Although there are 64 bits releases of Linux, I wouldn't use it (yet), but that is a personal choice. The most important reason (for me) is problem when using additional software.
For example, the Flash plugin isn't working on a 64 bits system. Likewise with Java. Using a 32 bits release on a 64 bits system won't give you a problem and offers all the software (like Flash and Java) without a problem. More about it here: http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/linux-tutorials-howtos-reference-material/69585-should-you-choose-32-bit-64-bit-linux.html By the way, I did use a 64 bits release on our corporate webserver, but mainly because I didn't intend to install additional (3rd party) software on it. Regards, Patrick 2008/4/11, Jim McCarthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hello -- > > I recently acquired an HP zx6000 dual Itanium-2 workstation, and so I was > very pleased to find Scientific Linux (version 4.1) available for the IA-64 > architecture. But according to the SL news archive, SL 4.1 for ia64 was > released 08-Aug-2005, and it appears none of the other SL 4.x or SL 5.x > releases run on ia64. > > Are there many SL users running on ia64 ? Are there plans to continue SL > support for this architecture ? > > Many thanks, > > -- Jim > ___ > > My SL 4.1-ia64 install went smoothly, and so far my only regret is finding > that the Open Motif X11 window manager (mwm) "experimental" version 2.2 > (openmotif-2.2.3-9.RHEL4.1.ia64.rpm) was chosen for SL 4.1 (as well as for > RHEL) and not the Open Group's officially supported and more stable > "openmotif-2.1.30" release. > > http://www.motifdeveloper.com/tips/Motif22Review.pdf >
