Ubuntu will drop 32-bit x86 arch entirely. If you ever needed an excuse to ditch this absolute joke of a disto in favor of the one they've been copying for years, now would be a good time.
Ubuntu will drop 32-bit x86 arch entirely...
Other urls found in this thread:
lol who still even has 32bit anymore
Its like ubuntu can't into optimization whatsoever.
Users who want to save ram such as large datacenters sharing virtual machines for sale. Big data crunchers such as those unpacking the open street map's world data at 1TB uncompressed and 60 something gigabytes compressed. Just random ones I can name off the top of my head.
The amount of RAM occupied by data is insensitive to the bitness of the OS. The bitness only changes the size of the pointers, which in practice is more like 1/4th to 1/3rd of the total RAM usage for a typical scenario (web browsing basically).
There's a metric ass load of 32-bit x86 machines out there. Support should be dropped when the nukes are and civilization ends. It was discouraging when distros started dropping MIPS, PPC, and SPARC. Dropping x86 is an absolute joke as are any distros who do this.
Ubuntu is mainly used as a docker base container. Do normalfags even use it anymore? There are better, new person friendly operating systems than that shit.
If a software provider provides a binary, it's almost guaranteed to be for Ubuntu first and foremost. Unless it's old, then it's probably aimed at Debian. Maybe some particularly corporate packages aim at Fedora or CentOS. Nobody provides for Mint or whatever.
It was a good choice for using on old computers donated to poor people and 3rd world countries. Multi-core 32-bit CPUs aren't slow. People aren't even using 64-bit CPUs to their full potential and can't for the foreseeable future.
Please explain to the class what the "full potential" of a 64-bit CPU is.
64-bit was a mistake. 38-bit master race.
I'm all for squeezing some use out of old machines, but on the other hand: pretty much any x86 chip introduced since 2007 is 64-bit. If you need something super cheap, there's no dearth of used Core 2 rigs out there. And there are still distros aimed at even older hardware.
2038 is coming either we like it or not. The 32-bit Linux apocalypse is upon us. Might as well update before then
Why the fuck would you install Ubuntu on that kind of thing? I can't imagine it's even capable of running no matter how you configure it.
Oh no, 2% of the users of a 1% market share OS won't get the latest update unless they spend 200-400$ on a new computer.
I like the novelty of using old machines and all, but wouldn't something like that be better running a distro designed for that sort of thing?
I remember when Arch dropped x86 and no one cared but me and the few who are maintaining Arch Linux 32.
Anyone who says that surely hasn't used Cinnamon, Budgie, or Pantheon.
Even if you dont custom anything(and I'm talking about customizations that don't even require you to open the terminal), there are plenty of good choices out there.
W10 itself is really hideos.
Win9x was the peak of usability in the "doesn't get in your fucking way" department. Some *BSD/Linux WMs emulate that. tiling window managers are a meme for the same people who used to do fancy litestep crap with a matrix/hacker wallpaper when they were 16.
I have some old hardware that I use as router.
I was using FreeBSD but it was getting too huge, so I switched to OpenBSD and pretty much happy about it, and even if I max out my dl/ul, CPU usage is about 30%
I don't understand the mail. It talks about dropping i386 and then about 32-bit support? What about i486 and the Pentiums or is that just i386 to Ubuntu?
It's a Trisquel life for me I guess...
"i386" often used in the sense of "all 32-bit x86 chips".
yep. tried. with a high refresh rate monitor. runs like shit compared to win 10. scrolling in any application (pdf, images, web browser) is choppy. smooth as butter on win.
gaymers rise up
I don't get you fuckers.
You celebrate DragonflyBSD for focusing on what matters, X86_64, but blasting Ubuntu for dropping x86 in favor of focusing on x86_64.
Don't get me wrong, ubuntu is a dumpster fire form so many aspects, but this is retarded.
its the current year.. the target users of that distro wont be using some 30 year old computer.
Yeah, it's almost as if everyone here isn't the same person.
