> On Nov 23, 2016, at 1:49 AM, Tim Blechmann <t...@klingt.org> wrote: > > hi all, > >>>> The currently sold CPU's are not really the measurement stick here. The >>>> measurement stick is actually installed Win 32 systems. >>> Yes, but what's the 32-bit Windows install base which is capable of running >>> Qt? We only support Windows 7 and above now, so I can't imagine it's very >>> many. Perhaps we should try to find some metrics to base our decision on. >> >> That's an important point: since Qt 5.7, we no longer support anything older >> than Windows 7. That was the first Windows with decent 64-bit support and >> computers with Windows 7, 8, 8.1 and now 10 tended to come with the 64-bit >> version pre-installed. So the chances of users running 64-bit Windows are >> much >> higher now. > > when using qt inside a plugin it is not necessarily a question how many > users are on 64-bit windows, but how many are on 64-bit hosts, as 32-bit > host can run on 64-bit windows.
True, and this is a good point. Many Windows applications are still 32-bit. > > i don't care about the binary packages, though. as long as i can still > build from sources, i'm fine ... but please don't completely drop > support for 32-bit windows. Of course this is out of the question (and would be of little to no benefit to Qt). We're talking ONLY about binary packages here, not to worry. :) > > cheers, > tim > > > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development -- Jake Petroules - jake.petrou...@qt.io The Qt Company - Silicon Valley Qbs build tool evangelist - qbs.io _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
