can be done on a P3, or even a P2.
35 • KaOS (by Chris on 2017-10-09 14:08:23 GMT from United States)
I've ran KaOS in the past, I find it an enjoyable experience. The OS is usually pretty solid and I like the Pacman package management. It's a very polished OS with a lot going for it and I'd like to see where they go with it. The biggest issue I usually run into is their repositories. I get that a small distro that's rolling can only maintain so many packages, but they hurt themselves as far as wider spread adoption by not including stuff that a lot of other distros have. But, if I remember correctly, they're still building their repositories, plus you can apparently build packages with Pacman. (I haven't played with Pacman much, since I mainly run distros with Apt for package management) There are definitely things I don't like about their default software that comes with the OS. But, that can all be changed.
Just talking about it is making me want to run KaOS again. I may have to install it on my next day off. :)
36 • What are you contributing to keep 32-bit support alive? (by Andre on 2017-10-09 14:17:00 GMT from Canada)
Support for 32-bit platforms doesn't come for free. It still requires regular patching and testing. Unfortunately, the number of people that use 32-bit machines and actively contribute to the development process of various projects is dwindling. Take a look at some of the smaller distros that dropped 32-bit support at some point in the past few years; it was almost always because of a lack of engagement from 32-bit users.
If you're really attached to your 32-bit hardware, you're going to have to volunteer some of your time if you want to see it get continuing support. Otherwise, accept that you're on a dying platform and move to one where somebody else is going to do the work for you.
37 • Question about Distrowatch web servers (by Tim on 2017-10-09 14:17:56 GMT from United States)
I am wondering whether the Distrowatch web server has moved or otherwise something has happened to it. I used to get decent page loading performance, but for the past week or so, they load extremely slowly (like 15-30 seconds or more). I have a broadband internet connection (100/10) and I have not noticed this problem with any other web site. I run Firefox 58 and, other than Nightly updates, I have made no changes to its configuration or add-ons.
38 • Calligra interface ^Feature Story (by Robert Rijkhoff) (by Dojnow on 2017-10-09 14:27:23 GMT from Bulgaria)
"... I didn't get on with the interface." -The interface is customizable. "... I was missing an option to simply remove the menu.", "The large menu displayed to the right of text documents and worksheets" ... This is not a menu but a docker. Every docker can be moved (left, top, bottom), removed, resized, tabbed with another docker or made float. Click on the padlock to lock/unlock (default) the docker. Right click on the strip between padlock and (◇)-button (above the 'Character') -> uncheck the unnamed checkbox to remove the main docker. Left click and hold on the strip -> drag and drop (move) and rearrange the docker(s). There is also the 'Settings' -> 'Dockers' menu, (x) -button, Right click on the area below 'Draw path' tab, ... etc. Give it a thorough try.
"32-bit builds are still important" - Yes, they are.
39 • KAOS (by karibou on 2017-10-09 14:32:24 GMT from Canada)
From the review:
"Unfortunately, there appears to be no other e-mail client in the KaOS repositories"
Wrong. I have been running KaOS and Thunderbird e-mail client for 3 years now; so yes, there are other e-mail clients.
40 • Dropping 32-bit is against free will of linux users. (by Mohamed on 2017-10-09 14:49:46 GMT from Algeria)
There's so many 32 bit hardware out there...
Dropping 32-bit is simply insane and against free will of linux users.
41 • 32 bit and 16 bit (by Mike W on 2017-10-09 14:57:39 GMT from United States)
Nicolae hit the nail on the head and opened a valuable discussion.
I use 32 bit for live USB because it is more likely to work on other peoples machines when I try to show them how portable Linux can be.
It's funny that my old 16 bit Windows applets like cardfile run on Linux but not Windows now.
@37, I've noticed an extreme slowdown at DW now too.
42 • yes, i read it (by RE: #5 on 2017-10-09 15:01:01 GMT from United States)
and i am still entitled to have an opinion
43 • are spamming on here (by looks like some astro turfers on 2017-10-09 15:05:39 GMT from United States)
i think distrowatch should block all proxy servers because it looks like somebody has a bug in their ear about 32 bit support and they are worried their ancient PC is going to lose support
44 • DW server (by Jesse on 2017-10-09 15:06:37 GMT from Canada)
@37 @41: There haven't been any changes or moves, but we are dealing with an issue on the server host which should be cleared up in a day or two. Sorry, I know it is frustrating, but we're working on it.
45 • Dropping 32 bit ... (by George Barbaz on 2017-10-09 15:34:52 GMT from United States)
I guess that i am a bit non-committal on this question ...
However ... the real issue, seem to me, the "crippling" of PCs from being able to upgrade their PC by the manufacturers of the PCs. Not Good.
46 • 32 bit distros (by hwms on 2017-10-09 15:42:48 GMT from United States)
Seems like a golden opportunity for some of the better distros. If they continue supporting 32 bit for the foreseeable future, then they would probably become the #1 distro for older equipment.
47 • 32-bit computing (by David on 2017-10-09 15:54:28 GMT from United Kingdom)
So many advocates of 64-bit computing from rich countries, ignoring the points about poorer ones made by posts 14 and 27! And what about the environmental impact? Computer hardware needs energy and rare materials to build and more energy and special facilities to recycle. I do not discard anything that still works, and that includes computers. My Sempron desktop (runing CentOS) and my Pentium III laptop (runing Salix) are perfectly adequate for everything I do.
When Red Hat dropped 32-bit, CentOS decided to continue it because the users wanted it. That's probably because they're professionals, not games players. This makes a another point, that a derivative can still produce a 32-bit version even when the parent drops it.
48 • Dropping 32-bit is a bad idea. (by DaveT on 2017-10-09 16:08:44 GMT from United Kingdom)
I only buy new things when the old ones wear out. The oldest hardware is 12 years old (and 64bit!), the newest my 64bit laptop at 2 years old. I have a mix of 32 bit and 64 bit laptops and desktops, and an Intel Atom powered 32 bit server running NAS4Free 9 that sits there holding all the media files for my Sonos HiFi.
Nas4Free is built on FreeBSD and the server only has 1GB of RAM so I can't upgrade to 10. It doesn't need more power or bits or RAM or hard drive to sit there and squirt flac files around my home network.
OpenBSD and especially NetBSD continue to support some seriously old hardware. OpenBSD only dropped support for VAX in the last year or so! I can see me waving goodbye to linux in the not too distant future.
As for the 2038 problem - it can't be difficult to do a 'reset' on the UNIX date for 32 bit so it starts in 2000 or some such year. Can it? An equivalent to 'laptop-detect' should do it...
My guitar amps are 30 years old and 15 years old, my car is 50 years old, my motorcycle is 20 years old. Why? Because the new ones are no better, and often worse than what I already own and use.
49 • Arch and KaOS (by mozzi on 2017-10-09 16:39:12 GMT from France)
"Arch is a blank canvas" you said : you don't know the philosophy about it. You may choose the desktop by yourself and is made for advanced users.
Meanwhile you can use arch-anywhere or zen-installer to add desktop and tweaks by yourselves.
50 • 32-bit (by ImagineThereAreNoWindows on 2017-10-09 17:22:31 GMT from United States)
To my way of thinking the following quoted statistics are exactly why we need 32-bit Linux distributions:
"As of August 2017, Windows XP desktop market share makes it the fourth most popular Windows version after Windows 7, Windows 10 and Windows 8.1.[10] Windows XP is still very popular in some countries, in all of Africa and part of Asia (e.g. China), with it running on one third of desktop computers."
Windows XP was released in 2001. X64 didn't even enter the PC desktop scene until after 2003. There are millions and millions of XP users currently in existence that are still using 32-bit hardware and are going to need help eventually.
Microsoft not only no longer supports XP but the later MS operating systems won't even install or run on their hardware thus preventing them from updating. Neither will a lot of those users have the monetary funds to upgrade their hardware to the latest and greatest. And this is but one of Microsoft's Achilles heel.
I know it may seem unreasonable but if all of those users were to switch over to an easy-to-use 32-bit Linux desktop then imagine the mind-share that would be captured. Linux desktop usage would be right behind W7. If that were to happen within the next few years then soon it would certainly be the "Year of the Linux Desktop".
I know I've done my fair share of evangelizing and converting friends and family members to the Linux way.
51 • Keep 32bit (by Reziac on 2017-10-09 17:49:04 GMT from United States)
because otherwise you are eliminating linux as an option for older machines. And there are piles and piles of them still in use.
At the very least, stop killing off the old ISOs -- if people need 'em, let them be downloaded and used (at their own risk of course). Not every system needs to be constantly updated, or updated at all.
As to myself, I just built a "new" frankenputer, 64bit hardware, but it has 32bit Windows (XP in fact) because there are still *16bit* programs I can't do without and have not found a more-modern replacement for.
52 • @26 bob: (by dragonmouth on 2017-10-09 17:55:18 GMT from United States)
"Old hardware (like old cars) usually means waste of power."
While we're at it, why don't we eliminate all people over 65 years old. All they do is consume resources without producing much in return.
53 • @Robert Rijkhoff: (by dragonmouth on 2017-10-09 18:14:43 GMT from United States)
"Personally, I would prefer the blank canvas."
Perhaps you should go with a Build it Yourself distro such as Linux From Scratch, Gentoo or Source Mage. They will give you a perfectly blank canvas. When, for whatever reason, you go with a prepackaged distros such as KaOS, *buntu, etc you cannot criticize what somebody else's idea of an ideal application mix is. You have to accept it as is. If you do not like the choice of apps, customize the distro.
54 • Memory addressing isn't the only difference (by Sitwon on 2017-10-09 18:27:04 GMT from United States)
There are advantages to running a 64-bit system even with 4GB or less physical RAM. You have double the registers, faster floating point math, improved performance for handling large files, improved networking performance (IPv6 was literally designed with 64-bit CPU architectures in mind), and enhanced security features (NX bit protection). I'm sure there are other advantages I'm not recalling at the moment.
Forgoing the improvements of 64-bit mode to save a little bit of RAM seems short-sighted. Especially if you don't actually know that RAM is your bottleneck. "Premature optimization is the root of bad performance." Don't go downgrading your OS architecture until you've first established that the little bit of RAM you free is worth everything you're giving up.
"Would you prefer people go buy a new PC rather than donate to your projects?" That's a false dichotomy. Whether or not someone donates is not causally linked whether or not they have to buy a new computer. If someone is so cheap as to be running on literally ancient hardware, they're probably not going to donate their money to your project anyways.
The bigger issue, which this article ignores, is testing and man hours. It takes time and hardware to properly test 32-bit releases. Supporting 32-bit architectures requires that developers maintain 32-bit systems (or at the least, 32-bit VMs) so they can test on both platforms. And that also double the amount of time it takes to test each release. One of the primary reasons that distros are dropping 32-bit support is that NOBODY is volunteering to do that work. If people were lining up to do the work of testing, or donating enough to pay someone to do the testing, then there would be no problem. But since most of these projects rely on volunteer labor, if nobody is stepping up to test for 32-bit, then it gets dropped. Simple as that.
If you want to save 32-bit distros, then get involved or roll your own.
This is why most FOSS projects have about 90% of the feature completeness of their commercial counterparts. They have all the features that their developers actually use, and therefore care about. They have none of the features that the developers of the software don't use and don't care about. If you care about one of the missing features, get involved. Otherwise it will wither in long backlog of feature requests that will always lose in priority to the tickets that directly affect the software's developers.