See, this is the problem with responding to people who use arbitrary, subjective criteria for declaring something to be shit. They always can just assert that they just don't like it and walk away feeling smug about how they don't like things.
good thing i recently moved from ubuntu to debian for the few old computers i have laying around
This is good. Ubuntu is for men that like to get real work done. For hobbyists that want to tinker with a computer from 2000, they are better off with a hobbyist operating system.
Are they keeping multiarch for certain pieces of software that don't have proper 64-bit compatibility or are they junking it altogether and just running with 64-bit?
How old? Core2? Pentium4? even older?
On the contrary, I was an exclusive Linux Desktop user for about 10 years. I used it for application development, music production, gaming, everything. I put up with bugs and glitches, shitty driver support, devised my own workarounds and mastered Bash, xorg.conf, pulse audio, etc. Workarounds galore. But then I bought a new PC with Windows 10 preinstalled. Fucking computational Nivana. The gap in support and functionality between Windows and Linux has continued to widen over the years, and I couldn't deny that Windows 10 was simply better for literally every use case I have on the desktop. Still use Linux on the server though, and Windows Subsystem for Linux for the admittedly superior Linux terminal.
I don't know about that. A while back there was a lot of hardware that just couldn't be used with Linux, including printers, wifi chips, laptops, etc. Now there's basic support for pretty much anything.
That's just not true.
Linux is just a kernel, whereas GNU/Linux is the system.
I don't know how, Windows 10 crashes constantly, actualizations fuck up everything and it is slow if you don't have SSD and at least 8GB of RAM. And still Windows is nonfree OS, it's fucking spyware.
First half of issues pointed there are caused not by problems of GNU/Linux itself, but by developers of nonfree hardware - they often don't provide support for GNU/Linux or drivers/firmware are proprietary. 1/4 of issues is caused by people not knowing about the GNU project - thing that should unify the system. The rest are actually problems of the OS.
You're not wrong. But it's botnets all the way down, user.
You can shut off most of the phone-home stuff in Windows 10, and set outgoing firewall rules for the rest (still lame though).
You're moving the goalpost. The experience of using Linux Desktop, even as a hyper competent computer user, sucks a fat one. The fact that my GPU switcher doesn't work, my scanner's built-in OCR doesn't work, that games don't work, is not alleviated by knowing that Linux is philosophically sound.
You're also ignoring the many issues with core Linux services such as pulse audio, xorg, wayland, DEs, grub, systemd, and the kernel itself.
lol you sure prooved me wrong
gaymers rise up
What's the point, if you can't even trust these devices? You can have a supercomputer, but if it's backdoored and obeys someones orders it is useless. Maybe one day we'll have NVMe drives respecting user's freedom, but now we have to do things without them.
Sorry, I'm not clicking reddit links, but these are known issues anyway. Just don't invest your money in these processors. There are librebootable devices, processors without 'security' (exploit) engines like some ARM or PowerPC processors ready to use and the Libre Risc-V CPU/VPU/GPU SoC is in progress.
Every year there are new devices with RYF certificate and these are the only devices I'm going to buy.
Lol, no you can't. Windows contains universal backdoors and these 'privacy' settings are just placebo. The system is nonfree software, and you don't know how it works without disassembling about 10GB of binaries. They control the system, because they made it, that's how nonfree software works.
And for me Windows sucks more, for me GNU/Linux is comfy, it is not perfect yet, but far better than ":( We had a problem" or actualizations taking to long time. Freedom is convenient, with GNU/Linux I control the system in my way, whereas on Windows you can't even remove the default browser.
What the fuck is a GPU switcher?
Go and comply to manufacturer of your scanner, maybe they didn't provide support for GNU/Linux, that's their fault. System has nothing to do with it.
1. Are you a kid?
2. What is supertuxkart?
3. What is Wine? Almost every game I tried running on Wine worked well.
4. They're proprietary anyway and again, it's not fault of the OS, devs are to lazy to provide support for different operating systems.
