yes i know. this is better and very detailed compared to that short and lame analogy.
On Nov 28, 2007 4:14 PM, Cocoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > the short analogy is that between 64-bit v. 32-bit, think of 64-bit > processors as the "more efficient" engine that burns fuel better than good > old 32-bit. it makes great economic sense to go with the newer technology, > (64-bit and dual core) because sooner or later software is going to catch up > with the hardware and you'd still be good now as you would going into the > future, mostly anyway. > > the longer answer is that most apps that juan dela cruz and maria clara > would use like web browsers aren't 64-bit, not yet anyway. in macverse, OS > X 10.5 has most apps and most of its underlying stuff in 64-bit but OS X > 10.5's kernel is still 32-bit to maintain compatibility with existing > drivers. in linuxverse, we're still waiting for adobe to come out with a > 64-bit flash plugin for firefox, likewise for sun's java. hence, quite a few > distros use both lib32 and lib64 and that most distros use 32-bit firefox, > which isn't saying anything bad about it being 32-bit. so, unless you're > into the huge media-content creating universe or want to be, getting a > 64-bit box and huge (greater than 4gb) ram makes little economic or logical > sense. > > these days really, a more "balanced" system--- i.e. average (1.8ghz) > processor clock speed, at least 1 to 2gb RAM, 160GB (at least) sata hard > drive and decent graphics card is i think what "normal" people should care > about. it'll stop people from complaining "my computer is slow because my > cpu is slow," most especially when they're running windows. of course it > is--- if you're spending more ram than you have right? maybe people will > start to think that computers are a "system". all the wheels got to turn > right and on time to make everything work great. > > Given the economic value of 64-bit processors are at par now with 32-bit > ones and given the combination of memory, board specs (i.e. pci v. agp), > would you pay for a 32-bit machine or a 64-bit machine that'll have a higher > chance of upgradability going into the future? of course 32-bit now isn't > saying it'll cease to be useful--- it'll still be useful 3 years down the > road but less so if you go 64-bit now. all i'm saying It makes great sense > to go 64-bit processor (and dual core) now especially, with an eye towards > great system balance. For good or ill the 64-bit processor is just progress! > it is the same way gasoline powered engines are slowly being replaced by > more efficient ones and maybe someday a hybrid engine. > -- > Cocoy > "People who are really serious about software should make their own > hardware" -- Alan Kay > _________________________________________________ > Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List > [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) > Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists > Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >
_________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