55 • 32 bit still needed by many (by Sherman Jerrold on 2017-10-09 18:34:27 GMT from United States)
Last week I mentioned our team needing 32bit distros for our work on older PCs for older and low income clients. I want to thank Nicolae Crefelean for all his work in presenting many of the considerations so well. I am not an 'astro-turfer' as @43 suggests some of us might be. In my decades of computer experience, most people don't even use all the features of older systems and they, as well as most members of my team, rely on them due to budget constraints. I even use 32bit distros on newer computers because they are then 'lightning fast'. As Nicolae said, it is not to try to keep 32bit forever, just for a reasonable time, since so many still need it. Thanks to all that contributed to this conversation whether you are a proponent of 32 or 64bit. I'm not against 64bit, just think 32 bit still needed by many.
56 • 32bit (by rooster12 on 2017-10-09 18:48:23 GMT from United States)
Think it is time to leave 32bit behind, waste of time for dev's and basically a novelty with many.
57 • 32 bit is very useful (by Marco Verdinelli on 2017-10-09 19:09:18 GMT from Italy)
There are many old computers that can work very well with a 32-bit OS.
I tried Antix, modified by adding a cairo-dock and spme others additions, and used it over old Pentium 4 with only 512 Mb of Ram. Well, for most users, for internet users and office applications, it is enough. No need of buying expensive hardware. No need of thrashing good machines.
Many users don't need a 64-bit pc.
58 • 32-bit support prematurely obsoleted (by David Lonsdale on 2017-10-09 19:14:49 GMT from Canada)
I'm not exactly supporting the idea of abandoning the 32-bit Linux Distributions. Because I do have a 32-bit Acer laptop that is still working despite the fact I lost the Windows operating system a few years ago. After a few installations of various 32-bit Linux Distributions, I decided to go with the 32-bit Xubuntu Linux Distribution. And it is a good idea to try to recycle your non-functioning Windows-based laptops to keep them out of the junk yard. But I also have a 64-bit Xunbuntu Linux Distribution installed on another non-functioning 64-bit Windows laptop. I wonder if there will be a 128-bit laptop in the future? Who knows? Cheers!
59 • @52 (by bob on 2017-10-09 19:49:31 GMT from Italy)
I'm actually planning to retire when I'll reach that age ;)
60 • Yes keep 32-bit, but be realistic (by M.Z. on 2017-10-09 20:44:14 GMT from United States)
@48
"...my car is 50 years old, my motorcycle is 20 years old. Why? Because the new ones are no better,..."
That's not really even a little bit accurate about either cars, or computers. Virtually every vehicle on the road has undergone massive redesigns that have greatly increased safety, performance & efficiency and they are continuing to improve with every development cycle (most cars become all new about every 5 years). On the performance, emissions, & efficiency fronts I've seen in just in the past 10 years the first vehicle to pass 30 US MPG highway while having 300+ hp & the first vehicle to make 700+ HP while making both legal emissions & a surprisingly decent 22 US MPG highway. Also, there have been massive improvements in batteries that have allowed electric vehicles to go over 200 miles on a charge & allowed vastly simpler & more efficient electric powertrains to start competing with internal combustion engines.
The thing about all those automotive improvements, is that they generally happen at a far slower pace than improvements in computers thanks to that Moore's law that others have mentioned. There are huge performance benefits to having new hardware, regardless if we are talking about games or just doing some multi tasking with a few programs spread across your virtual desktops. I know, I have both old 32 bit hardware that chugs with multiple programs open & 64 bit quad core hardware that flies under substantially more load.
The real important thing of it is questions of easy access to cheap used hardware for those only needing an adequate desktop. I can see why the main edition of Ubuntu may not be appealing to people with 32 bit hardware, but there is still a need there. I'd also say the points others made about avoiding the garbage dump are very valid.
61 • Question about Distrowatch web servers (by Tim on 2017-10-09 20:56:25 GMT from United States)
I was @37. Thank you for the feedback, Jesse.
62 • @60 M.Z. (by dragonmouth on 2017-10-09 21:48:23 GMT from United States)
"Virtually every vehicle on the road has undergone massive redesigns that have greatly increased safety, performance & efficiency"
That may be true in general but based on anecdotal evidence of the cars I have owned I would disagree on the efficiency.
I owned a 1976 VW Rabbit with a diesel engines which routinely got 60 mph. Today's VW diesels are hard pressed to get 40 mph (even with the 'special' factory tweaking)
A 1992 Toyota Corolla I owned routinely got 40 mph even when it had 250k miles on it. Today's Corolla's barely get over 30 mph.
A 2002 Toyota Camry I own gets about 34 mph.
I currently own a 2008 Honda Civic. I am hard pressed to get 30 mph with it.
All these cars had/have 4 cylinder engines between 1.8 and 2.2 liters.
Do you notice the pattern? As the cars got newer, their mileage got less. Also as the cars got newer, the engines got more complicated with efficiency and anti-pollution equipment. Car systems became more and more interlocked/integrated so that only dealer shops can do even the simplest repairs. With each passing year, cars are becoming more Like Windows, the drivers/users are allowed to do less and less.
"There are huge performance benefits to having new hardware"
As evidenced by smartphones. We must throw out perfectly working old ones and buy new ones every two years because manufacturers want to maintain a steady revenue flow.
63 • 32 bit (by gekxxx on 2017-10-09 21:53:07 GMT from Belgium)
I will be really happy this old 32 bit code will be finally gone. Clean modern code is what we really need.
64 • "32-bit CPUs must fade away" (by angstrom on 2017-10-09 21:55:11 GMT from France)
"Let's make one thing clear: 32-bit CPUs must fade away, just as 8-bit and 16-bit did in the past - it's not personal, it's evolution." (Nicolae Crefelean)
I agree with the Crefelean's conclusion that it's premature to abandon 32-bit, but I find the wording "32-bit CPUs must fade away" odd -- why "must"? Who says "must"? With time, 32-bit will naturally fade away, but there's no "must" unless we assume that there is some authority that dictates this.
I think that some distributions, e.g., Slackware, will support 32-bit for as long as it's reasonable to do so, not to mention *BSDs such as NetBSD and OpenBSD. Many of the "popular" distributions are more subject to what is "fashionable" than distributions such as Slackware are.
65 • 32 bit (by gekxxx on 2017-10-09 22:00:02 GMT from Belgium)
I will be really happy this old 32 bit code will be finally gone. Clean modern code is what we really need.
66 • x32 (by Nobody is perfect on 2017-10-09 23:53:37 GMT from Netherlands)
32 bit systems are Important !
Some Distros are welcome to drop the support. But not all. Never!
x64 heh big Deal.
Thank you D.Watch
67 • 32 bit (by angelico on 2017-10-10 00:45:01 GMT from Brazil)
My main computer is a ThinkPad X60s - 32 bits Core Duo and 2GB of RAM - running Debian 9. Long life to 32 bits Debian.
68 • Laptops with a little amount of RAM (by RJA on 2017-10-10 01:05:40 GMT from United States)
"stop building PCs with less than 4GB of RAM" -Nicolae Crefelean
Should be "stop building PCs with less than 5GB of RAM". Fixed that. ;)
And additionally, even with 6 GB, I dunno if that's enough either, especially with the Windows NT 6x family of Windows, Vista and up to 10!
And in the near future, even with 8 GB, some programs could be screaming about there not being enough RAM! :(
69 • 64-bit IIRC always has bigger binaries :( (by RJA on 2017-10-10 01:19:11 GMT from United States)
@65, try some heavyweight apps with 4 GB of RAM under a 64-bit OS and 64-bit Chrome, and I'll bet they fail with the dreaded "Aww, Snap!" error message...
Chrome seems to hate anything less than 5 GB of RAM and I dunno if even 6 GB is enough...
70 • BunsenLabs review by Dedoimedo (by rooster12 on 2017-10-10 07:14:45 GMT from United States)
BunsenLabs was an attempt at first to replace CrunchBang, then realized it was a departure of anything I've ever used. Think largely BL attempted to attach its self to CrunchBangs legacy but certainly that is something it is not.
Have to agree with Dedoimedo's review, somethings work and while instances are not fixable. Found the bl-applications suffocate and complicates the user experience. Attempting to create a sophisticate distribution is essentially a maze of pipe-menus and swollen with unneeded software OTB.
A new approach could save this distribution, perhaps shedding the bloat and realignment of developers.
Not something that would be on my PC, basically a minimalist. Find a few openbox distributions on Devuan's website that offers promise.
Perhaps moving away from Debian would help stabilize BunsenLabs, a lot of their issues seem to be systemd related.
71 • @70 (by OstroL on 2017-10-10 10:26:00 GMT from Poland)
Its not #!.
If you want #!, download Crunchbang++ or Monara (update and upgrade) or Nelum Dev1 (update and upgrade). You get the look and snappiness.
72 • 32-bit (by Sam on 2017-10-10 12:15:08 GMT from United States)
64-bit computing: a first-world problem.
73 • 32-bit mentality? (by Bob on 2017-10-10 12:36:53 GMT from Austria)
Interesting discussion - but I don't get the point for mainly 2 reasons:
- According to eBay the average 32-bit hardware is worth less than the hourly wage for most people.
- If my 64-bit OS needs more RAM, one GB will cost me less than $8.
I have enough of some old junk in the basement but I don't touch it because it would be an absolute waste of time. Therefore I fully understand that a lot of developers have stopped supporting hardware which was designed in the past millennium.
Many years ago I was pleased that Linux was already offering 64-bit software while the Redmonders still wanted us to believe that 32bit was enough for the average Joe. Meanwhile their attitude seems to have changed. Now the Linux world looks more retro than ever to me.
BTW: After porting all of my programs to 64-bit I have noticed that most of them run about 2x to 3x as fast as compared to their 32-bit counterparts (gcc or g++). But that was about 10 years ago. Maybe 32-bit software was catching up lately ? ;-)
74 • Regarding Post # 17 and Post # 47 (by Winchester on 2017-10-10 13:11:59 GMT from United States)
I don't know. It seems to me that users of 32-bit only hardware choosing Ubuntu , Debian , and RedHat / CentOS based operating systems and so forth are only jumping aboard a sinking ship.
It may work right now with the ability to receive security updates but,it seems that will no longer be the case in less than 5 years time.
They have respectively announced their plans.
Where would these updated 32-bit packages come from?? Who would be maintaining and developing them??
The 32-bit CentOS is based on RedHat 6. Without RedHat 6 there would not have been CentOS 6x. Updates for both end 38 months from now on November 30th,2020 if I am not mistaken.
I would say that it might be time for 32-bit users to learn Gentoo (or at least Calculate) , maybe Void, SlackWare, Slackel, Mageia, SliTAZ, or OpenSUSE Tumbleweed. At least some distribution where the handwriting is not (at least yet) on the wall.
75 • 32 bit will die (by some random user on 2017-10-10 13:39:39 GMT from United States)
32-bit linux software still work, and will continue to work until January 2038.
REF = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem
76 • 32 bit (by any user on 2017-10-10 13:41:30 GMT from United States)
And what's with this Lennart Poettering type attitude, by some of the posters? You've got 64-bit system? Great. Please don't try to ram it down everybody else's throat.
I have a 2008 Dell Dimension 530 that I'm trying to run into the ground. It has 3 gigs ram, and an Intel CORE2 cpu. I have a couple of 64-bit "successors" with 8 gigs each, waiting for it to die. But it keeps chugging along. Youtube 1080P plays fine, thank you.
I run optimized Gentoo linux, which helps. Hint: for CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS include "-fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables" which significantly reduces object file and binary sizes, without the speed loss associated with "-Os". See http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2012-September/078326.html and http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2012-September/078331.html The "busybox" developers know that their product is used in constrained environments, so knocking 15% of the size of an executable is important to them.
