Steven Kurylo wrote:
>>> I'm about ready to junk this 64-bit system and go back to 32. 8-(
>> Other than to say you did it, I don't see any reason to run a 64-bit
>> system.
Well... it is fairly necessary if you want to work with larger amounts
of RAM, and it does make better use of your processor's capabilities,
since you can assume at least SSE2 with all 64 bit CPUs. Plus, the
compiler can do lots of optimizations you can't assume in 32bit, because
of larger cache and more registers. As well, I've noticed that certain
bits of motherboard support to do with sensors and ACPI seem to work
better under a 64 bit kernel, but those are support issues that could
have been ironed out by now.
Sure, the average user won't notice a difference, but I certainly have,
and I wouldn't go back. I certainly haven't had the problems with 64 bit
installs that everyone's been reporting here. With the minor exception
of remembering to do package updates in my 32bit chroot environment, I
find that there's really not much requiring more work on 64bit than
32bit. And, I can safely say that a 64bit install of Linux is massively
less painful than one of Windows. ;)
Graeme
Received on Wed Apr 18 20:00:34 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 18 2007 - 20:00:43 CST