There are still a few compatibility issues related to 64-bit Linux primarily because of various closed-source vendors' lag in providing 64-bit versions of their programs. Notable examples of programs include Skype and Java. Taking into consideration the small market share, it will take patience.

Hi !

For the most part the 64 bit OS has very little poularity with desk top users. While I think that Windows Vista 64 bit operates some apps many distros do not.

Most Mobo's won't recognise over something like 17 GB anyway and I cant think of a 32 bit os that recogognises over like 4 GB RAM. In fact, many distro's wont read over 3.5 GB and windows 32 bit OS's I think only actually reads something like 3.2 GB in actual RAM.

Basically, Unless you plan on running a server room that rivals the NASA Space Centre or some other series of apps of rediculously outrageuos complexity, You wont necessarily need a bunch of RAM and a 64 bit OS is bordering on pointless.

64 bit OS's are far superior to their 32 bit counter parts in at least some aspects, and in my view, people should drop the 32 bit OS and stop MFG. it altogether. Then again, I've seen some people say that they think the 64 bit stuff is just a glossy ploy.....Take your pick.

In the end, I think that 512 bit OS's will likely come into play many decades from now and while that is probably a long way off, I for one think the point is that as systems and software become more demanding, the need for things such as CTX mobo's, 512 bit OS's, 32 core CPU's, and cordless HDD's will become the norm, rather than the exception.

Of course most of what I mentioned does not even exist yet. YET. But of course in ten years the 32 bit OS will likely be as rare as the 128 MB RAM.

In five years or so, most even basic home computers will become lightning fast. This will likely depend on the 64 bit archteture more and more.


Steve

quote:

A legacy of things past that are no longer needed



That's why I switched to Linux !! ;-}

@ Steve Williams :

"Most Mobo's won't recognise over something like 17 GB anyway and I cant think of a 32 bit os that recogognises over like 4 GB RAM. In fact, many distro's wont read over 3.5 GB and windows 32 bit OS's I think only actually reads something like 3.2 GB in actual RAM."

If you compile your own kernel, in the HIGHMEM options, you'll find that Linux supports PAE (Page Address Extensions) which support a 64GiB address space on 32bit.

Distro's like SuSE have shipped a "bigsmp" kernel for years, which was installed if you have multi-processor, but now thanks to SMP alternatives, is only needed if you want to acess 4GiB physical RAM or more. In practice this actually supports 8GiB RAM, before over issues interfere.

64bit OS, comes at a price, the doubling of pointer sizes, which increases the size of programs, thus memory bloat effects reduce the advantages of AMD 64's larger number of registers, and cleaned up architecture.

On my AMD 64 box with 4GiB, I generally run the 32bit Linux, which despite PAE is only very slightly slower than AMD 64 version, and PAE can be avoided by installing a default kernel, at cost of making some of the physical RAM unaddressable (due to hardware like graphics card mapping it's memory into the 4GiB address space).


As for the compatability issues, the distro's let you run 32bit binaries on AMD64, but there are problems with the 64bit wrappers for 32bit plugins, that would go away completely if Vendors recompiled for 64bit Linux.

All in all, for desktop use, even with a huge amount of RAM, the 32bit Linux is fine, but the enthusiast can do most things installing 64bit.

Furthermore if you run x86_64, you can install Virtual Box, and then install 32bit Linux for maximum compatability with dodgy websites.

Message Edited by RobRunsLinux on 12-13-2007 08:56 AM

Dell do a BIOS, it can screw up things like ACPI, by using M$'s compiler which accepts invalid code. But that normally isn't very important on desktop.

Linux, uses the hardware directly, that means it can re-tweak things to run well. So I'd be rather interested to see how they'd make the hardware "Windows" only.

Rob

I read your note with great interest, and I learned a great deal. I am facsinated by the fact I can put four 8 GB DDR 2's in this thing and never reach its full potential.

That's insane.

I see what you meant compiling for 64 bit and these issues will go awy completely, which I in favour of BTW, however I am in a pickle. Dell is obviously 'tweaking' their mobos to run on a specific OS {Windows P.O.S. in my case} and I am having a bad time gitting linux to run on my AMD Athlon 64 BTX mobo.

I just recieved an email stating I should consider selling it on EBay to get out from under a box that simply does not work.

Is there a way you can help me ?????

I really don't want to sell my Dell ! - But I will !!

Do you know of a way I can remove these 'tweaks' from the mobo ?

Thanks !

Steve

Dell customise BIOS but as Linux won't use it when running, it's only the ACPI code which should ought to cause any problems, and that is not a show stopper on desktop.

In years, I have never heard of someone having to change a MOBO because of "tweaking" for Windows. You should be more specific about the issues you have running Linux, in a thread, and then we'll see.

Both Windows XP/Vista & Linux are multi-tasking OS, optimisations for one are likely to be OK for the other. Linux does not use the BIOS code, once it has loaded, it may adjust timings and use it's own fixups.

Don't believe everything you hear. Boot up a LIVE CD and see what hardware is recognised, whether there's errors (in dmesg output), you should be able to copy logs into web email to save them, even if you can't figure out how to save the files to disk.

Rob

quote:

Dell do a BIOS, it can screw up things like ACPI, by using M$'s compiler which accepts invalid code. But that normally isn't very important on desktop.

Please clarify "Dell do a BIOS,..." I'm not able to make sense of this - Sorry.

I spoke to a Dell tech a few days ago and he aknowledged that Dell does do their "tweaks" to their BTX, but he prefers the word "Optimize" to run on Windows {in this case}....

I am being told by people that all OEM's tweak thier mobo's and I will have trouble running the Linux OS on it no matter what, unless I switch the mobo to something else.

I really need a resolution to this issue. Windows is junk and I really am in a situation where I need to switch to linux.....

Thanx !

Steve

Rob

DreamLinux recognises ALL my hard ware. {Except onboard sound} but I get horrible boot errors like fsck died with exit status 8. press control D to continue on MMGL.

MME works almost perfect {except now it won't reinstall on the HDD cuz of me dirtying the HDD.}

UBUNTU 7.04 freezes the entire computer up from the live CD and does nothing all

Windows vista crashed 22 times +...

I have been told that anytime you try to run linux on a computer that you did not build your self, your gonna have problems. Several folks have said this to me.

Linux is not simply installing and running, It is giving me all sorts of errors. I've lost six months of trying to fix it, But I am NOT a knowledgeable person when it comes to computers. I did not buy it to tinker with. I simply want to install it and be done with it...

I have written a 39 page book on all the errors I'm getting and I'm not any closer to a resolution. I've replaced nearly every piece of hardware in this thing except the mobo fan and power supply, and nothing.

I don't know the fisrt thing about computers, so I've spent like six hundred bucks on a part here and there cuz each peson I asked has said it must be this specificic part or another says it is that specific part till my mobo is now full. I've got a small server going here. Thats great, But my server does not work, at all.

Between windows and Linux I have nearly 100 installs.

Now DreamLinux MME does not install at all cuz a suggestion ruined my HDD, and I have no idea how to fix it.

As far as me not believing what I hear, Why am I being told that any time I buy a OEM computer , I am gonna have problems with running Linux on it ?

Also, do you wish for me to print all 39 pages of my book here ??

It should only take a few weeks or so...

Thank you !

Steve



Edit Edit Edit Edit Edit Edit


Also, the information must go THROUGH something. Like a path. This is where the issue seems to be, in that path.

Thank you !

Steve

Message Edited by Steve...Williams on 12-14-2007 06:21 PM