which ubuntu

[Scott (angrykeyboarder)]

Markus Schönhaber spake thusly on 212003864 ::
> Darryl LeCount schrieb:
> 
>> There is no specific Intel 64-bit version - the generic 64-bit version
>> is the AMD64 version. However, if you're planning on easily using Flash
>> or WINE then I would recommend you stick with the 32-bit version.
> 
> Using nspluginwrapper one can get flash working on AMD64 quite easily.
> Moreover, there's the option to use a 32-bit browser.
> 
> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RestrictedFormats/Flash#amd64andppc


I've got a 64-bit CPU and ran 64-bit Linux for a while. I got tired of
all the hoops you had to jump through to get stuff working, when it
"just worked" (by comparison) in 32-bit.

Then there is the problem of packages that only come in 32-bit versions,
period (no, I'm not talking about Flash - Sun's web browser plugin for
Java is another as well - but I'm not referring to it either). There are
a number of programs out there that are 32-bit only.  This is software
you don't find in the official Ubuntu repositories.

I got tired of it and went back to 32-bit and I've not noticed one bit
of difference performance wise.  But then, I've only got 2GB of RAM and
you need 4 or more for there to be any noticeable difference with a
64-bit vs. 32-bit CPU.

-- 
            Scott
http://angrykeyboarder.com
©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20070724/879501f4/attachment.sig>