This desktop still does it's job, and I'll keep it until it either dies, or I need to run software that it can't handle.
77 • 32 bit will die (#75) (by some random user on 2017-10-10 13:42:57 GMT from United States)
Sorry, meant to say:
32-bit linux software still works, and will continue to work until January 2038.
REF = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem
78 • Thanks for your feedback (by Nicolae Crefelean on 2017-10-10 14:38:00 GMT from Romania)
Hey everyone, thanks for your comments and appreciation. In an effort to keep it as short as possible I felt like we don't have to go into every single difference between 32-bit and 64-bit to initiate a good discussion.
Now considering not everyone reading the technical details has a technical background and a few things don't quite stand out, I summed up my article in the short list below:
- 64-bit processors can run 32-bit software
- most of the time, 64-bit software requires more RAM compared to 32-bit software
- reaching the RAM limit has various effects: PCs slow down, the operating systems freeze, and programs can crash
- by running 64-bit software on PCs with limited RAM it's easier to reach the RAM limit
- even today, we can buy new PCs with 2GB of RAM and no option to upgrade (by design)
- beside the new PCs, there are many others capable of running 64-bit programs, but their RAM limitation makes them better off with 32-bit software
- there are also old PCs that can successfully serve many purposes in the real world (education, business, research) that can only run 32-bit software
The purpose of the article was to point out that 32-bit software is still important today and in the near future, and to initiate a much needed dialog about it. It's also important to mention the fact that this article was not intended to make anyone cling onto 32-bit, nor to dismiss the advantages of 64-bit. 32-bit is not good for everything, and as pointed out in @4 64-bit is essential in various software for something as simple as dates (past and future).
While we might still have 32-bit netinstall/mini iso images for the years to come, those are not quite newbie-friendly. It would be great if some distro makers would reconsider supporting 32-bit because for the common user the netinstall/mini images are an inconvenience.
And because the price of the hardware keeps being pointed out every now and then, here are just three good reasons for which people don't buy better hardware:
- what they have already does the job
- they have other financial priorities
- they can't afford buying hardware at all, so they use what they have
Being able and willing to buy new hardware every few years is not something applicable to everyone, so it's imperative to be mindful about this. That's why there's cheap hardware on the market, so more people can have a chance to get their hands on technology and learn how to use it. Donating the older hardware to someone else is better than recycling, and in such cases that hardware still needs software. This doesn't mean every developer has to care about 32-bit but some have to, and I'm grateful for their continued work on supporting the 32-bit architecture because it offers choices to everyone and it enables the less fortunate people to do decent and updated computing.
79 • 32-bit (by dogma on 2017-10-10 14:51:29 GMT from United States)
I have a 32-bit machine that I still use somewhat. So I know we’re out there and we matter, but I totally get that small distributions can no longer spare the effort to test 32-bit when they already have 1000 other things going half-neglected.
80 • 32 Bit (by PaulW on 2017-10-10 15:55:15 GMT from United States)
The brutal Truth move on 64 bit should go too it's last centuries innovation with a snail's pace of adoption rate that big business for that. Same goes for x86 time for something new there as well a decade more and they will have to anyway. it's time for 21st century innovation.
Everyone makes good points, 5 kids using one computer GOOD, they need to learn how to work in a team and are being efficient. that country could use more people working to improve economy then coders.
32 bit good for tasks sure it is till it's not, as the others said if peeps want it let them pony up time money to support it enough said. You don't see peeps in poor countries running color computers or commodore and Ti/4's etc. (even though 90% of old education software would run just fine and teach them just as well). Modern concept requires modern software hardware deal with it.
From a security point of view WAY overdue on all the arc's time for something built from the ground up where peeps can't "Gank your client/server setup about time to".
from a compatibility point of view "KISS it & UWW" Kiss = Keep it simple stupid & uww = Use what works.
DW needs to slap thier host around and ask for refund if provided for free toothy smile when please? hhehehe
Final thoughts Jesse needs to get new hardware OR, use the clucker for 32 bit reviews eh. There are billions of cellphones out there some old ones too same issues there lots of 3rd world countries manage to pony up coin for them don't they. Great job everyone in supporting linux and it's alternatives I know I am not in that camp right now, Win2k16 Datacenter. but hey, everyone has different needs.
One more thing, wanna give shout outs to some of the great distro's I have used over the years TVVM to Fedora team, Pat V. (for slackware) the many peeps that gentoo for doing grunt work, LFS PClinuxOS when I didn't have time to compile, Knoppix for breaking all the ground on hardware and making it the standard plus LiveCD's, CentOS & Redhat Suse for obvious reasons Mint for making linux almost mainstream they actualy get it. & finaly distrowatch linuxquestions etc for support us all
81 • Dell iDRAC firmware update binary only run with 32-bit libraries (by LiuYan on 2017-10-10 16:01:25 GMT from China)
Currently I can install i686/i386 packages in CentOS / Debian to run Dell iDRAC firmware update binary, if 32-bit support is dropped, I can't run it anymore, so, please keep 32-bit alive.
82 • Dedoimedo review (by rooster12 on 2017-10-10 16:18:50 GMT from United States)
@71
Nelum Dev1 is a very nice distribution, quite fast and easy on the eyes.
83 • LiuYan & IDRAC (by PaulW on 2017-10-10 16:30:13 GMT from United States)
https://www.dell.com/support/article/us/en/04/sln305431/how-to-update-a-server...
has nothing to do with 32 bit they have 64 bit while the server is running that is a neat feature (learn something new everyday) I was gonna whine about vendor lock-in and you deserve what you get for that.
hope it helps
84 • Car & CPU improvements (by M.Z. on 2017-10-10 21:04:53 GMT from United States)
@62
“That may be true in general but based on anecdotal evidence of the cars I have owned I would disagree on the efficiency.”
Well one thing that is especially important to take into account is that safety & performance can often drag down efficiency. Cars today are as a rule both heavier & far more powerful than their counterparts from a couple of decades ago & are as a result safer & better performing, while generally still somewhat better in terms of fuel economy.
As a piece of anecdotal evidence of my own I’d point to my first car & my current one. They were/are both Chevys with 2.2 Liter I4s; however, there is a world of difference in terms of performance & fuel economy.
My first vehicle was a model year 1990 & had a 3 speed auto, throttle body fuel injection, 95 HP, & it made 28-32 MPG depending on where & how I drove it.
My current one is 16 years newer, has a 4 speed auto, port EFI, 148 HP, & it usually makes 30-34 MPG depending on how & where it’s driven. It’s also worth noting that I’ve gotten 36 MPG on occasion (I check the economy every time I fill up) & that I have bigger griper tires standard compared to the 1990 version.
On the performance front, I suppose both would be called ‘slow cars’ from their perspective years, but the 1990 went like 20 seconds in the ¼ mile & I know my current one is at least 2, maybe 4 seconds, quicker than that. That is a huge difference in performance. I also recall huge improvements in safety rating when I did some research on the two vehicles.
It’s also worth noting in all this that an all new car made in the same factory as the other two can be had which while heavier, has an extra few horsepower than what I’ve got now & gets up to 40 MPG highway according to EPA. That’s thanks to things like electronic direct fuel injection & a 6 speed automatic. Also that fuel economy test has gotten far stiffer since they called my vehicle a 32 MPG car.
I’m a bit more into the numbers from cars than the ones from CPUs; however, I know I’ve heard indications about improvements in both performance & electrical efficiency that far out strip that degree of improvement in cars. If you’ve got the money for an all new PC they can surly get far more done, though I also like the old 32 bit ones I’ve received for free & want to see them supported. Of course such things go beyond me & I think some people might really need their 32 bit PCs supported, rather than just hope that they are.
85 • Still dependent on 32bit OS (by Michael on 2017-10-11 02:25:09 GMT from United States)
At my place of work we are still dependent on 32bit Linux systems. We have several VMs which run software and toolchains which require a 32bit OS. It's a bit scary to see 32bit distro disappearing. I guess as long as these VMs don't require updates they'll be okay for years to come.
86 • Thanks, PaulW (by LiuYan on 2017-10-11 02:49:04 GMT from China)
@83
Thanks for the link. It's very helpful, I never use web UI to update ESM firmware before, maybe I'll try next time.
I still prefer update ESM firmware in operating system, because it don't need to upload the firmware 'back' to iDRAC remotely, and I can get more information when updating in operating system.
87 • The reason for the 64-bit season (by david esktorp on 2017-10-11 03:01:49 GMT from United States)
Garbage culture
Trash economy
88 • 32 and 64... (by drizzt on 2017-10-11 06:34:04 GMT from Australia)
i've read about two handfuls of comments, so hopefully won't be repeating anyone's comment here.
one of the things that GNU/Linux prided itself on when i first started to 'get into' it was the fact that it was such a great match for low-spec machines. i seem to see less and less of that 'pride' (if you will) nowadays. To me, it is those distros that seem to drop the 32-bit which do not really hold up to that. i'm not saying they are wrong or shouldn't; just that that they have a different 'agenda', which is all the blings and having all the latest technologies. there is limited (if any) concern on making it work on older machines. i am using 32bit distros still, and that is because my laptop is not up to the 64-bit technology yet (being jobless for 1.5 years (and not without trying) has its limits). if i have the $ for it, sure i would love to have a new machine that has complete 64-bit compatibility and plenty of RAM and say i don't need 32-bit OS. it is the distros that keep 32-bit that tends to care more about that mantra of being useful to older machines, and being able to beat Wind...hands down when it comes to older machines.
89 • Charity and Progress (by Arch Watcher 402563 on 2017-10-11 07:02:28 GMT from United States)
Why don't you chaps sitting on "junk" make Christmas gifts for your 'hood to show iLemmings the FOSS world?
- OpenBSD router to let granny ditch her slow, spook-infected one.
- Tor exit node for the library (tor project will help).
- DNS cache proxy to make Bubba's network zoom.
- Entertainment center (kodi.tv) and/or Software Defined Radio box.
- First PC for a toddler to play learning games.
- Linux temptation demo. "See if this old PC running Linux isn't faster than your Windows PC." Make file sharing show the Windows PC. Next thing you know, he may ask you to put Linux on it.
- Dedicated secure communications node (qtox/retroshare/etc).
- Web or blog server (nginx).
- Neighborhood forum/calendar/file server for carpooling, parties, birthdays, sports, etc.
- Solar/battery emergency server for power outages, storms, heavy snow, road conditions.
You don't have to use disk platter drives. Put a cheap SSD in the old guy. There are adapters from IDE to SATA if you need them. Insert a second NIC if needed. For old hardware upgrades cost next to nothing.
You're dreamers who think autos have progressed. Get a clue on monopolies and planned obsolescence. That's where profit lies.
I worked some years in automotive concepts. We had conclusively better tech. The inventor had decades of experience in vehicle design (Germany and America). He said getting new tech into autos is impossible. Vested interests want crappy stuff. He sought only side markets and military contracts. Even with better design, proven in military field tests, he ignored auto markets. He said the only way he'd penetrate them was selling expensive aftermarket kits to hobbyists.
We did purely mechanical stuff but you should study the oil monopoly war on alcohol. Prohibition was not for 1920s saloons. Monopolists use government regs to get and keep markets. Alcohol is better and cheaper fuel, but needs different carbeurators, so, WARNING-DANGER: don't pour alcohol in your tank. Visit alcoholcanbeagas.com for help. Imagine a still in your garage making fuel for free to grasp why oil firms had a problem with it.
