Linux Mint 6 "Felicia" released!

[AK Dave]

My laptops support 64bit, but I prefer a 32bit linux install because despite the fact that the CPU is "64bit" and theoretically everything in the machine supports 64bit, the vast majority of my quirky problems solved themselves magically by switching to 32bit OS. Or in other words "reverting back", as the laptop was originally sold with XP. Oh sure, it was "Vista Ready", but it was "32bit Vista Ready" despite being a 64bit computer. It is only a couple years old and runs fine, and computers like mine are far more the rule than the exception today.

Maybe the 64bit stuff works great on something brand new. I wouldn't know.

I certainly don't consider operating a 2 year old laptop with an AMD dual core to be "legacy support". I rather resent and take personal the suggestion that 32bit support is "legacy support".

You know, if you really want a 64bit OS on that fancy new machine why don't you just keep the Vista it came with? Oh, because it doesn't work? Sure. So don't try to stuff it down my throat either.

If, due to limited hours in the day, we have to have "one then the other" instead of "both simultaneously" then please keep 32bit first.

[blackvd]

For people with more than 4 gigs of ram you have to use 64, unless you install a server kernel which botched my wifi

[marcus0263]

My laptops support 64bit, but I prefer a 32bit linux install because despite the fact that the CPU is "64bit" and theoretically everything in the machine supports 64bit, the vast majority of my quirky problems solved themselves magically by switching to 32bit OS. Or in other words "reverting back", as the laptop was originally sold with XP. Oh sure, it was "Vista Ready", but it was "32bit Vista Ready" despite being a 64bit computer. It is only a couple years old and runs fine, and computers like mine are far more the rule than the exception today.

Maybe the 64bit stuff works great on something brand new. I wouldn't know.

I certainly don't consider operating a 2 year old laptop with an AMD dual core to be "legacy support". I rather resent and take personal the suggestion that 32bit support is "legacy support".

You know, if you really want a 64bit OS on that fancy new machine why don't you just keep the Vista it came with? Oh, because it doesn't work? Sure. So don't try to stuff it down my throat either.

If, due to limited hours in the day, we have to have "one then the other" instead of "both simultaneously" then please keep 32bit first.

Take it personal? That's just the facts, 32 Bit IS legacy, try buying a 32 Bit machine the last two - three years.

Since your processor on your two year old Laptop being 64 Bit rather proves 32 Bit is Legacy wouldn't you say?

BTW my main rig at home is 2005 vintage and I've been running 64 Bit for going on 3 years now with zero problems. In my experience 64 Bit is more stable than 32 Bit.

[AK Dave]

Take it personal? That's just the facts, 32 Bit IS legacy, try buying a 32 Bit machine the last two - three years.

]

While it is true that a new computer, or one purchased within the last 2-3 years, will almost certainly have a 64bit, it is disingenuous to say that every such computer is "64bit". In name only, as a technicality, perhaps, but the MAJORITY of these consumer-grade electronics devices are designed for and intended to be used with 32bit-only software. Full function with these computers using 64bit software is more problematic, in case you never noticed. You conveniently ignore this reality and this point which I made previously.

Those computers are the majority. They are certainly not "legacy", despite whatever hardware YOU may be so fortunate to use.

BTW my main rig at home is 2005 vintage and I've been running 64 Bit for going on 3 years now with zero problems. In my experience 64 Bit is more stable than 32 Bit.

Hooray for you. I am so thrilled for you.

[marcus0263]

While it is true that a new computer, or one purchased within the last 2-3 years, will almost certainly have a 64bit, it is disingenuous to say that every such computer is "64bit". In name only, as a technicality, perhaps, but the MAJORITY of these consumer-grade electronics devices are designed for and intended to be used with 32bit-only software. Full function with these computers using 64bit software is more problematic, in case you never noticed. You conveniently ignore this reality and this point which I made previously.

64 Bit processor pretty much makes it 64 Bit doesn't it? Just because it can "emulate" a 32 Bit environment doesn't make it a 32 Bit machine no matter how you try to spin it
Like I've said I've used a 64 Bit Desktop for going on 3 years now, no problems here. Well that is for Linux anyway, Microsoft is another story but this isn't a Microsoft Windows forum is it?

Those computers are the majority. They are certainly not "legacy", despite whatever hardware YOU may be so fortunate to use.

Now who's the one being "disingenuous" by calling a 64 Bit system 32 Bit?
Like I said, try buying a 32 Bit system for the last 3 years or so.
When you can no longer buy the hardware for the last 3 years kinda makes it legacy wouldn't you say?

Hooray for you. I am so thrilled for you.

I'm glad and maybe you can try using your laptop in it's native environment

[rohdef]

AK Dave> I'm sorry you take this as a personal offense, but I agree with marcus0263 that no matter how you try to twist it 32bit won't become less legacy. 32bit systems is legacy, the 64bit systems is improving all the time.

A lot of the issues in the start with 64bit is either solved or on the way to be solved. I think a better option for you rather than being insulted would be to give 64bit a chance again, and see if the problems you have experienced is solved. If not then live with the fact that you use a system that works as a legacy system. My workstation is a Pentium 4 and on that I live with the fact that it's a legacy system. I know it, but I don't complain.