First of all, linux is just a kernel and it doesn't have services. Xorg is old as fuck and it is being replaced by wayland and it seems right to me. Pulse audio is poetteringware, and didn't work for a long time, but works now, echo canceling too. Grub works fine, motherboard firmware is a problem more often, for example improper UEFI implementation, which works only with Windows, because it removes Grub even though is should work (guess who wants that). DEs are fine, I don't know what gay shit you want to have in your DE, but i3wm on GNU/Linux is in my opinion better than the shell of Windows, and really see Cinnamon, it's great. systemd is shit indeed, but not every distribution uses it. The Linux kernel is a shitty monolithic kernel and the Hurd would be better, but thanks to people like you - who totally ignore the GNU operating system and work of its developers, no one knows about the Hurd and people call Linux an entire OS. The Hurd is far better designed, but underdeveloped. And from user's point of view, I can't see the kernel directly, but I know one thing - even if it is a shitty monolithic kernel, it is still free software and its developers are doing a great work - it never crashed once on my computer and I'm using GNU/Linux for a long time now. The only time my GNU/Linux worked improperly was when my hard drive died, but kernel didn't crash, it informed me gently there's a problem with memory. On the other hand Windows 10 crashes about 4 times a month with their ":) OPSIE WOPSIE, we made a fucko wingo". Once I pulled out a sata hard drive from running windows 7 machine Windows threw BSOD. I don't know what the fuck are you running on your device, but that can't be Windows running on it. And what GNU/Linux had you been running? Because it sounds like Hannah Montana Linux.
Nope. Function calls become 64 bit calls, The stack suddenly has a lot more 64 bit values on it. Everything generally gets bigger.
x32 is the answer to compact code on x86_64 machines. Boot the 64bit kernel but just about everything else should be x32 code, because bash doesn't really to access more than a GB. But it just hasn't become very popular for some reason.
As developers lose access to those old machines, as people stop caring enough to invest the time to maintain the code so it builds, they drop arches. They aren't going to hold up a release because it won't build on 68K or some other obsolete arch. And x86 is quickly becoming obsolete. When was the last 32 bit only CPU made? Wasn't it an Atom destined for netbooks?
Aren't function calls stored as offsets relative to the PC? Aren't there short-form instructions?
Wrong. Desktop Windows doesn't support PAE so every machine sold with 4GB wastes memory since Windows has to toss 1/2 to 1GB to make room in the flat memory map for the PCI space.
Most Linux distros default to or make available a huge memory supporting 32bit kernel that can access 64GB with PAE but there is a performance price to pay with a return to the bad old days of segment registers.. If your machine supports x86_64, and it probably does, you should install the 64 bit kernel. You can even keep most of the 32bit userland.
What about the fact that by any definition of the word "malware" the telemetry bits of Win10 qualify? And unless you have a corporate edition there really isn't any real fix
Nothing else really matters, doesn't matter how slick the preload support is for all of the hardware, doesn't matter about 3rd party software support. It is infected and you can't cure it. Ever.
And it will only get worse, the DRM locks tighter. You don't get to bitch when the chains start to bind you in a spot you care about because you knew and should have gotten the Hell out before now.
Give two people a random pile of (identical) hardware, one a Linux install DVD / USB stick and the other a Windows disc. See which one gets to a desktop and the Internet first. OEM preloads are the only way people can deal with Windows. And if we could ever break the monopoly bundling, OEMs would handle Linux too and make it "just work."
For some uses. Good luck on jump tables function pointers stored in structures, every address pushed onto the stack, etc. Just look up how big a stack frame is on x86_64 when the whole CPU state gets pushed. Bleh!
What are they gonna do? Publish my orgasm face on the cover of a magazine? Punish me for being a bad goy by denying me that cushy job that's reserved for jews and trust fund kids anyways? Send me to a FEMA camp for being a bad goy that they would send me to anyways for downloading a copy of the Tails, notorious for being the operating system of choice for domestic terrorists? Not to mention my keen interest in Kurt Saxon's publications
I hope these become viable solutions. As of right now, there is no x86(-64) emulation which is any good on those platforms, but plenty of good PowerPC emulation on x86 platforms.
You actually can disable most of it through settings, and the rest can be blocked by outgoing firewall rules.