In early days some incandescent light bulbs were invented that never burn out. They were quickly un-invented, but you can find one or two still burning 100 years later in the odd firehouse.
Microsoft and Intel monopolies cost IT decades of progress. A recent uni study concluded Apple deliberately slows down iPhones to push new models. I doubt the public has seen any natural progress in IT. It's all about profit maximization curves and related market control, not ethereal concepts of progress. Those are just TV ads.
90 • Adios, 32 bit (by imnotrich on 2017-10-11 17:48:22 GMT from Mexico)
Planned obsolescence arguments aside, it is increasingly frustrating to me when a browser refuses to install because my CPU has the wrong architecture. No dude, that's none of your fricking business the OS is the OS. Deal with it. Or I can't easily run the programs I want/need on MY hardware. I still run 16 bit programs here, ok? PAC MAN! I live very well in a 3rd world country on my 1st world pension but that doesn't mean I'm going to send perfectly good hardware to ewaste heaven simply because some hardware manufacturer or Microsoft wants me to buy new stuff. If it meets my needs I will not upgrade. And yes, some of my older systems get adopted by friends and neighbors who don't have sufficient resources to buy a brand new Alienware every 6 months. Now as for open source and Linux distros, there remain many legit reasons to continue supporting 32 bit hardware. People say old hardware isn't green enough? Throwing all that perfectly good hardware in the garbage isn't very green either. And I've yet to meet a Microsoft OS or Linux distro that properly handled power management without a bazillion bugs so perhaps people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks.
91 • 32 bit (by Tim Dowd on 2017-10-11 18:55:22 GMT from United States)
I guess what's bugging me about this conversation is the paranoia and assumption that someone's out to get working hardware and that these distros who give us a high quality product for free have some hidden agenda.
All of the folks who point out that older computers still have a role to play are right. But no one is discussing taking their ability to run Linux away.
1.) Ubuntu hasn't dropped 32 bit support. It has stopped making 32 bit ISOs running the main GNOME Shell version for 17.10 onwards. Ubuntu MATE and Lubuntu haven't made that announcement, and you can download the Ubuntu MATE 17.10 Beta today if you want. Ubuntu isn't taking away i386 packages. Many machines around the world will be using Ubuntu derivatives and Ubuntu packages for subsequent releases. If the i386 packages make it into 18.04 (which I can't see why they wouldn't) then a Ubuntu MATE machine would be good until 2023!
2.) If Ubuntu were to take away all 32 bit support from all releases from Artful onward (which it ISN'T,) Ubuntu Xenial would continue to be supported through 2021.
3.) Debian has no plans to drop i386, so we're looking at good support for these computers into the 2020s. By that time they really will have a niche role, and the idea that Debian isn't "user-friendly" enough for a 15 year old computer (which the newest 32 bit desktops will be at that time) is kind of silly.
4.) Unsupported doesn't mean unavailable. One person commented that they should at least make the old ISOs available. Ubuntu makes ALL of its old ISOs available
http://old-releases.ubuntu.com/releases/ . It's not a great idea to run an unsupported distro, but if it isn't on the network and that's what makes the computer work, they're still there for you.
The bottom line is that these ISOs are going away because they're not being used. Google was really clear that this was its reason for dumping 32 bit Chrome 2 years ago. As valid an argument as everything is for keeping 32 bit, if people aren't using a piece of software on that architecture, it isn't going to last. There's nothing nefarious about that.
92 • Ewaste Heaven (by edcoolio on 2017-10-11 20:04:38 GMT from United States)
@91
Well said!
93 • Myths & truths about "planned obsolescence" (by M.Z. on 2017-10-11 23:04:52 GMT from United States)
@89
"...You're dreamers who think autos have progressed. Get a clue on monopolies and planned obsolescence..."
There seem to be many common myths among those who are completely ignorant about automobiles about 'planned obsolescence' being a common thing in the auto biz. There are some elements of truth there, for instance they could certainly design an exterior that would never rust; however, you wouldn't like the price of such a vehicle. There is also a drive to get people into new cars; however, there have been no true monopolies in the auto biz for decades & anything that weakens one's reputation among customers has a way of eroding market share over the long run.
The true classic example of something like 'planned obsolescence' in cars were vehicles made in the US in the late 1950's which were constantly getting taller tail fins & a bigger dash of chrome in order to say 'look at me, I'm all new & don't you want me?' It was very much a 'keeping up with the Joneses' form of marketing new cars. Those vehicles generally had perfectly comparable durability to other vehicles of the era, but they were an attempt to hype what was new & allow people to show they had money for a new car as a status symbol. That may be playing on people who are a bit shallow, but it's not actually 'planned obsolesce' as such.
Now if you wanted to make a vehicle that was truly a 'planned obsolescence' machine, then anyone who had any real understanding of engines could do that with ease. All one would need to do is get a rubber timing belt that was designed to fail early enough & put it between the crank & cam/valves on an engine where the valves touch the top of the pistons in the event of a timing error (that's called an 'interference engine' or 'interference timing' because of the way the valves & pistons interfere with each other). You'd basically total the engine every X amount of miles & most people would buy a new vehicle at that point, & probably one from a competitors product line at that.
Fortunately there seem to be very few companies that actually designs vehicles that way. I for one have never owned a vehicle that didn't have a nice steel timing chain going between the crank & the camshaft/(s) & those generally last well over 150k miles before they develop a characteristic 'hunting' sound that indicates a bad timing chain.
Also anyone who knows much about the trends over the last couple of decades in vehicle size, engine power, & to a lesser extent fuel economy, would see the improvements in cars. Vehicles from the 1980s, 90s & even early 2000s were clearly some combination of less powerful, slower, & less efficient. There are however examples of vehicles that gained a good deal of both weight & power while holding steady or barely progressing in terms of efficiency. I'm sure there are also examples of vehicles that actually slid backwards a bit on efficiency after a model year switch; however, that seemed more common in the early 2000s than now.
That sort of thing is actually fairly easy to check on if you dig through independent 3rd party sites like the EPA & can keep in mind the relationship between power, weight, & economy. Sadly they only give economy numbers there & don't have good indicators on weight & power, which have eaten some efficiency gains.
"...In early days some incandescent light bulbs were invented that never burn out..."
That is actually a real thing to my understanding. There could be some other draw backs to the original light bulbs, but I don't actually know one way or the other. On the whole that seems like a true example of planned obsolescence.
A few great examples from the world of electronics are Apple iGadgets that are designed to have their batteries fail after a certain number of charges. On the surface that may seem unavoidable; however, to my understanding the batteries are soldered in to make sure the entire device goes out with the battery. On my Android it's not designed that way at all & I can remove the battery with ease.
Another great example would be PCs with RAM soldered into the motherboard, as mentioned in the DW article. It's a terrible stunt to pull on customers who are likely to run into a problem with insufficient RAM eventually.
On the electronics front, I would suggest avoiding brands known for soldering RAM & batteries into their products. I also hope we keep 32 bit around so as to avoid making computers obsolete too soon.
94 • Can't help myself, I keep doing it! (by RollMeAway on 2017-10-12 02:33:36 GMT from United States)
Recently repaired 2 32-bit computers. One cost $20 for a NEW $500W ATX power supply. Second one cost me $40 for a NEW hard drive. I simply copied a backed up, compressed image of the old hard drive onto the new one and I'm back in business.
Except for several Raspberry Pi and a couple of Pine64 boards, I live in a 32-bit world. At work I maintain and use 11 computers. Two of those are 64-bit, but they run 32-bit software. Most control electronic test equipment, and are blocked from internet access.
At home, I have 5 desktops and 2 laptops, all 32-bit, all do what I want and need.
Most at work, have ISA plugin cards, some of which I designed and built. It would cost tens of thousands of dollars and weeks/months of time to switch all my systems to 64-bit.
Personally, I have no use for "wobbly windows" , animated open and close windows, etc. I recall a distro I played with several years ago, that showed a short video of a toilet flushing, when I deleted a file. Ridiculous ! When I open or close a window, I want it be be instant. I cannot appreciate redrawing the window hundreds of times (animated), from a pin-point to full screen. Is that what you need 64-bit systems for ?? !!
My biggest disappointment in distros dropping 32-bit was PClinuxOS. I contributed $30 once a year sometimes twice, for over 10 years. I rarely used the forums or downloaded new ISOs so wasn't noticed. Guess I should have included a note with each donation: "Thank You for continued support of 32-bit systems" . Too late now!
95 • 32-bit (by Dave Postles on 2017-10-12 06:47:04 GMT from United Kingdom)
I'm impressed by the contribution of @78. I don't really have any investment personally. I have a netbook which is (obviously) 32-bit on which I run Devuan. I will run it as a naturally sandboxed machine - no external connections or files. That solution is simply a personal one, but there are so many people with old kit that is their only machine. I agree that net-install is not a viable proposition for inexperienced people. Is it possible to crowdfund those distros which will continue to produce 32-bit ISOs to persist for some considerable time? I would be happy to chip in.
96 • Browsers & stuff (by M.Z. on 2017-10-12 07:31:05 GMT from United States)
@61
Links to some random YouTube vids without any serious indication of a reliable source? Sorry, but that feels too troll like to be taken seriously or have it's links clicked. If you want people to click on that sort of thing give us reason to think the source material is serious & perhaps we could have an interesting discussion.
@63
Well you're short & more direct than my long winded attempts at a well reasoned point, but what's your actual objection?
@64
"...How do you think Mint earns its money?..."
Via a very mild change in the default behaviour of a browser that is doing the exact same thing it has always done. Don't all web browsers follow a similar pattern of behaviour as what you describe? Given that fact, it seems modifying one open project to benefit another that has fewer sources of reliable revenue is a fairly minor change that is well within the range of expected behaviour.
If something were stuck directly into the UI of a desktop environment & unsuspecting users were being tracked based on searches that were meant to be offline, then you'd have a serious point. Ubuntu did make desktop searches into ad revenue opportunities that had to potential to give third parties indications of what you were searching for on your private desktop. They even later admitted that they probably should have handled things differently prior to changing & eventually retiring the feature.
@66
"I have the idea people think Opera to be free. Opera however lives of ads...It is a commercial product."
Truth be told similar things could be said of Firefox, but it is still a well established 'Free as in Speech'/Open Source project. It sort of depends on which of several versions of the word 'free' you mean. Both Red Hat & Mozilla rely on some form of commercial revenue to develop their 'free as in speech'/open source products & both give away their code freely for others to modify & use as they please. It seems as though Opera has moved in a similar direction with the newer chrome based versions of their product, though Vivaldi seems to be doing a far better job of developing a innovative web browser off the same basic code base.
97 • 32-bit still useful in VMs (including in education) (by Spencer on 2017-10-12 07:35:09 GMT from United States)
Thing I noticed a lack of mentioning: VMs for users. I have a couple of less-energy-hungry machines that benefit from lower RAM usage with a couple dedicated purposes, but I could probably figure out how to replace those well enough if non-64 builds went away.
The thing I am not sure what to do with is that if I want to run a few VMs and have them talk to each other, it is nice to not need to dedicate multiple GBs to each one. Similarly, while my machine has VT-x available, as recently as a couple years ago I had an instructor provide only a 64-bit VM just to learn that VirtualBox can't do that if you don't have the hardware acceleration. We all got a reminder in this when literally half the computer science students (yes, folks who get to optionally have extra loan amounts pushed to the front of the year to buy nicer computers, folks whose intended career paths emphasize computers) did not have a CPU that VBox could use to run a 64-bit VM (the extensions for which seem to not yet be universal on the Intel side, and I would be unsurprised if there were pockets in the AMD side too).
