Is Windows beating Linux to 64-bit desktop?

Chat about Linux in general

Is Windows beating Linux to 64-bit desktop?

Postby MarkusR on Fri Aug 28, 2009 11:16 pm

Since I have finally reached the magical 4GB marker in system memory, I've had to begin to consider 64-bit OS.

The system I built is currently a dual-boot between Linux Mint 7 32-bit and Windows XP 64-bit. After giving the 64-bit Mint initial consideration, I've found it more convenient to stick to 32-bit. Linux can handle the extra memory better than Windows in 32-bit mode, so I suppose having 32-bit Mint shouldn't concern me as much as having 32-bit XP.

Does it seem like we missed/are missing another great opportunity to drive the Linux to more desktops? It looks like the HW developers are tossing us on the curb yet again by not giving proper 64-bit Linux support. And could it also be that the GNU movement hasn't been able to do the shift quick enough for sufficient amount of programs? I suppose the only consolidation is that Win7 is still going to be offered also in 32-bit, so perhaps there is still plenty of time to do the transition.

I don't mean to argue this is the case, I'd be more than happy to be filled with information I'm missing here. :(
MarkusR
Level 1
Level 1
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:56 am

Linux Mint is funded by ads and donations.
 

Re: Is Windows beating Linux to 64-bit desktop?

Postby monkeyboy on Sat Aug 29, 2009 12:32 am

I think using 64-bit as a promotion tool for Linux may work better in a year or so. Right now too many folks see it as a "work in progress" that is a bit short on applications and stability. On a personal note, I feel 64-bit is the way to go but wider acceptance is still a ways off.
If you don't like it, make something better
If you can't make something better, adapt
If you can't do either ball your panties up and cry.

Complaining is like masticating most anyone can do it.
However doing it in public is really hardcore.
User avatar
monkeyboy
Level 5
Level 5
 
Posts: 773
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 11:30 am

Re: Is Windows beating Linux to 64-bit desktop?

Postby Muzer on Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:27 am

What has everyone got against Linux 64-bit?

There are three problems with it. THREE! And these are minor!



1) Flash is slightly harder to install (will be fixed in Flash 11)
2) ndiswrapper only works with drivers for XP 64-bit which aren't as common as one would like (will be fixed if/when they implement Vista 64-bit support)
3) Binary-distributed, 32-bit only apps are a bit tempremental, but thankfully these are relatively rare.
Muzer
Level 4
Level 4
 
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 2:09 pm

Re: Is Windows beating Linux to 64-bit desktop?

Postby Fred on Sat Aug 29, 2009 11:00 am

There is that competition thing again between Windows and Linux. "Windows might get ahead of us with 64 bit systems even though Linux was first by a wide margin. The sky is falling. What on earth will we do!?"

Who cares? If you do care, why? Do you own a company that is trying to make money from Linux by competing with the Windows OS? If you do then that is your problem/opportunity, not the communities'.

Linux is not owned by a company. It is owned by a wide community of developers and contributors, which anybody can join or depart from at will. It is only in competition with itself, not Windows or any other OS.

Fred
Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and each time expecting a different result.

Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on the menu. Liberty is an armed lamb protesting the electoral outcome. A Republic negates the need for an armed protest.
User avatar
Fred
Level 10
Level 10
 
Posts: 3356
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:59 am
Location: NC USA

Re: Is Windows beating Linux to 64-bit desktop?

Postby waldo on Sat Aug 29, 2009 10:58 pm

Who cares? If you do care, why?

Fred, I care.

I care because I know that the only way computers will improve is if there is competition. That is the way the real world works. There is competition in hardware, and it certain has improved in giant steps since IBM introduced their PC in 1981. They were a giant step ahead of Apple at the time.

Software, particularly the OS, is another story. There has been no competition. Microsoft has a stranglehold monopoly. Linux has not been competition. It has been a nuisance of a gnat to be swatted away. Microsoft introduced XP in 2001, and by 2002 Linux, if it had been supported by people who wanted to beat (with financial incentives) Microsoft, would have had a product much better than XP, and made significant inroads among computer users. Instead, it has been tinkered with by people, such as yourself, who find "that competition thing" distasteful.

