A good "rule of thumb" is that machines that could run XP, Vista, Windows 7 or x86 OS X will almost always be a lot faster with Ubuntu even if they are lower-spec than described below. On one hand, hardware produced in the last few years or with an efficient architecture or machines built for a specific purpose can often work well with less. For example, a netbook with an 8 GB SSD will work well although there wont be much room for saving stuff directly onto the drive so cloud storage services could help a lot.
A machine with a crumbling, 15 year-old, slow, 8 GB, IDE hard-drive probably won't work and doesn't really compare with the netbook anyway. It might be worth trying Ubuntu but really start looking at other distros.
All bit x CPUs should be fast enough to run Ubuntu and can run the bit x86 version as well. The bit version tends to be easier to use and runs into less problems.
Ubuntu Desktop There is real risk to anybody who is running a body of software that gets little testing. The facts are that most bit x86 packages are hardly used at all. That means fewer eyeballs, and more bugs. Software continues to grow in size at the high end, making it very difficult to even build new applications in bit environments. This led us to stop creating Ubuntu install media for i last year and to consider dropping the port altogether at a future date.
The Ubuntu developers remain committed as always to the principle of making Ubuntu the best open source operating system across desktop, server, cloud, and IoT. We look forward to the ongoing engagement of our users in continuing to make this principle a reality. But there is more detail in the spreadsheet than than simple summary.
Unless you have specific reasons to choose bit, we recommend bit to utilise the full capacity of your hardware. If you use the 64 bit system, eventually you will run into a situation where a driver or even a program is not available in 32 bits.
Adobe pulled its 64 bit Flash for a while. Canon printer drivers are only available in 32 bit but can be force installed. I used both 64 and 32 bit systems, and found that 64 bit did not provide me any advantages both ran at the same speed as far as I could tell.
I wrote the last Launchpad Bug description myself a long time ago and the only thing I can say I have been unable to discover why is there so much misinformation around this topic. I think the most probable answer is the bit edition is much more buggy than the bit one, since this is what my own experience of only using Ubuntu in my daily life suggests. On the other hand this is only speculation since I have not performed a formal comparison between editions. As far I'm able to work well enough using it I simply choose to use the bit edition because is the one I want to be improved, since in time it will clearly be the best option and it will be here before we have noticed.
By then I want us people being using a complete stable distribution. Use to, most computers where 32bit. Now most newer CPU's is 64bit. And 32bit is compatiable with both versions. The reason is that there are still lots of bit processors in production now, and most computer users do not know what bit and bit are. However, if someone with bit computer s downloads and uses the bit version, it works because bit arch is backwards-compatible to bit.
Update: As of This is because most computing devices that could potentially have Ubuntu installed on today are bit, and only devices with less than 2GB RAM may contain a bit CPU. Any modern CPU is capable of running 64 bit. If You don't need memory hungry applications then there is no need to go 64bit.
I have 16GB ram and sure 64 bit , 32bit would be a stupid move. Counts also for windows 7 en 8. Ubuntu Community Ask! Sign up to join this community.
The best answers are voted up and rise to the top. Stack Overflow for Teams — Collaborate and share knowledge with a private group. Create a free Team What is Teams? Learn more. Why does Ubuntu Download recommend bit install? Asked 11 years, 3 months ago.
Active 7 years, 2 months ago. Viewed 75k times. Improve this question. Community Bot 1. Warren Pena Warren Pena 2, 5 5 gold badges 16 16 silver badges 12 12 bronze badges. This question is of historical significance only. See also: What are the differences between bit and bit, and which should I choose? Add a comment. Active Oldest Votes. Improve this answer. Eliah Kagan k 51 51 gold badges silver badges bronze badges. For the most part I saw no differences, but there were some small niggles: As mentioned above, Flash historically hasn't been very well supported on 64bit.
0コメント