Even if VT-x and AMD-V were universal (and if we ignore letting anyone else into the duopoly any time soon), as was mentioned the cheap computers (sometimes students pick those in order to have better access to different funding for fun things like enough food to eat) keep having RAM soldered on. Enough RAM for a single OS is a problem already? I would say that this makes virtualizing an even worse problem. If you only have 4GB of RAM for everything, having your VM require an extra 100 MB under such idle conditions as "the system monitor is open" is a serious problem. Yes, we should just make schooling work better so students can afford reasonable hardware (only one of a great many things we need to fix, actually), but until that becomes reality we have to strike a fine balance.
Maybe developers are unable to optimize 32-bit builds on solely 32-bit hardware anymore because of scarcity, but seeing if it will run at all and observing such a significant resource utilization difference feels like it should be enough? Develop testing that relies on VMs for non-driver issues? I feel like the edge cases that still exist (and yes, I agree those are moving towards edge cases) still face some pretty serious barriers that are not really well in their control for being stuck on 32-bit.
I would like to hope a few years from now the situation had improved dramatically. If I could either say that 64-bit RAM usage had somehow magically dropped or that my 16GB of RAM had finally truly moved from extravagent to sub-par, if I could see these next few years come out with absolute across-the-board support for the hardware extensions that aid virtualization... if that happened, I would be out of my own personal reasons to have concern (not sure if there are any global-scale issues, I know many regions that operate on donated computers, I suspect if the computers must be donated then the budget for paid OSes with 32-bit support is not there) but where we stand now it is just too beneficial. While I have the technical expertise to migrate myself to Debian, Ubuntu just made things so stupid-easy that I will miss some of the ease with which I could virtualize some things.
Something I have learned growing up: yes, there is an ideal perfect world where some things just are not problems. Getting yourself there can be quite realistic (if we set aside a great many starting point factors), and many of the same factors that help encourage folks into software development overlap with factors that make such perfect individual worlds possible. Getting there in a group is much more complicated, and when you are doing work to make a group, even one as small as a single organization, reach a given ideal state, there are usually many years of compromise along the way. It is not generally pretty, but it is necessary in order to drop as few people as can be along the way and ensure that as many traditionally undersupported people as possible are not dropped off for not having had a chance to advance earlier. In this case, those with resources and know-how, or at least access to those in the past few years, have had the abundant opportunity to move along and ensure perfect x86_64 support. Alas, some folks (If we go with the VM-running in class example, perhaps first-generation students who are just now getting their first access to enough information to realize this is a problem?) have not known this was part of future-proofing, or have not had the resources to do anything about it, but are still impacted in some way. Until we solve the segment of computer manufacturers at a few steps in the chain cutting the wrong corners to be affordable to students (sure, "cheap" to those of us who can afford better, saved up for to those who need to in order to make such a purchase), there will continue to be absolutey valid cases for 32-bit software.
I guess, in short, while I see many folks here are fortunate enough to not be forced to care about 32-bit software (and I am very close to in the exact same boat myself), I can promise that I know enough people face-to-face who rely on the availability even in the context of learning towards a profession that should pay enough to make the point moot later. Hiding the 32-bit images and putting warnings on them that the developers are having harder times testing the software feels fair right now, but I seriously hope that this is a step in a longer (not shorter, longer) process and that the folks going in this direction at least maintain the automated builds and find ways to help the folks who need these builds help them spot whatever problems may arise until 64-bit has been viable long enough that even 2nd-generation users do not suffer from outright dropped support.
98 • Saying goodbye to 32-bit (by cykodrone on 2017-10-12 07:39:16 GMT from Canada)
10 or 20 years from now (if we survive the orange apocalypse) when 128-bit is the new standard, we'll be debating dumping 64-bit. I have a few thoughts on this, does anybody save programs or games for historical reasons? I know some people save some hardware. With our luck the only way stop Skynet is with a legacy app and OS. xD I too like to get nostalgic but the pattern with hardware has been more speed and more instruction sets while using FAR LESS ENERGY than legacy dinosaur chips. Do the planet a favour, dump your coal and steam fired clunkers. All through history people and business have dumped obsolete technology to stop the bleeding of money and resources, why the clinginess to 32-bit? Are you still clinging to 16-bit as well? The times and technology changes with them, keep up or get trampled by the herd. "Time's tide will smother you" -The Smiths.
99 • Continuing support for 32-bit distros... (by Mike Walsh on 2017-10-12 07:44:14 GMT from United Kingdom)
I'm not ambiguous about this one at all.
I use an ancient, 15-yr old Dell laptop, and a slightly younger (13 yrs old) Compaq desktop. The Dell is P4-based, the Compaq has a dual-core Athlon 64.
I run Puppy on both of them.....and on the Compaq, most of my Pups are 32-bit.....I have just one 64-bit Pup. 32-bit runs faster on 64-bit hardware; as stated, is less RAM-hungry; and is a good fit for older hardware.
I'm one of those who makes use of what they have. You'll not catch me rushing out every 18 months or so to empty my wallet into a dealer's pocket for the latest piece of over-hyped junk ("Oh, you GOTTA have this; life won't be worth living if you don't...") Yeah, R-i-i-i-ght.
For my needs, 32-bit works. There is so much 32-bit software out there for Puppy, we ain't gonna go short any time soon; and many of us compile and package new stuff for the 'Puppy' eco-system on an ongoing basis. Pup's a 'do-ocracy'; those that can, do. Why do we need to rely on somebody else to provide software, when Pup has all the necessary tools built-in? And most of that is in private cloud-hosting a/c's; no 'central' repo for Puppy. (Safer that way, too.)
----------------------------------------
I'm no 'green warrior', but it strikes me as frankly ludicrous, throwing out perfectly usable hardware just because some over-paid marketing department insists we should. And people in the developing Third world countries have as much right to internet access as we do here in the West. Most of them can't afford to throw thousands at the newest hunks of hardware, and rely on 'throw-out' donations from others. Linux is a perfect fit for these older machines, and will do everything needed as well as, if not better than, Windoze can.....
AND it doesn't cost an arm and a leg.
100 • @98 and other greenwashers (by curious on 2017-10-12 08:08:23 GMT from Germany)
Please provide conclusive evidence that the resources expended in producing all those shiny new machines are not more than can be saved by their lower power consumption.
You should also consider the environmental impact of trashing all those still functional 32bit computers.
Also, the dwindling supply of certain materials should be taken into account, and the effort made to obtain them - e.g. coltan mining and the child labor often involved.
So, the arguments for alway buying the newest machines because they are the most efficient and thus more "green" is unconvincing, especially for expensive devices.
101 • Most netbooks still require 32-bit (by Chris on 2017-10-12 11:51:58 GMT from United States)
Many people still have old netbooks laying around that still run perfectly fine with no battery issues still. Since XP has been end-of-life, Linux has been the only real choice for these machines.
One of the biggest strengths of Linux is its ability to run legacy hardware that Windows has long forgotten. By switching to 64-bit only, a large segment of currently running hardware will be affected. Isn't Linux supposed to be about choice? 64-bit only removes choice.
102 • Power consumption clarification (by Nicolae Crefelean on 2017-10-12 12:09:14 GMT from Romania)
@98: The ratio between the computing power against the power consumption, most of the time favours the newer processors. All hail progress! But that's not the single measurement that counts. Many tasks don't require a huge amount of computing power, so this ratio is meaningless in such cases. A race car is much more efficient at squeezing horse power from the fuel, yet a regular car is more than enough to go shopping.
Let's take a look at the TDP (Thermal Design Power) of some Intel desktop CPUs (data available at ark.intel.com):
Intel Pentium II, 233 MHz: 34.8 W
Intel Pentium II, 300 MHz: 21.5 W
Intel Pentium III, 700 MHz: 18.3 W
Intel Pentium III, 1.2 GHz: 29.9 W
Intel Pentium 4, 1.7 GHz: 64 W
Intel Pentium 4, 2.0 GHz: 71.8 W
Intel Pentium D 935, 3.2 GHz: 95 W
Intel Pentium D 940, 3.2 GHz: 130 W
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400, 3.0 GHz: 65 W
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650, 3.0 GHz: 95 W
Intel Core i3-530, 2.93 GHz: 73 W
Intel Core i7-880, 3.06 GHz: 95 W
...
Intel Core i3-7300, 4.0 GHz: 51 W
Intel Core i3-8100, 3.60 GHz: 65 W
We can see how the power consumption varies across generations and models, and how the popular Core 2 Duo E8400 doesn't need more power than the latest and greatest Core i3-8100 while being able to do quite some heavy lifting. So the old tech can successfully serve in many ways and lots of options have a decent power consumption. And on a case by case basis, the old tech can even be better than the new one. That old crusty Pentium III @ 700 MHz can easily become a weather station with logging, push notifications and an API for data consumption, using little power. Is it the best technical option? No. But if you already have it, it's cheaper than anything else - even the $10 Raspberry Pi Zero W (which requires some extras anyway).
16-bit software has way too many limitations for today's needs to be worth the trouble maintaining, which is why there's a very limited number of hobbyists and businesses who still work in that area. But 32-bit software, while inconvenient in some cases, is good enough for many tasks. And again, there's 64-bit hardware that is crippled (RAM) by default by the manufacturers, so instead of debating 32-bit vs 64-bit (which is not the case here), we should simply pick what's best for each use case and stress the PC manufacturers to stop making hardware with 4GB or less RAM or allow upgrades to at least 8GB, if not more.
103 • Question about Distrowatch web servers (by Tim on 2017-10-12 14:32:35 GMT from United States)
Again, I was @37. The Distrowatch web site performance is very good again, this morning. Thanks very much!
104 • Greenwashing (by edcoolio on 2017-10-12 15:37:35 GMT from United States)
@100, you hit the nail on the head.
It reminds me of the numerous studies (most of which seem to become buried rather quickly) of automobiles which prove that the most "efficient" cars on resources are older, mid to high MPG vehicles.
Of course, this includes ALL inputs to actually make a car over its lifetime, with the biggest positives for an old car in these calculations being that the AUTOMOBILE HAS ALREADY BEEN BUILT!
I suspect that it is exactly the same for computers, laptops in particular.
105 • power consumption matters (by Tim Dowd on 2017-10-12 16:12:24 GMT from United States)
@102
I've enjoyed most of your comments and generally agree with your support of old tech. But your comment about using a PIII for a weather station being cheaper than buying a Raspberry Pi is not correct.
A Raspberry pi running off a standard cellphone charger draws 5 watts, or 0.005kW. Multiplied by 720 hours (a 30 day month running 24 hours/day) that gives us 3.6 kWh. In my region that's $0.27 USD per month.
My desktop computer draws 402W, or 0.402kW, and over the same 720 hour month would use 289.44kWh or $21.97 a month.
That Pi pays for itself very quickly, not to mention the environmental implications of reducing power consumption by a factor of 100.
It is certainly green to keep a desktop going for its intended purpose as long as possible before replacing it. But when people say that a single board computer is much greener, they have a point. Obviously if you're not using it continuously the difference is smaller, and if you are in a place that's mostly renewable energy it might not be a big deal at all. But spending 100x the energy cost for a device does add up over time, and its carbon footprint in most places does too.
106 • TDP and usefull life of old equipment (by Rev_Don on 2017-10-12 16:39:25 GMT from United States)
Thermal Design Power (TDP) does not indicate how much power it uses. It measures how much heat it it produces. And even if it did, that doesn't account for the rest of the system. Newer chipsets, ram, hard drives, power supplies, and just about everything else in a newer computer require less power to do the same amount of work.
