| |||||||||||||
Spin is spin, but...Spin is spin, but...Posted Oct 26, 2008 23:16 UTC (Sun) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458)In reply to: Spin is spin, but... by khim Parent article: Linux now an equal Flash player (Linux-Watch)
Sorry, but it's the other way around: positive effects must be measured and if the user won't notice there are no need to switch to 64bit yet. Why? Easy: we already have working 32bit stuff and 64bit stuff must prove itself before it'll be accepted. XP 64bit was total flop and Vista 64bit is not so hot either - and that's prerequisites! While there are no 64bit OS there are no 64bit programs... You need at least ONE program which shows that 64bit OS is worthwhile and even after that switch from 32bit to 64bit will be on case-by-case basis... That MSFT still isn't able to ship a 64-bit OS while others had stuff running before the chips shipped is not exactly the architecture's fault... Multi-gigabyte memories are commonplace today (heck, this laptop has 4GiB RAM), and anything with more than 4GiB can't be handled sanely with 32 bit architectures anyway.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||||