On Saturday 24 January 2009 08:06:10 Randall R Schulz wrote:
My point was simply to respond to the point about swapping by saying
that bigger programs will have an increased probability of swapping on
any given hardware configuration (amount of RAM) and every single
program will be bigger when compiled for and run on a 64-bit
architecture. And it's not just the code, it's also the data that are
inflated on a 64-bit model.
I've been around long enough to clearly remember the same arguments that were made in
favor of 8-bit systems when 16-bit systems were new, and 16-bit systems when 32-bit
systems were new. There are undoubtedly specific applications today that will run better
on a 32-bit system.
However, few computers specifically target a single such application. We expect ours to
be able to run whatever we decide to put on it, today or next year, or even three or four
years from now.
I think that makes a very compelling argument for exploiting the 64-bit capability
that's been available in most of our processors for a good many years now. So long
that Microsoft won't be releasing any new 32-bit operating systems beyond Server
RAM and disk storage are so relatively cheap these days, that it hardly matters if an
operating system needs a little more of either one in order to run smoothly. However, on
obsolete hardware, a 32-bit operating system - such as it was designed for - might be the
only viable option.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help(a)opensuse.org