How many of you need a 32 bit distro?

[eriefisher]

WoW! 61% says yes so far. This surprises me. 64bit arch has been around for some time now and the lower cost of new systems I can't believe there is such a demand for 32bit. I understand there may be a lot of them still out there but this suggest it may be on the rise re-purposing older hardware. My current laptop is an Acer. It's 3-4 years old now and originally ran Win10 poorly for my Mother-in-law until it started to freeze up on suspend. I ended up giving her another laptop and install MX on this one. No more problems.
The cost of upgrading may be prohibitive to many people but realistically my current printer cost more than my last three laptops. The last laptop I bought used at a "computer shop" for $200 with no OS. It was 3-5 years old then and I ran it for about 8-10. I recently installed MX19 on it and gave it to a friend. He's happier than a pig in poo. My point is all these laptops have been 64bit. No point in going back to 32bit now.

[Bartman]

I use the small foot print low on system resources lightweight 64 bit Linux distros because I use old computers.

I just like old computers built to last unlike the disposable garbage they make these days.

I'm a desktop user the Wife and kids are the laptop users.

[SwampRabbit]

WoW! 61% says yes so far. This surprises me. 64bit arch has been around for some time now and the lower cost of new systems I can't believe there is such a demand for 32bit. I understand there may be a lot of them still out there but this suggest it may be on the rise re-purposing older hardware....

My point is all these laptops have been 64bit. No point in going back to 32bit now.

Not all newer hardware is 64bit, there are a lot of really cool x86 Single Board Computers (SBC) out there, more and more coming out every day.

[eriefisher]

Not all newer hardware is 64bit, there are a lot of really cool x86 Single Board Computers (SBC) out there, more and more coming out every day.

They why would a 32bit OS be such an issue if there is an audience for it.

[SwampRabbit]

Not all newer hardware is 64bit, there are a lot of really cool x86 Single Board Computers (SBC) out there, more and more coming out every day.

They why would a 32bit OS be such an issue if there is an audience for it.

Ummm, I didn't ever say that was an issue with it, and pretty sure my statement reinforces the need for it.

[Bartman]

Not all newer hardware is 64bit, there are a lot of really cool x86 Single Board Computers (SBC) out there, more and more coming out every day.

If you are taking about the SBC such as the PI those come with there own OS from what I've seen.

[eriefisher]

Not all newer hardware is 64bit, there are a lot of really cool x86 Single Board Computers (SBC) out there, more and more coming out every day.

They why would a 32bit OS be such an issue if there is an audience for it.

Ummm, I didn't ever say that was an issue with it, and pretty sure my statement reinforces the need for it.

What I meant was that if sales for these boards are good(assuming they are) Then why would so many OS's and applications(Chrome) drop support for 32bit. I tell you if I could figure out how to get MX on an old Android box I have I would.

[freemedia2018]

No point in going back to 32bit now.

"it works for me!"

proprietary software is all about forcing people to throw out good software and good hardware. one of the last straws with windows for me was when someone i knew had a perfectly good printer and the upgrade to xp simply dropped support. this model wasnt ancient, they just decided to make it worthless.

dropping hardware support drops the value of both existing hardware and software. though it increases the value of NEW hardware, which is why corporations do it. when distros do this, they shaft users. since i still have some good 32bit hardware that i like using, and other people still use 32bit hardware sometimes, AND since 32bit distros work on both 32bit and 64bit systems for the most part, i focus exclusively on 32bit distros. someone has to support this stuff.

if we only care about mainstream users, we might as well use windows. or ubuntu. or a mac. these proprietary-like attitudes continue to try to take over the free software ecosystem. "just upgrade your hardware." EXCUSE ME? dont get me wrong, nobody is obligated to maintain multiple archs. however, the excuses for dropping support (as though its a good thing overall) are appalling. all it means is you care about fewer users. thats your right-- dont sugarcoat it. you just dont care about them anymore.

[SwampRabbit]

What I meant was that if sales for these boards are good(assuming they are) Then why would so many OS's and applications(Chrome) drop support for 32bit. I tell you if I could figure out how to get MX on an old Android box I have I would.

Why? Because they don't care, because they are stupid, or a combination of both? I dunno....

But I do know that its not going away any time soon, look at what happened when Ubuntu tried (and failed) to drop 32bit support fully?
I bet a lot of users migrated to other Distros because of it. Don't alienate users... it never goes over well.

The only reason I see for dropping 32bit support is laziness in not wanting to maintain it.

[freemedia2018]

The only reason I see for dropping 32bit support is laziness in not wanting to maintain it.

even i wont go that far. its the first thing i think of, and its partly true.

to be fair, lots of distros find themselves cutting various corners due to lack of resources. this is one of those corners. its a major sacrifice, and what irks me most is they try to play it off as some kind of "smart move" thats "for the best." they even pretend the people who are affected by it barely exist. thats a huge insult, basically a smear to people who may have loved the software previously. i lose respect for people that do this-- unless its true: "there are only 5 people downloading it. we sincerely apologise to each of them."

if i dropped an architecture, i would do it with an apology, an (honest) appeal for people to stand up now or in the future to help support it-- these appeals are too often dishonest, circular arguments that drive away people who do stand up, then say "nobody stood up to keep it supported, so we had no choice really". and i would admit that "this is a corner being cut-- not ideal at all".

instead, they promote the decision. they dont just sugarcoat a bad thing, they pretend that its better to make an ecosystem that (just like the proprietary corporate ones) tell users when to throw away their stuff and buy more. its bad. but sometimes they really do have no choice. just be honest. dont make it an opportunity for nasty propaganda in favour of e-waste. it really only profits big corporations. the "benefits" to users are nonsense. also, if we are honest, sometimes there are alternatives to dropping support. not looking seriously for those is truly lazy.