If you measure the amount of electricity an e8400 uses under full load compared to an i3-8100 under full load you'll find that the E8400 consumes about 20 to 30% more electricity while produce less content. My i7-2700k under full load uses about 5% less electricity under full load than my E8400 system does, and that is with the same make and model hard drive and power supply but four times as much ram in the 2700k. Considering that I can accomplish a lot of tasks in about half the time on the 2700k that adds up to quite a savings on the power bill. The 2700k is even more efficient under low load conditions. This isn't meant as a recommendation for dumping older equipment, only to put a more realistic spin on it.
Now can you save enough on your power bill with newer hardware to offset the cost of that hardware is difficult to answer.At the moment Core 2 Duo/Quad thru Sandy/Ivy Bridge systems seem to be the sweet spot of cost to performance, but that is contingent on where you live. One also needs to factor in can you afford to shell out a hundred bucks in one lump sum for newer hardware or would it be easier to spend an addition three bucks a month on your electrical bill. Each person needs to determine that for themselves.
Another point to consider is what a person is using their computer for and how much time they have to accomplish those tasks. I do a significant amount of image and video editing and trans coding. I've been doing such for years and can't imagine using an old single core Pentium 4 for it. I can see legitimate uses for older equipment, but not for everyone.
All in all, as long as your equipment can accomplish the tasks you need to do in an acceptable amount of time then it's powerful enough FOR YOU. Just remember that what YOU need may not be the same as someone else so don't fault them for being for or against either side of the old vs new hardware discussion.
107 • RE #106 TDP and usefull life of old equipment correction (by Rev_Don on 2017-10-12 16:51:38 GMT from United States)
"Considering that I can accomplish a lot of tasks in about half the time on the 2700k that adds up to quite a savings on the power bill."
That should have been about 5 times faster on the 2700k.
108 • power (by Tim Dowd on 2017-10-12 17:00:17 GMT from United States)
@ 105
I did one thing wrong- that's the peak power for the desktop computer, not the idle power. So lets say leaving the weather station running requires about 100W. It's still 5 bucks a month, which still is a lot compared to the Raspberry Pi.
109 • pfsense and 32 bit (by edcoolio on 2017-10-12 19:13:48 GMT from United States)
I see today that pfsense has a new release, no 32 bit image available for the 2.4 series.
It's interesting that this happens while many are discussing the validity of 32 bit os/systems. This is because my router/firewall/dns server for home is an old 32 bit system I don't want to throw out!
It is actually an old laptop with dual NIC's. This old laptop at least as, if not more, powerful than home routers available today. Further, the battery still functions on this, which means during power events (you know, off, then quick on after a few seconds) are also covered.
So, will I go to a different product? Eventually, it seems I will have to. I will do this sooner than later. Will I purchase new equipment, set up the whole thing, then buy an APC for my power needs - and dump perfectly good efficient equipment?? No.
I guess the announcement from pfsense hits home on two fronts:
1. How I still use 32 bit systems.
2. How 32 bit systems can still be efficient, cheap, and of great use.
3. How much I depend on FOSS software.
In conclusion, I don't agree with pfsense in this, but it is their labor and I respect that. I also appreciate the use I have gotten out of their hard work.
110 • Note on 36 • What are you contributing to keep 32-bit support alive? (by Charles Marslett on 2017-10-12 20:44:33 GMT from United States)
I am actually in the opposite state of affairs. I have a file server that
has actually been running 64-bit Linux for over 10 years (I think I started with a 2.xx kernel). Early on, Ubuntu, then a couple of fly-by-nights, then Gentoo. Well, the 64-bit kernels I have installed the last few months (4.5-4.14) don't work with the two XFS file systems that server runs on. So I have to put in custom driver patches. I am not that much of an expert on the operation of XFS, so when this gets to be beyond my capabilities, I may have to fall back to a 32-bit kernel. Because the 32-bit 4.14 kernels still work with my XFS file systems unpatched. Probably because 32-bit XFS drivers are not being maintained as completely as the 64-bit drivers. For other reasons I don't want to back off to pre-4.5 kernels. And I'm not excited about inventing my own file system right now. I'm just whining, you must realize.
So remember that a generation, (32-bit, 64-bit, 128-bit) drags along a lot of baggage not specific to the processor.
Incidentally, can anyone recommend a reliable replacement for XFS and EXT*? That could solve my issues with forgetting 32-bit processors, but without that, I feel it is still something I need. I have a lot of files on the server. Not big files, necessarily, but millions of files. More than JFS, BtrFS and the ReiserFS systems seem able to handle. And now, more than 64-bit XFS it is beginning to have issues. Speed is important, but not more important that capability.
111 • RE: Power consumption (by Nicolae Crefelean on 2017-10-12 21:28:22 GMT from Romania)
@105 @108 Thanks for your comments. You are of course right about the long-term use. Even with the idle power consumption of that PIII which has a maximum TDP of 18.3 W (plus the rest of the hardware) is still well over a Raspberry Pi. But it's a good starting point that comes without an initial cost, that we can immediately use until we get the RPi parts and build the new solution.
But even the cheap RPi Zero W *full* setup still costs some money - about $40-$50 with the case, 16GB microSD card, power supply, adapters, plus shipping. So although not very expensive, it still takes some time to pay for itself. But the weather station was just a random example. :) Although I prefer using a Raspberry Pi whenever possible, I always evaluate my options and I do make use of what I already have until the time is right for something better. Because hardware is almost never the only thing we have to consider when we plan our budget.
112 • Is 32 bit support good for the planet ? (by Sebastien on 2017-10-13 07:31:58 GMT from France)
Totally agree with Steve (#7). My young daughter uses a cute 10' Asus netbook, still looking shiny. It would be a shame to drop it off right now. I also use the same netbook as a media center with Kodi on it, working just fine. I do not care about RAM consumption or some entropy considerations. I just want not to have to trash away devices that still work good enough for me. I am glad that some distro are still aware of that and continue to work on supporting this equosystem. Thanks to them I can live out the fashion geek, always buying the last powerfull device that need the last (Windows) version on it (unless it's the other way round). Not sure about it (some may argue that energy management is not as good in older hardware) but you can guess that less hardware turnover might also be a good thing for the planet.
113 • Please continue to create 32bit Linux operating systems. (by Theopoli on 2017-10-13 11:29:51 GMT from United States)
There are times when a User may want to have all new everything. To maintain a parity and usefulness of a computer system the software should work together with the hardware. When the community (business, churches, clubs, associations, research entities) has decades of old data that is still useful, then consider the necessity of maintaining multiple computers and multiple operating systems.
A case in point doing technical support is difficult when there is but one computer system running one operating system. Often there are no two computer systems alike enough that the systems can be mirrored. Computer maintenance is best done 32bit to 32bit, and 64bit to 64bit. With no 32bit Linux available it is difficult to keep the compatibility of new computers trying to access the older computers.
Sometimes an older computer system is better for internet surfing as many of the ads are not able to get across the old firmware. Example of this feat is the User with a computer system that has only a working DVD drive. Fortunate for him the processor has built in graphics support. Using [Just Browsing Linux, 32bit] the computer system got online and limited the amount of advertisement coming across the network. No hard disk drive means the cookies and residuals are not left behind on a storage device to create havoc later. This also stops cold any virus trying to invade a computer system.
At last progress and technology marches on with time. New hardware does require new software to run well. A User with possession of 32bit Linux distribution is a life saver when nothing else is available. Ever try to run a 64bit Linux on 32bit hardware. Does not work at all. Then there are temptations to run a full featured 64bit Linux on a ARM processor. Not happening yet. Will buy that USA made cellular phone that can run a full feature 64bit Linux operating system. Most Users are tired of the invading advertisements and telemarketers coming through on the cell phone (who is paying for the usage time.)
Yes keep and continue to create 32bit Linux for legacy computers.
How many Users would have kept their Apple IIe, Commodore 64, Sega, Atari ST-1024,
Apple Amiga, Apple Macintosh IIx, Grid Systems, Osborne, Apricot computers if the 16bit and 32bit operating systems were maintained.
Anyone remember the Timex Sinclair-100? That was the "Raspberry Pi" of its day.
Often older computers do run cooler and still have great usage. Remember in Russia, the folks over there ran their nuclear power plants with Apple IIe computers. Still use an old Intel 80486 computer to run the old Celestron telescope clock drive. Old computers running 32bit Linux are okay. They do a very good job of monitoring more than 200 acres of potatoes that generate more than 700 amperes of electricity to run the farm equipment. Yes the User can also make "Bio-Diesel" fuel from used cooking oil by linking a old computer with 32bit Linux to monitor the fermenting process. More uses for old 32bit Linux-- running CNC machines, re-programming sewing machines.
Waste not, want not. One should eat the meat that is hunted. Do not see a dog losing a meal. Many developers have given of their own time and money to create these great 32bit Linux operating systems. It is easier to continue improving an existing 32bit operating system than to start a project from scratch. Maybe someone will find a way to link up several 32bit processors to operate like a 64bit computer system. Probably more trouble than its worth. Keep it simple. Like new, then buy a new computer system.
Like old, then maintain the old computer system for its 32bit Linux simplicity. Using older computers with older 32bit Linux will help the User understand how something works. Perhaps guide the User to participate in the improvement of more complex Linux operating systems.
Again, thank you to all the Linux Developers, Testers, and Distributors.
We can complain and nag only because Linux has given Users an alternative.
Thank Linus Torvalds and The GNU Community. The computer User today have more ways to use a computer than a 1,000 Lego Build Sets.
How about asking the reading audience what they use their version of 32bit and 64bit Linux for. Ask every week to discover what the reader use ro be productive.
This will be a very interesting weekly survey.
Thank you Editor.
114 • 32 bit, black and white colorized old movies (by Jordan on 2017-10-13 12:34:05 GMT from United States)
This 32 bit/64 bit debate reminds me of the (non) issue a few decades back of movie channels releasing old monochrome movies after having them colorized.
If you don't like to watch old movies in color, use your controls to toggle into monochrome.
If you don't like 64 bit taking over linux distros, get (keep) a 32 bit machine and you'll be fine. You can even keep old 32 bit distros running well, as you know, on any machine.
If the worry is 64 bit taking over all distros, (don't read further): Make a 32 bit distro.
115 • @54 Sitwon (by Robert P. on 2017-10-13 13:15:33 GMT from France)
"[...] most FOSS projects have about 90% of the feature completeness of their commercial counterparts."
Do you have any reliable data to support this, or are you just trying to sell your belief as fact?
116 • @115 (by azuvix on 2017-10-13 14:56:46 GMT from United States)
You're correct to be critical of a claim like that. A more fair statement would have been something like: "Many users find free software to be adequate for their needs even when a proprietary alternative is available." I imagine that is a large part of the reason that software like the GIMP, Inkscape, Libreoffice, and so on are able to maintain a large user base - those that know how to use them well must know how to work with the limitations and take advantage of the existing features, and many find that their needs are met without having to pay a premium. There IS a minimum requirement for features to achieve that, but whether or not that has ever been quantified or studied, I have no idea. Would you say that's more agreeable?
As for the 32-bit situation, it would be a huge shame if everyone on the GNU/Linux side jumped ship. I still have computers that can't manage 64-bit software, and if there were no distros to support them, I would have to look into a BSD or other operating system that has the good sense to support everybody who wants to use it. Not that I'm saying there is anything wrong with that, but having plenty of options never hurts.
