M.Lewis wrote:
> With the upcoming release of FC6, I'm wondering if anyone can offer their
> thoughts on the x86_64 flavor. I've seen some discouraging posts about
> x86_64. I'm wondering if there are positive thoughts about x86_64 as
> well.
Positive:
the more memory you have in your computer, the more likely you are to
see 32 bit issues with a 32 bit OS. 64 bit gets around this.
It's faster.
Many (most?) Open Source developers and power users have already
transitioned to 64 bit, at least on the desktop, so there's a lot of
testing and support out there.
Nearly all open source software works perfectly when compiled as 64 bit.
OpenOffice is now 64 bit (on FC6). Wine remains 32 bit for obvious
reasons (it has to work with 32 bit Windows software). You should have
no problems with Fedora-provided software.
There should be no problem with running 32 bit user-mode software on a
64 bit OS (although it may demand that you install a lot of other 32 bit
software for compatibility. Yum can usually help with this...)
x86-64 is going to become the standard PC instruction set. You can get
there now.
Negative:
x86 is still the standard PC instruction set, so you benefit from weight
of numbers.
A lot of closed source software is only provided for x86.
I understand Dosemu *won't* work in 64 bit mode -- x86-64 drops 16 bit
compatibility (hooray!)
32 bit software takes up less memory and disk space.
Getting 32 bit software to work on a 64 bit OS is often more work than
getting it to work on a 32 bit OS (especially true for things like
browser plugins, codecs, and older closed source software).
I must have been on x86-64 for a couple of years now -- I don't regret
it.
James.
--
E-mail: james@ | Legacy (adj): an uncomplimentary computer-industry
aprilcottage.co.uk | epithet that means 'it works'.
| -- Anthony DeBoer