As noted in that link, there are other subsystems in the computer phoning home, and for better or worse, that is how important updates are often served these days.
But let's get some perspective here. Not every computer you use has to be a veritable fortress of privacy. Your gaming PC shouldn't be where your crypto wallets are stored, for example. I've got more than half a dozen computers for various purposes, and Linux is installed on most of them. But for browsing the clearnet, gaming, writing software, and making music, Windows 10 is amazing.
Wow, to not have Long Mode on x86 your CPU must be a Pentium III or lower. Even most Pentium IV's except for a select few have Long Mode capability. 64bit Capable Pentium IV's cost $5 and its not a Windows thing of needing to use some .COM file as you're only talking about Unix. So why are you living in 32bit x86 still?
I'm glad we agree.
As linux desktop user, I'm actually glad the year of the linux desktop will never come, as it'll keep some of the brainlets ITT away from my desktop of choice. More mainstream appeal is always a bad thing.
Brainlets are only going for the brainlet distros that do all the work for you and use the Gnome desktop. Everybody else can configure their own system to have precisely what they like for themselves.
I changed my mind. I was drunk while writing that sentence. Windows isn't and never will be the best desktop OS.
Why GNU/Linux is better desktop OS than Windows:
1. I decide what software I run - if I don't like something I can remove it, wheres on Windows you have two browsers (IE and Edge) and you can't remove any.
2. If I don't like how the system looks like, I can change it, by installing a different theme, WM, DE, whereas on Windows it wasn't possible to change a theme, besides what microsoft gave you and you still change entire DE/WM.
3. On GNU/Linux I decide when and if I want to update my computer and updates mostly don't require rebooting, whereas on Windows you can't update anything without having to reboot the system, if you don't have an SSD drive updating can take even an hour. Imagine what would happen, if you really needed check something on your computer quickly, but Windows would be busy updating its shit.
4. On GNU/Linux I have a huge repository of both free as in freedom and free as in beer computer programs, nothing spies on me. Installing from repository is so much faster than having to browse the Internet, then downloading installer, then running it and finally finding out you've just downloaded nonfree malware shit. Even in the Microsoft Store there's malware, because guess what, every proprietary program is malware by definition. Package management is fucking dead on Windows.
5. The system is lightweight - it uses low amount of memory, disk space and processor. GNU/Linux works fine with 2 GB of RAM, while windows is barely usable with 4GB. Windows is bloatware breaking good old hardware - all these read/write operations literally kill your hard drive.
6. After some time Windows gets slower and slower and you have to reinstall it. This isn't a case on GNU/Linux and if you're running things like Guix System, NixOS or Gentoo, you don't even have to reinstall to upgrade, because system upgrades itself painlessly.
This is my point of view. I had used and sometimes still have to use :( Windows myself and it is a complete piece of garbage. I remember having to deal with malware on Vista, Installing GNU/Linux was the best, related to computers decision in my life. I've never had malware on my GNU/Linux, Windows 10 is safer than its predecessors, but it is still insecure, for example my friend installed a shitty game from Steam containing a cryptocurrency miner. And even without that, a system with backdoors built-in isn't secure at all.
What a bad decision, that's exactly what I was expecting Canonical to do. Wonder what will Mint fags do, are they going to sink with Ubuntu, or will they switch to Debian as a base? Canonical is constantly making bad decisions:
Dropping GNOME to develop Unity. Drop Unity after long time to use GNOME again. Stopping development of upstart, eat systemdicks. Waste your time developing Ubuntu Touch, drop it after few years. They're constantly compromising themselves. Wonder when will they abandon snap packages and introduce flatpak instead. They're just wasting their money, they should give it to someone else.
just use gentoo and compile for whatever platform you need, jeez. Fucking brainlets.
If you're talking about Linux, I agree.
General Linux problems
>Year 2016 pleased us with several local root Linux kernel vulnerabilities as well as countless other critical vulnerabilities. In 2016 Linux turned out to be significantly more insecure than often-ridiculed and laughed-at Microsoft Windows.
