Linux Format forums Forum Index Linux Format forums
Help, discussion, magazine feedback and more
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

32 or 64 bit cover discs?
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Linux Format forums Forum Index -> Magazine and coverdiscs
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Should we include 64 bit distros on the cover DVDs?
No, 32 bit works for everyone
21%
 21%  [ 4 ]
Every distro should come with 32 bit and 64 bit versions
15%
 15%  [ 3 ]
Yes, 32 bit is old hat and should be ignored
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Compromise by including some distros as 64 bit instead of 32 bit
63%
 63%  [ 12 ]
Total Votes : 19

Author Message
NETTKNUT



Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2012 8:59 pm
Posts: 3
Location: WALES

PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 9:16 pm    Post subject: Cover disc 32 or 64 Reply with quote

Since everyone can run 32-bit OSs I see no reason for 64-bit. If there is an alternative 64-bit distro available why not put a link on the disc? This will give the most up to date version; those on the cover disc are at least a month old I think!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wyliecoyoteuk
LXF regular


Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 11:41 pm
Posts: 3422
Location: Birmingham, UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

heiowge wrote:
Agreed, but in all fairness, a pre-64 bit machine might struggle to run Fedora 16 or the like. I see no reason to release that as a 32 bit version on the disc. Lubuntu, yes. Puppy, yes. OpenSuse 12.1, no. Ubuntu 11.10 no.

Ubuntu 11.10 runs perfectly well on our 32bit netbooks
_________________
The sig between the asterisks is so cool that only REALLY COOL people can even see it!

*************** ************
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ram
LXF regular


Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 10:44 pm
Posts: 1658
Location: Guisborough

PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wyliecoyoteuk wrote:
heiowge wrote:
Agreed, but in all fairness, a pre-64 bit machine might struggle to run Fedora 16 or the like. I see no reason to release that as a 32 bit version on the disc. Lubuntu, yes. Puppy, yes. OpenSuse 12.1, no. Ubuntu 11.10 no.

Ubuntu 11.10 runs perfectly well on our 32bit netbooks


Doesn't on mine, realtek alc268 chipset, no speaker sound.
_________________

lubuntu LXDE 13.10 running on AMD Phenom II*4; ASUS Crosshair III Formula MB; 4 GB Ram.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
wyliecoyoteuk
LXF regular


Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 11:41 pm
Posts: 3422
Location: Birmingham, UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ram wrote:
wyliecoyoteuk wrote:

Ubuntu 11.10 runs perfectly well on our 32bit netbooks


Doesn't on mine, realtek alc268 chipset, no speaker sound.


Sorry about that, but it is hardly relevant to the 32/64bit issue is it?
I was pointing out that 11.10 can run happily on 32 bit hardware.
_________________
The sig between the asterisks is so cool that only REALLY COOL people can even see it!

*************** ************
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
droseraholic



Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:38 am
Posts: 17
Location: Wales, UK

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree with heiowge:

Use 64-bit on the Cover DVD for the latest "heavier" distros (Ubuntu, Fedora, SUSE, Mint, etc), and 32-bit for the "lighter" versions that use less resources (Puppy, Tinycore, Lubuntu, maybe Xubuntu), and benefit older machines.

I too still have a couple of 32-bit machines, the old original Acer Aspire One netbook (as described in the LinuxFormat mini-booklet that came with the magazine around the time these machines were released), and an old desktop (that I'm aiming to get rid off). I have a nettop (Zotac ZBOX AD02) and Lenovo ThinkPad X121e, both using the AMD "Fusion" (E-350) cpu, which are 64-bit dual core, and both with 8Gb RAM, so need 64-bit distros for these.

Incidentally, starting from Ubuntu 12.04, Canonical will be recommending 64-bit by default:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTAxMTQ

Also, almost all new Windows 7 PCs of whatever type (desktop, nettop, netbook, laptop) are now using 64-bit CPUs and ship with 64-bit versions of Windows pre-installed.

So, certainly by the end of the year, I would be in favour of the majority of LinuxFormat Cover DVDs carrying 64-bit editions of distros (where appropriate).

Incidentally, whilst I do have broadband I find the LinuxFormat cover DVDs to be invaluable: they enable me to try out distros and software without going over my monthly download limit!
_________________
Kind regards,

Adam. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DavidMcCrossan
LXF regular


Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:46 am
Posts: 320

PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 4:37 pm    Post subject: 32 or 64 bit coverdisks? Reply with quote

Stay with 32-bit, please.