117 • 116 follow-up (by azuvix on 2017-10-13 15:19:43 GMT from United States)
Re-reading the original post, I realize that wasn't quite the point Sitwon was trying to make, but the fact remains that a number based on nothing but a guess shouldn't be given the same respect as an actual research finding. And his/her central point still does make sense given what I said - the features supported are the ones that are explicitly deemed necessary and demanded or created by the user base, often leading to software that can support the needs of a large number of people. I would consider that a fair statement.
118 • Chart by Nicolae Crefelean (by Winchester on 2017-10-13 15:28:48 GMT from United States)
Should this chart not be edited since it is clear that OpenSUSE still supports 32-bit desktops via its Tumbleweed branch??
It seems as though the chart,as it stands right now,could mislead people.
CentOS 32-bit support ends in less than 38 months and ,as far as I know,there are no plans as of yet for OpenSUSE Tumbleweed to end any of their currently supported architectures.
119 • it's a balance (by Tim Dowd on 2017-10-13 16:10:41 GMT from United States)
@ 111
I agree completely with what you say here. The bottom line is that every choice we make with computers is somewhat unique to our own particular situation. In my physics classroom we regularly use a 1999 Compaq laptop with a Celeron processor and Windows 2000 Pro, because it interfaces with older scientific instruments and the amount of use doesn't justify buying new software. The same goes for the two old desktops running video analysis software- I probably never will upgrade them from Debian Jessie because they're fit for purpose and get used only for a few specific classes a handful of times over the year. It's just that a lot of applications for old computers involve using them as servers or always on dataloggers of some sort, and we are in an era where that should be questioned given the power use.
There have been a lot of interesting points in this discussion and I've enjoyed reading through all of the comments. But again, I want to push back at the idea that we're at a crisis moment for the future of 32 bit. Support has begun to be scaled back in distros that are looking at their usage statistics and aren't seeing a demand for 32 bit in those applications. I think we're a few years off from losing support of the Ubuntu MATEs and Lubuntus of the world, and maybe a decade or more from Debian abandoning. By that time, most 32 bit hardware will have broken from old age, or won't be connected to the internet and thus can use older versions. And even then, there'll always be NetBSD.
Keep being creative with computers, all. It's inspiring to read about what y'all are doing.
120 • Still using 32-bit Linux (by Robert Kern on 2017-10-13 21:04:30 GMT from United States)
Somewhere after the turn of the century, I had a need for a good scanner. I purchased an Epson scanner which used an ISA SCSI card to communicate with the computer (which was using Windows XP at the time).
When Microsoft moved on, I continued using my scanner on my 32-bit computer by using Linux. I still use my scanner a lot and would be lost without 32-bit Linux. I'm guessing there are a lot more people like me who continue using 32-bit Linux because Windows no longer supports their computers.
I see no reason to throw out perfectly good, working hardware.
121 • Bottomline (by Penny )Worthless on 2017-10-14 04:18:49 GMT from Canada)
#120
"I see no reason to throw out perfectly good, working hardware."
is the bottom line, as news hardwares and softwares are just mass surveillance craps even not a single penny worth.
Californian Silicon Techies who tried to trap the whole world, are themselves entangled and trapped.
Somewhere down the planet called The Earth, there already been a Golden Dawn with full flow of energy breeze which of course does not have any grains from Californian Silicon Sands on The Golden Beach .
122 • 32 bit systems (by OstroL on 2017-10-14 09:29:09 GMT from Poland)
If you have a 32 bit system with a working distro, just don't upgrade the system. It'd keep on working.The problems start, when you try to upgrade. Just disable unattended upgrades.
123 • RE: openSUSE Tumbleweed + balance (by Nicolae Crefelean on 2017-10-14 12:16:39 GMT from Romania)
@118: Thanks for pointing out that oversight, I just asked Jesse to update the table accordingly.
As for the 32-bit CentOS, it still has a good life ahead. If it was only a few months, it would've been worth mentioning that it's about to discontinue 32-bit. Overall, the purpose of that table was to reflect the present situation in a simple fashion.
@119: Indeed, I've found a lot of interesting comments here and I'm glad the readers voiced their opinions and experience. But the crisis is not far, and we can't wait for the last minute. Especially in companies, schools and other institutions the sysadmins will download an ISO once, then install the operating system on many PCs. So there's no meaningful way to determine the real need for 32-bit software, based on ISO downloads or even updates, considering it's easy to switch to other mirrors or even create one of our own, which is highly recommended in networks with many clients. It's up to us to let the distro makers know how much we rely on their work. And of course, supporting them is essential.
And in a decade from now we will still have good hardware requiring 32-bit software. As long as people can still buy brand new PCs with low RAM, we will sadly have to drag 32-bit along with us for longer than we could (in theory). I wish this wouldn't be the case but this is mostly up to the hardware makers. Even in these comments we found a few people who continue pointing out to the 64-bit capability without even considering the RAM issue, so it's practically impossible to get this message out to the whole market - to the consumers.
The longer it takes for the PC manufacturers to understand and combat the implications, the more frustrating it will be for the people who buy crippled hardware and then deal with it or buy something better. The old hardware will finally die, but the new(er) RAM-crippled hardware will either get discarded or make the architecture problem worse, because in a decade from now it will be even less justified to maintain 32-bit software.
I'm not sure what would be the best way(s) to reach out to the PC manufacturers but it has to be done.
124 • Absolutely Clueless (by Silly Confused on 2017-10-14 13:20:43 GMT from Canada)
#123
"I'm not sure what would be the best way(s) to reach out to the PC manufacturers but it has to be done."
Tech Giants and their idioties-techies are absolutely clueless in a fuzzy logic state. They have no clear foresight or vision where they are heading to.
Technology has already passed it peak, now onwards it's on down-swing.
The OS which does not accept any of Windows, Linux, BSD, iOS or Android commands and runs in stealth mode. What viruses, hackers, NSA or GCHQ gonna do without a single bit of clue is just banging their heads hard into the wall in a dark.
in Japanese its known as FOKUYOTTA.
125 • pfSense & 32 bit (by M.Z. on 2017-10-14 14:51:30 GMT from United States)
@109
"I see today that pfsense has a new release, no 32 bit image available for the 2.4 series."
I have a similar dilemma with pfSense & old hardware. I think it's actually easy enough to try & find a 32 bit firewall OS via the search function here on DW. My main issue is that I want ease of use equaling pfSense & I want to make sure it is something as different as possible when compared to the built in firewall in my Linux desktops. With pfSense I knew that I was running pf as a basic firewall & adding other security enhancing tech on top. I feel I'm gaining less from a security standpoint if the basic filter is the same as what's in my desktop. Now I have do do some digging & figuring on what offers the best security enhancements while still being easy.
I know dropping 32 bit is a sort of case by case thing based on what the project can devote to the effort & what kind of market it's trying to target; however, this is a disappointment to me. I think this is a sort of application that lends it's self to 32 bit home users due to lower resource requirements.
126 • Dropping 32 bit ? (by Scott G on 2017-10-14 16:31:31 GMT from United States)
As said before many people depend upon 32 bit OSs, but there comes a time when you need to reach for the future and focus on that future. I have been waiting for 64bit to be replaced by 128bit.
WHERES MY FRIGGIN' JET PACK?
127 • Long Term 32 bit Support User (by Bruce Neale on 2017-10-14 18:45:21 GMT from Germany)
I will use 32 bit as long as Linux supports 32 bit, just like with Windows XP. Our Original Thinkpad T41 runs MX-16 & LMDE-2 far better than the original Windows ever did. I have used the T41 any time a newer Desktop has died or had Windows related problems. My newest are a pair of Thinkpad T500 laptops, which have MX-16, Mint 17.3 & Salix 14.2 installed.
Like many others my 1st Linux was Xandros 2 alongside Windows on the T41 & the Desktop at that time. It was easier to install than Windows & found our Internet suppler with no drama at all. Eventually it was followed by Mepis.
I have tried a few times to get a 64-bit system with various used motherboards working wth Linux , but at the time none of the 20-30 distros ran or installed except for a Slackware distro.
I have collected a few Thinkpad T60 & T61 models. Any that have come with Windows 8 or 10 are not my idea of fun. The best runs Windows 7 Ultimate for occasional use.
I have found that MX-16 or Mint LMDE-2 or 17.3 will usually install on the older equipment that I have tried.
I prefer a 128 GB SSD for Multi boot Linux distros for these older Laptops & reasonably lightweight distros.
I will try to avoid sysD distros for daily use for a few years more for many reasons.
The last new kit I bought was in 2006, so its had a few HDDs & various distros it is OK for daily use.
The newest Toshiba C850D Laptop with 64-bit Windows 8 died when I tried to upgrade to Windows 10, so 1 more 64-bit laptop good for parts only now.
I buy a new motherboard for the big old Desktop when it dies, so that will be 64-bit when this gets rebuilt.
Any new equipment I buy has had good figures for Energy etc at the time.
I am another who runs a 23 year old Toyota Corolla for Daily use. Some years it requires minimal maintenance, others it needs a bit more.
I try to keep the original parts as long as possible, because the Original battery lasted 11 years & there were 3 more in the next 11.
The Miele washing machine & dishwasher are also more than 20 years old.
Those who believe that effiency figures of modern equipment of any type are worth replacing after a short time, are creating an enormous waste problem for future generations.
We have travelled the World for Decades for Work & Play with no need for any Electronics at all.
best regards, Bruce
128 • Blame 2G RAM laptops on Microsoft (by atlpcug on 2017-10-15 15:13:35 GMT from United States)
My understanding is that Microsoft charges a very low price to license laptops with limited RAM. That's why initial notebooks came with just 1G, which were all 32-bit. My notebook (1.5G soldered) still serves me well with Linux. Windows 10 requires more RAM, so the new limit is 2G.
129 • XFS replacement (by PaulW on 2017-10-15 20:23:13 GMT from United States)
@110, with that much data. I am curious why you haven't moved to ZFS already.
Number of Comments: 129
Display mode: DWW Only • Comments Only • Both DWW and Comments
| | |
| TUXEDO |
TUXEDO Computers - Linux Hardware in a tailor made suite
Choose from a wide range of laptops and PCs in various sizes and shapes at TUXEDOComputers.com. Every machine comes pre-installed and ready-to-run with Linux. Full 24 months of warranty and lifetime support included!