Because of this, 95% of computer users are stuck with Microsoft, and their unmotivated method of trickling out meager improvements. It took them six years to bring us awful Vista, and still Linux has no real answer that turkey. Two years later, we are getting Windows 7, which should have come about in 2003, if Microsoft had competition. Windows 7 is the product of customer gripes about Vista, and the threat of income loss, not of competition from Linux or Apple. [Apple produces Bentleys in a world that buys Fords and Toyotas. They are not competition.]

Until Microsoft actually is worried about Linux (and has good reason to be), then Linux is a failure. Nobody that matters (i.e., those who choose and pay for tools to get a job done) gives a hoot about "competition" between distros. The competition is Microsoft. If Linux or any other OS wants to matter, then a company that is hungry and has a vision has to come forward. It's everybody's loss that this is not happening. Most computer users are stuck with Yugos.
waldo
Level 4
Level 4
 
Posts: 360
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 3:55 pm

Re: Is Windows beating Linux to 64-bit desktop?

Postby Fred on Sun Aug 30, 2009 4:15 am

waldo wrote:
... 95% of computer users are stuck with Microsoft, and their unmotivated method of trickling out meager improvements. It took them six years to bring us awful Vista, and still Linux has no real answer that turkey. Two years later, we are getting Windows 7, which should have come about in 2003, if Microsoft had competition. Windows 7 is the product of customer gripes about Vista, and the threat of income loss, not of competition from Linux or Apple.

It sounds like what you want is somebody, anybody, to give Microsoft competition so you can have a better Windows. Well, personally, I don't care if you can't get Microsoft to build a better Windows at a lower cost. Some companies have started using the threat of moving their desktops to Linux as a lever to get better pricing from Microsoft. That's fine with me. In business, you do what you have to do, within bounds of course. But I really don't care if they can buy Windows for less or not. It's not my problem.

The part you aren't getting is that Linux is not a commercial product, entity or endeavor. It was never designed or intended to compete with Microsoft, and still isn't. There are some companies, Red Hat, Novell, IBM, etc., that use Linux as a tool in their competition with Microsoft but that isn't what Linux itself is about, and never has been. You might wish it was something different than what it is but that doesn't change anything.

When I said Linux only competes with itself I wasn't talking about the various distros. Linux competes with itself by trying to be better than it is today. Contributors are constantly competing with what exists in Linux, trying to build a better Linux for tomorrow. Actually the distros look to each other for improvements in the way they aggregate and build their offerings. They pass their improvements along, they don't horde them as differentiators. Different distros are aimed at different demographics. In Microsoft's world one size fits all, not so in the Linux world.

Microsoft introduced XP in 2001, and by 2002 Linux, if it had been supported by people who wanted to beat (with financial incentives) Microsoft, would have had a product much better than XP, and made significant inroads among computer users. Instead, it has been tinkered with by people, such as yourself, who find "that competition thing" distasteful.

Again, it sounds like your biggest concern is a better, cheaper Windows, or beating Microsoft, for whatever reason. Linux is owned by a wide community of developers and contributors, not a company with a financial interest. Why would we care about your quoted scenario? I don't much care what Microsoft does with their software. I think they are too poor. They need to raise their prices and really crack down on pirated software. :-)

You missed the mark about "people such as yourself" too. I started a business, raised it from a puppy you might say, owned and ran it for over twenty years. I am a little bit familiar with the advantages of a competitive market place and what it takes to survive and flourish. :-)

Until Microsoft actually is worried about Linux (and has good reason to be), then Linux is a failure.

Now that is a logically twisted statement. How can you possibly define the success or failure of Linux in terms of what Microsoft does or doesn't do? Microsoft isn't a part of anything related to Linux. Your quote would make just as much sense if it was worded:

"Until the Corn Farmers Assoc. in Iowa is worried about the Banana Growers Collective in Brazil, (and has good reason to be), then the Banana Growers Collective is a failure."

You will just have to get used to the idea that Linux is not in business, or in the market place, and was never intended to be.