486 only added a few instructions and FPU. The Pentium, Pentium Pro and Pentium III only really added SIMD instructions. Note the Pentium II didn't add any new instructions not already on the Pentium Pro.
You're not listening me at all, you just vomit with this spam without even responding to my arguments. Did Microsoft pay you for this, or are you trolling? Now I'm going to read all this shit to check if it is a valuable source.
I just did. I even bolded that line for you. See references [8-13].
with proprietary software only dedicated glowniggers will know about the vulnerabilities and they might never get fixed.
As opposed to even more people knowing about them, and getting fixed even less frequently. See above.
What he's trying to say is that the sites you posted listing vulnerabilities for each system are biased, because it's much, much harder to find vulnerabilities by analyzing the output of a dissasembler than nice commented C source code.
Public sites are part of the group who doesn't have access to the Windows source code (unlike glow niggers), so Windows could have 100 times as many vulnerabilities as Linux and still show up as being safer on those sites. But in reality it isn't, because glow niggers have access to the source code and thus to the non-public exploits.
WSL is not for servers, its specifically aimed at developers for deployment testing and as a SSH terminal. Putting WSL increases the value proposition of Windows 10, significantly, and reduces the necessity of VM Linux installs on dev workstations. It's huuuge.
You obviously didn't read through the relevant links above. Mac OS X had the highest vulnerabilities in 2015, and that's closed source. Bugs are typically found not by code audits, but by people tripping over them. The real bias is the install count, and so it stands to reason that Linux bugs are actually under reported. The other damning fact above is that even when security bugs are known, they aren't prioritized over other types of bugs, and often go unfixed for long periods of time.
Mac OS X is based on many free components, for example Darwin system, you can check the code on their website. opensource.apple.com
Yeah, just like Meltdown and Spectre - after 25 years google audited it.
More like crackers wanting to exploit vulnerabilities. Or do you really think applefags not knowing what a processor is can report a bug?
Well top spot this year is a bunch of closed source Adobe software. You don't need source code to find vulnerabilities, is the point.
Sure, but there is more incentive to find exploits in software with more marketshare.
BUY NEW HARDWARE GOYIM, QUICKLY, MY POCKETS AREN'T FULL ENOUGH YET
MAKE SURE IT HAS (((IME))) AND (((PSP))) ON IT, OOOOOOOOOOOOY VEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEYYYYYYYYYYY
Off yourself to save us the trouble kike, we're not going to give you more money, in fact, we'll take it and your life with it.
The only reason 32 bit hardware does not serve almost all needs is that our software has dropped in quality immensely through the ages. Part of the reason why is the jews want the goyim buying more and more hardware and disposing of hardware that still works perfectly and should be able to perform the task it has always performed.
A 32-bit OS supports 16-bit code, a 64-bit OS doesn't.
why is that even a thing in 2019
(normally if you have sources you will easily rebuild for 32 or 64 bits)
Maybe if the player doesn't give a fuck. Sounds realistic?
Maybe MacOS and Adobe have so much more vulnerabilities total that even with a bias towards reporting for open source software, it still ends up with more reported vulnerabilities. Or maybe the vulnerabilities were found and reported by Adobe themselves.
That's laughable, unless by "tripping over" you mean running a fuzzer. But then without the source code it's difficult to distinguish if a crash was just a crash or a vulnerability. And in any case for open source you can "trip over" them too, OR do a code audit. So the rate of finding exploits is still higher.
You conveniently left out the value of the target. Linux is run in all kinds of important web servers which if compromised could infect millions of Wondows machines just by giving them an .exe, plus you can get a shitload of user passwords. Windows on the other hand is harder to pwn through remote exploits, because most of the time it isn't exposing any services or ports to the Internet, as most of them are behind NAT.
0,0529 USD have been transferred to your account
Ok, as I said before, I started reading the list on this website itvision.altervista.org
And here is the first part of my comments on it. There'll be more, but now I'm tired.
You're reading this article in a wrong way, the author isn't trying to show that Windows 10 is better than GNU/Linux. Below are some reasons why I think GNU/Linux is better, because for me these things compensate for the disadvantages of GNU/Linux and for me, personally disadvantages of Windows are much more painfull.