Best

David
Noted local Luddite....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NETTKNUT



Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2012 8:59 pm
Posts: 3
Location: WALES

PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 6:27 pm    Post subject: 32 or 64 bit cover disc. Reply with quote

I see that this month's CD has two 64-bit distros on it; so it has become a fait accompli. I have had further thoughts on this question and it seems that a move to a dual layer CD might be the answer. This would provide plenty of extra room. Also not all Linux users have or want the latest all singing all dancing features on their machines, indeed there are plenty of distros for older slower machines such as Puppy Linux. A dual layer disc would allow a wider range of these to be featured regularly on the CD. For many years I subscribed to the now defunct Personal Computer World which had a dual layer CD as standard and always had a Linux section on it; If it was good enough for PCW it should be good enough for Linux Format. Just a thought.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
migrating_to_linux



Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 1:14 am
Posts: 35
Location: United States, Midwest, Central Time Zone

PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 7:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

geek73666 wrote:
Isn't Linux format always going on about how Linux can 'resurrect old machines'? Using 64-bit distros would make that hard, especially for older machines.


+1

Keep 32bit. Include 64bit as well for those who might prefer it.
_________________
Puppy Linux FAQ
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nelz
Site admin


Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 12:52 pm
Posts: 8364
Location: Warrington, UK

PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's not a fait accompli, it is one disc that reflects the results of the poll. There is only the one 64 bit distro (Grml is a 32 bit distro with the option to boot with a 64 bit kernel, essential for a rescue disc). As for distros like Puppy Linux, well, that is on the DVD.

1 64 bit distro
1 hybrid 32 & 64 bit distro
5 32 bit distros including a couple for older hardware

That not only reflects the opinions expressed in this topic, but yours too. I can't comment on the possibility of a dual layer disc, apart from noting the added complications of authoring such a beast, but I imagine cost would be a factor. Double sided discs are an occasional feature and less troublesome.

However, even with twice the space, the same arguments apply and including two of everything just because there is more space is not always the best option. There is stuff I would have included on next month's DVD if I'd had an extra 4GB to play with, but it wouldn't have been extra copies of the same distros.
_________________
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." (Albert Einstein)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
brightidea



Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 12:16 pm
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 10:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd like to see 64 bit, but only because its a new starting point of hardware capabilities rather than 32 bit distros compiled for older standards.

From a LXF pov, I suppose they should be thinking why they provide the disk, that would probably steer things in the best direction.

personally, used 64 bit for 4+ years, maybe play with the provided distros, but i could actually not have the disk and still be happy with my subscription. do play with the distros on there, but only because i have it, how many ppl here would have no chance of downloading a distro with todays broadband availability, as i only really download something that either takes my interest or has a good LXF review/article.

Thing to take from it though, not everyone will be happy with with whatever change is made, but then that's what makes linux users such an interesting bunch
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
7bluehand



Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 12:50 am
Posts: 1
Location: Southern California

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2012 1:03 am    Post subject: 64-bit please Reply with quote

Hi,
I've been reading Linux Format for a little over a year and I quite enjoy using the coverdiscs. However, I have two computers, one is 32-bit and the other is 64-bit, and although the coverdiscs can run on both computers, if I were to actually install one of the distros onto hard drive, I would only install the distro provided on the older, 32-bit PC that I own. In fact, just recently, after Backtrack was included in the magazine, I actually went online and downloaded the 64-bit version of Backtrack so I could install it on my newer PC. Personally, I think it's kind of a hassle to read about something for which a disc is provided and then have to go online to download the latest (64-bit) version because the disc provided only has the 32-bit version.

So with that said, I vote for a compromise of both. The discs should include 32-bit and 64-bit versions of some distros, then perhaps other distros could be only 32-bit such as Lubuntu, Puppy, and other light distros.

Thanks
_________________
All I know is that I know nothing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cushie



Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:41 pm
Posts: 37
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:32 pm    Post subject: LXF DVD152 Reply with quote

I noted there were only 19 votes cast before the vote was closed on this forum, so I've missed that chance.

I would appreciate a mix of 32/64 each month so as to try and please everyone with something to play.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
davourak



Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 2:31 pm
Posts: 39

PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:13 pm    Post subject: 64-bit is the way to go Reply with quote

I just booted LXFDVD160 to run Linux Mint 13. To my surprise it said it was 64-bit on the menu. But, I thought, my PC is only 32-bit, as this is my really old Celeron-based PC that I hardly use. But the 64-bit live Linux Mint ran perfectly. A bit of searching online reveals that some Celeron processors were made 64-bit, which mine must be. So I think all the distros should be the 64-bit versions, as some even really old hardware was 64-bit anyway.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Linux Format forums Forum Index -> Magazine and coverdiscs All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Linux Format forums topic RSS feed 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


Copyright 2011 Future Publishing, all rights reserved.


Web hosting by UKFast