You are of course free to take Linux and use it in your business of competing with Microsoft if you wish. :-)

Fred
Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and each time expecting a different result.

Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on the menu. Liberty is an armed lamb protesting the electoral outcome. A Republic negates the need for an armed protest.
User avatar
Fred
Level 10
Level 10
 
Posts: 3356
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:59 am
Location: NC USA

Re: Is Windows beating Linux to 64-bit desktop?

Postby exploder on Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:43 am

Fred, I always enjoy reading your views on topics like this. :D I personally do not care what Microsoft is doing, I lost interest in them years ago when they introduced "product activation". I think eventually Linux will be competitive in business because people will get fed up with Microsoft's "planned obsolescence" and the way they build proprietary products that lock you out unless you have the latest greatest version of Windows.

In Linux we share our technology and no one is locked out of anything. I remember someone on hardware central built new ATI drivers for Windows XP, he was quickly ordered to stop what he was doing. The drivers in question allowed older cards to function properly without features being lost. This effort was stopped dead in it's tracks because people would continue to use the older graphics cards rather than buy the latest greatest. Microsoft does the same thing, you will not be running IE8 in Windows 2000 now will you?

Microsoft has a long history of stealing technology and making it their own. Microsoft stole their GUI from apple! Microsoft stole technology for their office product and that one is going to cost them. Do we really care what a company that operates like this does?
exploder
Level 15
Level 15
 
Posts: 5871
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 10:50 am
Location: HartfordCity, Indiana USA

Re: Is Windows beating Linux to 64-bit desktop?

Postby timh on Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:47 am

...what's about the competition of the Top 500 Supercomputers? Over 85% running Linux and near to 1% Microsoft HPC :lol:
Linux had a lot of competition because of the big communities everywhere.
I think if more and more people will try and use it the problems with hardware will be less depending of the vendors.
(But right now so many things running ❞out of the box❞)
But for me the two Nr°1's is Freedom & Security. :mrgreen:
Tim
LMDE2 UP7
Image
Image Image
User avatar
timh
Level 3
Level 3
 
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 2:36 pm
Location: Spain

Re: Is Windows beating Linux to 64-bit desktop?

Postby DrHu on Sun Aug 30, 2009 1:44 pm

MarkusR wrote:Since I have finally reached the magical 4GB marker in system memory, I've had to begin to consider 64-bit OS
Ahaha!, the 4GB threshold, do I now switch to 64bit
--actually apart from the the 4GB threshold, the advantage of 64bit is faster performance, with a 64bit processor, and even running 32bit applications, there is little of a performance hit, memory size (RAM) might not be its (64bit) most significant advantage
Personally at 4GB, it would be a tossup, if I really wanted to run fully 64bit systems, I would only want to do so, if I could stack the memory higher (8-32GB) or more, lets say as much as is affordable..
It becomes a toy/gadget, personal interest..., as you really need a business to justify such an expense, like a sound studio, animation studio or other high end application that needs the address space that 64bits can provide.

MarkusR wrote:Does it seem like we missed/are missing another great opportunity to drive the Linux to more desktops? It looks like the HW developers are tossing us on the curb yet again by not giving proper 64-bit Linux support. And could it also be that the GNU movement hasn't been able to do the shift quick enough for sufficient amount of programs? I suppose the only consolidation is that Win7 is still going to be offered also in 32-bit, so perhaps there is still plenty of time to do the transition.
Does it seem like we missed/are missing another great opportunity..
Even if it looks like Linux has a missed opportunity, it is often not the true case, for example you will find many people who are aware of the options will buy a netbook with windows OS (of some type, even the stripped down windows 7 version), dump windows OS, and install their choice of Linux distributions
--the reason, cost saving and the market of available systems; and they then even go after Microsoft for the windows refund, which they should be entitled to if they do not accept the windows EULA, and delete it from the system; although both the manufacturers (OEMS) and Microsoft make that difficult, it is still their legal right.

