On Thursday, 12 April 2018 18:18:15 CEST you wrote:
> Johan Ymerson wrote on 04/12/2018 10:03 AM:
> > Sure there are 32-bit desktops out there, therefor I wrote pretty dead,
> > not
> > completely dead ;-)
> > Two years ago, Ubuntu did a poll and 92% answered they used the 64-bit
> > version.
> I have a couple of 64-bit machines too, and would have answered in the
> affirmative (if I used Ubuntu). Unless the question asked "do you use ONLY
> the 64-bit version", you are drawing an unwarranted conclusion.
> > Maintaining a 32-bit desktop is getting harder and harder. Bugs that only
> > affect i386 is getting more common as hardly anyone testing new versions
> > run i386. And the 3GB memory per process limit is starting to be a real
> > issue. The larger distributions will probably drop i386 support in a year
> > or two.
> Please, stick to facts. None of those statements is true, except possibly
> the last (I have no insight into what the plans may or may not be for
> "larger distributions").
Let's not get into a technical Linux discussion here. We hams probably keep 
old computers around way longer than the average user. The (sad) truth is that 
most people today see their laptops and phones etc as consumables that you 
through away after a couple of years.

> Anyway, my basic point, and trying to keep this relevant to the topic to
> hand, is that for Elecraft to require 64-bit hardware seems to be an
> arbitrary imposition, as there is no other obvious reason for said
> requirement to be imposed on a shack computer.
>   Doc  N7DR

I agree that providing both a 32-bit and a 64-bit version would be nice. But 
if Elecraft need to chose between either 32-bit or 64-bit (and two versions 
obviously cost more than one to maintain), then 64-bit is the obvious choice 

/Johan, SM0XHJ

Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Reply via email to