Learn more about our full service package and all benefits from buying at TUXEDO.
|
| Archives |
| • Ussye 1118 (2025-04-21): Fedora 42, strange characters in Vim, Nitrux introduces new package tools, Fedora extends reproducibility efforts, PINE64 updates multiple devices running Debian |
| • Issue 1117 (2025-04-14): Shebang 25.0, EndeavourOS 2025.03.19, running applications from other distros on the desktop, Debian gets APT upgrade, Mint introduces OEM options for LMDE, postmarketOS packages GNOME 48 and COSMIC, Redox testing USB support |
| • Issue 1116 (2025-04-07): The Sense HAT, Android and mobile operating systems, FreeBSD improves on laptops, openSUSE publishes many new updates, Fedora appoints new Project Leader, UBports testing VoLTE |
| • Issue 1115 (2025-03-31): GrapheneOS 2025, the rise of portable package formats, MidnightBSD and openSUSE experiment with new package management features, Plank dock reborn, key infrastructure projects lose funding, postmarketOS to focus on reliability |
| • Issue 1114 (2025-03-24): Bazzite 41, checking which processes are writing to disk, Rocky unveils new Hardened branch, GNOME 48 released, generating images for the Raspberry Pi |
| • Issue 1113 (2025-03-17): MocaccinoOS 1.8.1, how to contribute to open source, Murena extends on-line installer, Garuda tests COSMIC edition, Ubuntu to replace coreutils with Rust alternatives, Chimera Linux drops RISC-V builds |
| • Issue 1112 (2025-03-10): Solus 4.7, distros which work with Secure Boot, UBports publishes bug fix, postmarketOS considers a new name, Debian running on Android |
| • Issue 1111 (2025-03-03): Orbitiny 0.01, the effect of Ubuntu Core Desktop, Gentoo offers disk images, elementary OS invites feature ideas, FreeBSD starts PinePhone Pro port, Mint warns of upcoming Firefox issue |
| • Issue 1110 (2025-02-24): iodeOS 6.0, learning to program, Arch retiring old repositories, openSUSE makes progress on reproducible builds, Fedora is getting more serious about open hardware, Tails changes its install instructions to offer better privacy, Murena's de-Googled tablet goes on sale |
| • Issue 1109 (2025-02-17): Rhino Linux 2025.1, MX Linux 23.5 with Xfce 4.20, replacing X.Org tools with Wayland tools, GhostBSD moving its base to FreeBSD -RELEASE, Redox stabilizes its ABI, UBports testing 24.04, Asahi changing its leadership, OBS in dispute with Fedora |
| • Issue 1108 (2025-02-10): Serpent OS 0.24.6, Aurora, sharing swap between distros, Peppermint tries Void base, GTK removinglegacy technologies, Red Hat plans more AI tools for Fedora, TrueNAS merges its editions |
| • Issue 1107 (2025-02-03): siduction 2024.1.0, timing tasks, Lomiri ported to postmarketOS, Alpine joins Open Collective, a new desktop for Linux called Orbitiny |
| • Issue 1106 (2025-01-27): Adelie Linux 1.0 Beta 6, Pop!_OS 24.04 Alpha 5, detecting whether a process is inside a virtual machine, drawing graphics to NetBSD terminal, Nix ported to FreeBSD, GhostBSD hosting desktop conference |
| • Issue 1105 (2025-01-20): CentOS 10 Stream, old Flatpak bundles in software centres, Haiku ports Iceweasel, Oracle shows off debugging tools, rsync vulnerability patched |
| • Issue 1104 (2025-01-13): DAT Linux 2.0, Silly things to do with a minimal computer, Budgie prepares Wayland only releases, SteamOS coming to third-party devices, Murena upgrades its base |
| • Issue 1103 (2025-01-06): elementary OS 8.0, filtering ads with Pi-hole, Debian testing its installer, Pop!_OS faces delays, Ubuntu Studio upgrades not working, Absolute discontinued |
| • Issue 1102 (2024-12-23): Best distros of 2024, changing a process name, Fedora to expand Btrfs support and releases Asahi Remix 41, openSUSE patches out security sandbox and donations from Bottles while ending support for Leap 15.5 |
| • Issue 1101 (2024-12-16): GhostBSD 24.10.1, sending attachments from the command line, openSUSE shows off GPU assignment tool, UBports publishes security update, Murena launches its first tablet, Xfce 4.20 released |
| • Issue 1100 (2024-12-09): Oreon 9.3, differences in speed, IPFire's new appliance, Fedora Asahi Remix gets new video drivers, openSUSE Leap Micro updated, Redox OS running Redox OS |
| • Issue 1099 (2024-12-02): AnduinOS 1.0.1, measuring RAM usage, SUSE continues rebranding efforts, UBports prepares for next major version, Murena offering non-NFC phone |
| • Issue 1098 (2024-11-25): Linux Lite 7.2, backing up specific folders, Murena and Fairphone partner in fair trade deal, Arch installer gets new text interface, Ubuntu security tool patched |
| • Issue 1097 (2024-11-18): Chimera Linux vs Chimera OS, choosing between AlmaLinux and Debian, Fedora elevates KDE spin to an edition, Fedora previews new installer, KDE testing its own distro, Qubes-style isolation coming to FreeBSD |
| • Issue 1096 (2024-11-11): Bazzite 40, Playtron OS Alpha 1, Tucana Linux 3.1, detecting Screen sessions, Redox imports COSMIC software centre, FreeBSD booting on the PinePhone Pro, LXQt supports Wayland window managers |
| • Issue 1095 (2024-11-04): Fedora 41 Kinoite, transferring applications between computers, openSUSE Tumbleweed receives multiple upgrades, Ubuntu testing compiler optimizations, Mint partners with Framework |
| • Issue 1094 (2024-10-28): DebLight OS 1, backing up crontab, AlmaLinux introduces Litten branch, openSUSE unveils refreshed look, Ubuntu turns 20
| | • Issue 1093 (2024-10-21): Kubuntu 24.10, atomic vs immutable distributions, Debian upgrading Perl packages, UBports adding VoLTE support, Android to gain native GNU/Linux application support |
| • Issue 1092 (2024-10-14): FunOS 24.04.1, a home directory inside a file, work starts of openSUSE Leap 16.0, improvements in Haiku, KDE neon upgrades its base |
| • Issue 1091 (2024-10-07): Redox OS 0.9.0, Unified package management vs universal package formats, Redox begins RISC-V port, Mint polishes interface, Qubes certifies new laptop |
| • Issue 1090 (2024-09-30): Rhino Linux 2024.2, commercial distros with alternative desktops, Valve seeks to improve Wayland performance, HardenedBSD parterns with Protectli, Tails merges with Tor Project, Quantum Leap partners with the FreeBSD Foundation |
| • Issue 1089 (2024-09-23): Expirion 6.0, openKylin 2.0, managing configuration files, the future of Linux development, fixing bugs in Haiku, Slackware packages dracut |
| • Issue 1088 (2024-09-16): PorteuX 1.6, migrating from Windows 10 to which Linux distro, making NetBSD immutable, AlmaLinux offers hardware certification, Mint updates old APT tools |
| • Issue 1087 (2024-09-09): COSMIC desktop, running cron jobs at variable times, UBports highlights new apps, HardenedBSD offers work around for FreeBSD change, Debian considers how to cull old packages, systemd ported to musl |
| • Issue 1086 (2024-09-02): Vanilla OS 2, command line tips for simple tasks, FreeBSD receives investment from STF, openSUSE Tumbleweed update can break network connections, Debian refreshes media |
| • Issue 1085 (2024-08-26): Nobara 40, OpenMandriva 24.07 "ROME", distros which include source code, FreeBSD publishes quarterly report, Microsoft updates breaks Linux in dual-boot environments |
| • Issue 1084 (2024-08-19): Liya 2.0, dual boot with encryption, Haiku introduces performance improvements, Gentoo dropping IA-64, Redcore merges major upgrade |
| • Issue 1083 (2024-08-12): TrueNAS 24.04.2 "SCALE", Linux distros for smartphones, Redox OS introduces web server, PipeWire exposes battery drain on Linux, Canonical updates kernel version policy |
| • Issue 1082 (2024-08-05): Linux Mint 22, taking snapshots of UFS on FreeBSD, openSUSE updates Tumbleweed and Aeon, Debian creates Tiny QA Tasks, Manjaro testing immutable images |
| • Issue 1081 (2024-07-29): SysLinuxOS 12.4, OpenBSD gain hardware acceleration, Slackware changes kernel naming, Mint publishes upgrade instructions |
| • Issue 1080 (2024-07-22): Running GNU/Linux on Android with Andronix, protecting network services, Solus dropping AppArmor and Snap, openSUSE Aeon Desktop gaining full disk encryption, SUSE asks openSUSE to change its branding |
| • Issue 1079 (2024-07-15): Ubuntu Core 24, hiding files on Linux, Fedora dropping X11 packages on Workstation, Red Hat phasing out GRUB, new OpenSSH vulnerability, FreeBSD speeds up release cycle, UBports testing new first-run wizard |
| • Issue 1078 (2024-07-08): Changing init software, server machines running desktop environments, OpenSSH vulnerability patched, Peppermint launches new edition, HardenedBSD updates ports |
| • Issue 1077 (2024-07-01): The Unity and Lomiri interfaces, different distros for different tasks, Ubuntu plans to run Wayland on NVIDIA cards, openSUSE updates Leap Micro, Debian releases refreshed media, UBports gaining contact synchronisation, FreeDOS celebrates its 30th anniversary |
| • Issue 1076 (2024-06-24): openSUSE 15.6, what makes Linux unique, SUSE Liberty Linux to support CentOS Linux 7, SLE receives 19 years of support, openSUSE testing Leap Micro edition |
| • Issue 1075 (2024-06-17): Redox OS, X11 and Wayland on the BSDs, AlmaLinux releases Pi build, Canonical announces RISC-V laptop with Ubuntu, key changes in systemd |
| • Issue 1074 (2024-06-10): Endless OS 6.0.0, distros with init diversity, Mint to filter unverified Flatpaks, Debian adds systemd-boot options, Redox adopts COSMIC desktop, OpenSSH gains new security features |
| • Issue 1073 (2024-06-03): LXQt 2.0.0, an overview of Linux desktop environments, Canonical partners with Milk-V, openSUSE introduces new features in Aeon Desktop, Fedora mirrors see rise in traffic, Wayland adds OpenBSD support |
| • Issue 1072 (2024-05-27): Manjaro 24.0, comparing init software, OpenBSD ports Plasma 6, Arch community debates mirror requirements, ThinOS to upgrade its FreeBSD core |
| • Issue 1071 (2024-05-20): Archcraft 2024.04.06, common command line mistakes, ReactOS imports WINE improvements, Haiku makes adjusting themes easier, NetBSD takes a stand against code generated by chatbots |
| • Issue 1070 (2024-05-13): Damn Small Linux 2024, hiding kernel messages during boot, Red Hat offers AI edition, new web browser for UBports, Fedora Asahi Remix 40 released, Qubes extends support for version 4.1 |
| • Issue 1069 (2024-05-06): Ubuntu 24.04, installing packages in alternative locations, systemd creates sudo alternative, Mint encourages XApps collaboration, FreeBSD publishes quarterly update |
| • Issue 1068 (2024-04-29): Fedora 40, transforming one distro into another, Debian elects new Project Leader, Red Hat extends support cycle, Emmabuntus adds accessibility features, Canonical's new security features |
| • Issue 1067 (2024-04-22): LocalSend for transferring files, detecting supported CPU architecure levels, new visual design for APT, Fedora and openSUSE working on reproducible builds, LXQt released, AlmaLinux re-adds hardware support |
| • Full list of all issues |
| Star Labs |
Star Labs - Laptops built for Linux.
View our range including the highly anticipated StarFighter. Available with coreboot open-source firmware and a choice of Ubuntu, elementary, Manjaro and more. Visit Star Labs for information, to buy and get support.
|
| Random Distribution | 
AV Linux
AV Linux is a versatile, Debian-based distribution featuring a large collection of audio and video production software. Additionally, it also includes a custom kernel with IRQ threading enabled for low-latency audio performance. AV Linux can be run directly from a live DVD or a live USB storage device, though it can also be installed on a hard disk and used as a general-purpose operating system for everyday tasks.
Status: Active
|
| TUXEDO |
TUXEDO Computers - Linux Hardware in a tailor made suite
Choose from a wide range of laptops and PCs in various sizes and shapes at TUXEDOComputers.com. Every machine comes pre-installed and ready-to-run with Linux. Full 24 months of warranty and lifetime support included!
Learn more about our full service package and all benefits from buying at TUXEDO.
|
| Star Labs |
Star Labs - Laptops built for Linux.
View our range including the highly anticipated StarFighter. Available with coreboot open-source firmware and a choice of Ubuntu, elementary, Manjaro and more. Visit Star Labs for information, to buy and get support.
|
|
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