I suppose the only consolidation is that Win7 is still going ...
Linux 64bit has been available long before either Windows or Apple got on board..
The problem is always cost/benefit
--does it make sense for most users to use a 64bit system, when a 32bit is more than adequate for almost all computer activity of the normal user group
    email
    streaming movies, audio, TV
    blogging
    web sites, creating
    chat
    voip
--that can all mostly be handled by a netbook (not even a full computer), and they are unlikely to be 64bit for quite some time, given their role
Last edited by DrHu on Sun Aug 30, 2009 2:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
DrHu
Level 16
Level 16
 
Posts: 6629
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 8:20 pm

Re: Is Windows beating Linux to 64-bit desktop?

Postby DrHu on Sun Aug 30, 2009 2:08 pm

waldo wrote:Until Microsoft actually is worried about Linux (and has good reason to be), then Linux is a failure

http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/column ... rating.htm
I don't think Linux as a project need worry about Microsoft, it is actually the other way round, as their own statements attest to..
    Microsoft is also worried about Linux because of its success in the data center, where its share of the server market, at a little below 20 percent, is significant. It's these worries that prompted Microsoft to warn anyone who cared to listen that Linux infringed its intellectual property and to mutter darkly about legal repercussions
    ...
    Which is a polite way of saying that in Microsoft's opinion Apple is not really a competitor worth worrying about. Its desktop market share is beginning to fall back after a strong couple of years, and with no presence in the server room it doesn't pose a threat in the way that Linux does

Apple, of course has their I-products (IPhone) etc..
    Apple's consumer goodies are forbidden fruit for the Gates clan, Bill's wife Melinda told Vogue magazine recently. "There are very few things that are on the banned list in our household. But iPods and iPhones are two things we don't get for our kids ... Every now and then I look at my friends and say, 'Ooh, I wouldn't mind having that iPhone,'" she laments.
User avatar
DrHu
Level 16
Level 16
 
Posts: 6629
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 8:20 pm

Re: Is Windows beating Linux to 64-bit desktop?

Postby Wamukota on Sun Sep 06, 2009 10:25 am

Linux does not need 4Gb of RAM to run, Windows does more or less, so the pressure to develop a 64-bit OS made MS go for 64-bit as all Windows users are aware of the 3.2 Gb bottleneck.
As most Linux users run with 1Gb or less, there is no gain in prioritising 64-bit development. On my HP Compaq nx6325 with 1Gb RAM Ubuntu 9.04/64bit ran slightly faster then its 32-bit brother, but some Flash applications failed to run, forcing me to downgrade to 32-bit.

No, we are not missing the 64-bit boat, because the manpower needed to convert ALL win32 applications worldwide to 64-bit is enormous, while a Linux user can single-handled download the source code and compile it for 64-bit.

Just my 2 cents

A.
Administrator http://linuxmintusers.be - The Belgian Linux Mint Website
Ubuntu User #27389
Linux Registered User #391092
Wamukota
Level 1
Level 1
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 5:44 am
Location: Brugge

Re: Is Windows beating Linux to 64-bit desktop?

Postby exploder on Sun Sep 06, 2009 10:32 am

Here is something worth considering.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/fin ... 22424.html
exploder
Level 15
Level 15
 
Posts: 5871
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 10:50 am
Location: HartfordCity, Indiana USA

Re: Is Windows beating Linux to 64-bit desktop?

Postby subslug on Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:01 pm

It seems to me like, for what Linux attempts to be that it is a larger success than Windows ever will be just for the simple fact that, Linux is Open Source. Windows being closed source is hamstrung in who and what can be developed for it and how it can evolve whereas Linux doesn't suffer from this sort of problem. The sky is the limit, so how do you judge success?
That's why you see Linux embedded in hundreds of devices and generally those devices are much better than the few using the ones with Windows embedded.

How many times has Windows been completely rewritten and started over back to scratch? Linux is still pretty much what it's been since it was born.

FWIW I've been running Mint7 64 bit since day one and for me anyway it's a no brainer to go 64 bit. In the past 64 bit wasn't always smooth sailing but, really not so much now.
I do a lot of video editing on this system and I haven't really hit any major gotchas at all.
User avatar
subslug
Level 3
Level 3
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 9:05 pm

Linux Mint is funded by ads and donations.
 

Return to Chat about Linux

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 5 guests