On Thursday, September 05, 2013 21:52:49 Rohan Garg wrote: > On Thursday 05 Sep 2013 12:11:22 PM Scott Kitterman wrote: > > On Thursday, September 05, 2013 21:20:51 Rohan Garg wrote: > > > > >> Below is the summary of above changes on the ubuntu.com/download > > > > > > > > > >pages > > > > > > > > > >> for 13.10: > > > > >> > > > > >> http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop > > > > >> ================================== > > > > >> > > > > >> In both download boxes (LTS & 13.10): > > > > >> > > > > >> * On the right hand side above the "Choose your flavour" replace: > > > > >> > > > > >> "If you have a PC with the Windows 8 logo or UEFI firmware, choose > > > > >the 64-bit download. Read more" > > > > > > > > > >> with > > > > >> > > > > >> "If you have an older PC with less than 2GB of memory, choose the > > > > >> 32-bit download." > > > > >> > > > > >> * Update the Choose your flavour drop-downs, with first option - > > > > >> the > > > > >> default: - 64-bit > > > > >> - 32-bit (for machines with less than 2GB RAM) > > > > >> > > > > >> When the drop-down is expanded, 64-bit should be listed first. > > > > >> > > > > >> http://www.ubuntu.com/download/server > > > > > > Quote from original email ^^ ( specifically for the desktop edition ) > > > > Thanks. IIRC, there were Atom 32 systems sold with 2GB of RAM, but I'm > > not > > 100% sure. > > > > I particularly don't think this should be done for 12.04 (as this > > proposes) > > since multi-arch was in a much less deployed state back then. For 12.04, > > I'd also worry about a user wanting to install some third party 32 bit > > only > > package and discovering it won't work due to some library not yet > > converted. They end up then having to reinstall their system (or give up > > in > > disgust). > > Your arguments are technically sound, but from a UI POV won't it look > ugly/inconsistent to have amd64 listed first for 13.10 and i386 for 12.04 ? > > > What advantage does running 64bit give a user that they would care about? > > I can only think of one, albeit a very important one. 32 bit ISO's don't > come with EFI support, only the 64 bit ISO's support machines with EFI / > Secure Boot. Hence this must be clarified somehow on the download page, > else people just get pissed off that Kubuntu won't even boot on their shiny > new computer.
Agreed. I think list 32 bit first and say (as Ubuntu does now): "If you have a PC with the Windows 8 logo or UEFI firmware, choose the 64-bit download. Read more" Then some like to something about "How do I tell if I have UEFI firmware". Once we get to 14.04, then the "last LTS not so great on multi-arch" problem goes away. Scott K -- kubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
