On Thu, 2007-11-22 at 11:19 -0700, Chris Gehlker wrote:
> I tried installing 64-bit Ubuntu desktop just because I could and
> discovered:
>
> It takes a lot longer to launch.
> Firefox doesn't work, at least not out of the box.
> Gnome won't mount WebDAV shares.
>
> So out of curiosity I went to the web to find out a little about 64-
> bit OSes and this seems to be the conventional wisdom:
>
> There are no advantages to 64-bit OSes that offset the losses from
> bigger code due to bigger pointers and integers
> There are classes of applications that can really benefit from 64-
> bithood, especially those that memory map big files.
> 32-bit OSes can be written to support 64-bit applications at least on
> Intel and PowerPC.
>
> So why is Linux moving in the direction of separate 32-bit and 64-bit
> builds? Is it just to remain portable on less popular hardware?
----
I've been using Fedora 7 86_64 at work on a fair amount of desktops and
it works well, including Firefox, including nspluginwrapper for 32 bit
Flash and Acrobat plugins and people are happy.
There must be something wrong in your setup or hardware because it
should work well...including launch times.
Craig
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)