On 24/07/2010 13:14, Alan Bell wrote: > on the other hand, I use 64bit on a few machines. Works just fine for > me, flash and all. I don't think it makes a massive difference though, > you could do either. I had no end of problems with 64-Bit Ubuntu, I ended up going back to 32-Bit. No doubt I'll probably re-visit it though in the future when I have time. > There is probably an argument that everyone should move in a 64bit > direction so that one day the 32 bit build can be dropped (you can't > upgrade from 32bit to 64bit without a reinstall) if you want to keep > your install forever, just upgrading each time and upgrading the > hardware as you go, then I would start with 64bit. On the other hand it's no biggie to reinstall keeping your home directory contents. Personally I have my home directory on a separate partition. No doubt eventually 32-Bit support will be dropped, but on the other hand that will also cause a whole load of machines (pre-AMD64 AMD chips and pre-EM64T Intel chips) to loose support for the OS. To be fair though I suppose that most people with servers these days probably have 64-Bit capable CPUs and desktops and notebooks that aren't 64-Bit capable are probably getting on a bit now (easily 4 to 5 years old I'd guess) so maybe in a couple of years these sort of machines are probably going to be retired anyway.
Rob -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