[raparadis]

Love Mint 6. I have been wait to get it up and running. Old IBM with PIII coppermine.
Can not get sound to work. Mint 5 work OK with OSS. Does not seem to work with Mint 6. Any ideas???

[lakehousetech]

For people with more than 4 gigs of ram you have to use 64, unless you install a server kernel which botched my wifi

Actually you can use the big mem kernel (non-server) to utilize more than 4GB of RAM.

[lakehousetech]

AK Dave> I'm sorry you take this as a personal offense, but I agree with marcus0263 that no matter how you try to twist it 32bit won't become less legacy. 32bit systems is legacy, the 64bit systems is improving all the time.

A lot of the issues in the start with 64bit is either solved or on the way to be solved. I think a better option for you rather than being insulted would be to give 64bit a chance again, and see if the problems you have experienced is solved. If not then live with the fact that you use a system that works as a legacy system. My workstation is a Pentium 4 and on that I live with the fact that it's a legacy system. I know it, but I don't complain.

Both of you have no clue what your talking about. Quit trolling around on the release thread.

[rohdef]

Both of you have no clue what your talking about. Quit trolling around on the release thread.

Ok, would you mind accounting for what makes you say I don't have a clue about what I'm talking about. I might be mistaken, but I would say what I'm writing (at least in this case) is correct and rather clear.

[yarvelling]

I'm fairly new to Mint, having mostly used Microsoft for years; I tried Mandriva on this laptop but it was too much of a pain to get media codecs working in conjunction with Compiz, etc.... tried Mint 5 off a live CD; it played everything perfectly (with Compiz doing it's stuff too)....brilliant! Installed it, got it upgraded with Gimp 2.6 and OOo 3...all was fantastic I then did the upgrade version to Mint 6 last Monday; all without a hitch....I love it
I just want to say a big Thank You to all the Mint team who've put this together....you're brilliant!
Cheers,
Steve

[blackvd]

Actually you can use the big mem kernel (non-server) to utilize more than 4GB of RAM.

Thanks for the info, do you know why on 4 gigs my system Monitor only shows 3.9? Since I have a separate gpu why wouldn't it show as 4? Just curious.

[humptydumpty]

Well done - yet another excellent Mint distro! A very nice gift for Christmas!

Thanks Clem et al.

Mike.

[alexand3r]

Wow; fantastic distro, and better than Ubuntu I might add

[AK Dave]

64 Bit processor pretty much makes it 64 Bit doesn't it?

No. Once again, just because the CPU is 64bit doesn't mean that everything in the laptop was intended to be used with a 64bit OS. Especially if the laptop shipped with a 32bit Windows XP and the manufacturer's Vista support for that machine is limited to 32bit.

64bit has just been too quirky for me.

Like I've said I've used a 64 Bit Desktop for going on 3 years now, no problems here.

I am sooo thrilled for you! Hooray!

I'm glad and maybe you can try using your laptop in it's native environment

Been there. Done that. No thank you.

[AK Dave]

I think a better option for you rather than being insulted would be to give 64bit a chance again, and see if the problems you have experienced is solved.

Believe me, I do it every couple of months. New Ubuntu comes out, I try it in 64bit first. Really makes me appreciate Mint. This exact issue is why my main rig, a laptop, has 3 bootable linux partitions on it and usable at any one time. Usually also 2 bootable persistent USB sticks.

I have the least issues (zero) and the greatest stability with 32bit Mint.

When 64bit Felicia comes out, I'll put it in place of a 64bit Xubuntu/Ubuntu dual-DE install AND see if ndiswrapper or my video drivers work any better in a 64bit environment than they did the last time. Last time I went 64bit, I lost suspend/resume, wifi stability was dicey, and OOO3 was a buggy.

But when I'm perfectly happy with a solid, stable, and 100% functioning 32bit Felicia there is very little (zero) incentive for me to do this except for the gee-whiz factor of being able to say that my kernel is 64bit. Nope. If that means legacy, then thats the vast majority of desktop linux installs. I'm in good company.

[Handyman]

Anyone know how to lock your screen in Mint 6? I miss this.

[alexand3r]

Anyone know how to lock your screen in Mint 6? I miss this.

Yeah, its Ctrl+Alt+L... though personally I suggest you use suspend instead; saves energy see...

[marcus0263]

64 Bit processor pretty much makes it 64 Bit doesn't it?

No. Once again, just because the CPU is 64bit doesn't mean that everything in the laptop was intended to be used with a 64bit OS. Especially if the laptop shipped with a 32bit Windows XP and the manufacturer's Vista support for that machine is limited to 32bit.

64bit has just been too quirky for me.

Like I've said I've used a 64 Bit Desktop for going on 3 years now, no problems here.

I am sooo thrilled for you! Hooray!

I'm glad and maybe you can try using your laptop in it's native environment

Been there. Done that. No thank you.

What ever Dude

[john1]

To all

Mint is just fantastic, not a single issue since version 3
I installed mint 5 in 3 PCs, all dual-booting with XP
On one, which I use rarely, I used parted magic to remove the linux partitions and installed mint 6 on the empty space
no issues at all
now, on the 2 other PCs, I would like to avoid removing all I have installed.
I saw a method of doing an upgrade from mint 5 to 6 but it seems there are some issues.
is there an easy and sure way to upgrade from 5 to 6, without removing everything and starting from scratches?
regards to all and hoping a great mint xxx releases in 2009

john