On 2015.09.07 15:31, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 02:45:25PM -0500, Brian F. Yulga wrote:
On 2015.09.07 02:14, Michal Kubecek wrote:
I always detested the Microsoftisch way of commerce that implicated that if you do not get the latest of hardware you are out of using our Microsoft-ware. Reason for me to abandon that company since windows 3.1.1 Really, this is getting ridiculous. Could we, please, stop confusing the
On Monday 07 of September 2015 13:44:27 C. Brouerius van Nidek wrote: things by calling 12 year old machines "latest of hardware" and similar? Consumer grade 64-bit CPU's are with us since 2003, maybe even longer. In the world of home user PC's, 12 years is ages. Since consumer-grade 32-bit and 64-bit CPUs existed in the market concurrently for several years, it would be better to state when 32-bit "new" systems ceased being sold. This is probably somewhere around 2007-2010. Referencing the minimum system requirements for 13.2 ...
- https://en.opensuse.org/Hardware_requirements (Pentium* III 500 MHz, 1 GB physical RAM)
... we can speculate/infer that 13.2 can run on equipment 15 years old, and Leap perhaps 8 years old.
I'm far from denying there are still 32-bit machines around and running. But calling 64-bit systems in general "shiny new" or "latest of hardware" in order to draw a picture that 64-bit consumer hardware is some novelty only the wealthy of us can afford, that is a blatant manipulation and twisting the reality.
Back in 2005, you could say "latest of hardware". But now we have 2015 and only the oldest consumer PC's are 32-bit. x86_64 is not a novelty, it's not "latest of hardware" (most of them, of course) or "shiny new", it's the vast majority. Pretending that dropping i586 means "if you do not get the latest of hardware you are out" is an enormous exaggeration at best. I don't think this is the intent of the _general_ discussion point surrounding 32-bit support. It's _not_ an argument that 64-bit systems are so new that 32-bit cannot be dropped. Nor the opposite end of the spectrum, of trying to use legacy systems from the 1990s [1].
A 10-year old machine with 2 GB of RAM is still adequate for some purposes; X environments such as LXDE and XFCE enable these machines to be useful for light tasks (e-mail, simple web browsing). If the CPU supports 64-bit, there may be no practical advantage of a 64-bit OS in this situation, and may instead cause reduction in available resources (RAM, disk space).
I think we should just be straightforward about what will be "left behind" with the change to 64-bit only, regardless of whether 32-bit use is due to choice or "necessity".
As far as the hardware, it is -- to quote from a movie -- "old, but not obsolete". Please read my mail again, carefully. You should notice it wasn't about how/if the 32-bit hardware is obsolete. All it was about was the absurdity of calling 64-bit systems in general "latest of hardware". Your response therefore completely misses its point.
Michal Kubeček
I wrote "_general_ discussion point", replying to both your response and what led to it, for which I do not think there was any suggestion that 64-bit is "shiny new". I also don't think anyone here is trying to argue that 12 year old machines are "latest of hardware". -- Brian Y. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org