The second part of the first part:
Now I'll look at severe problems and 'problems' listed on this page. I'm not denying GNU/Linux has issues, I know that, but some of these problems are only problems for people not carying about freedom or not knowing what exactly GNU/Linux is.
Hardware support - this paragraph mainly focuses on things that are not a fault of the OS itself, like the lack of drivers or drivers being worse than those on Windows. Reasons it is in this way: 1. Manufacturers of hardware don't want their hardware to be working well on GNU/Linux or don't provide support for it at all, because Microsoft probably pays for it to keep its dominance or because they simply don't want spend their time and money on developing software for the miniority. And again, we're not trying to replace Windows at all cost, we have our rules and we often don't use proprietary software, so we only use drivers or firmware respecting user's freedom and of course devices able to run free software only are uncommon on the market and reverse engineering is hard and time-consuming, it is hard to reimplement all features without knowing how a device works. But libre drivers and firmware are often designed better on hardware capable of running libre software, for example LIMA driver for MALI GPU is going to be 40% more efficient than its proprietary replacement. If someone is to blame, that is hardware developers, they fucked up.
He'll either have to eat his own words or throw a obscene amount of money at the wine project for this to not blow up in his face.
I'm betting 20bux this'll be like Mir all over again, damaging the Linux ecosystem for some time, tarnishing Ubuntu's reputation and costing dear ol' Mark lotsa dosh for nothing.
Right Mir, forgot it on my list of things Canonical have fucked up.
He doesnt have to do that. He could just compile wine statically. That way you can have 32bit wine without any 32bit libs on 64bit. Is he such a nigger he doesn't know what static compiliation is? Just run alpine linux or gentoo with 32bit musl and get your dev enviroment setup, then compile wine statically. Then you can trash the whole system and preserve the wine binary to distribute on ubuntu or any linux kernel system that then runs on anything you want with in kernel 32bit support for its architecture. I'm sure they already use gentoo to compile everything else...
I suggest musl because I switched from glibc to it and my whole /usr/ lost 1.5GB of space just by switching the libc. So the size difference is nice for distributers with limited bandwidth.
Speaking of static wine does anybody have a statically compiled copy of the newer wine's that aren't wine-2.0? I need it for distribution reasons....
Speculation aside, the point stands.
My argument wasn't "Linux good, Windows bad." Like I said, I was an exclusive Linux user for a decade, and I still use it exclusively on the server side.
'Linux Desktop sucks''. You can point the fingers anywhere you want. Fact is, proprietary software is more polished.
I can see a lot of users leaving over this.
This is funny, even manjaro managed to get back it's 32 bit support after arch dropped it.
Why in the world would they drop 32bit? isn't ubuntu's main audiance thirdworld shitters? I doubt pajeets can afford anything beyond a toaster and 90% of the time those using ubuntu don't have a great computer.
This is just being retarded on their part.
top kek, strawman doesn't even begin to describe it
You can't even use it for gaming, why would this even be a concern? You are forced for play old retro games on it by default (tried testing Shadow of the Colossus on it's lowest settings with absolute trash results on Ubuntu). 64bit is best for linux because it's mostly for work and visual displays. Why bother with 32bit? So you get a ram boost? And use it on what? Blender? Only to have trouble even rendering live environments? I don't see the benefit really. I do see however, a benefit to using a 64bit display for i3 or awesome, or any of those fancy tiling window managers. Is there something I'm missing?
*forced TO play
Who? Which users use only 32 bit CPUs and Ubuntu at the same time?
So much going on here that makes me want to throw up
Budgie is very nice out of the box. Still no reason to change it. Maybe I will find a decent wallpaper but I can't be assed.
Seeing as amd64 has been the norm for the past 15 years unless you have one of those shitty first-gen netbooks .
There is a 100% chance multiple government agencies have complete control over your computer. Stop living in denial.
Brainlets use macOS because (((they))) tell them to.
Pentium 4 supports x86-64. Only early atoms did not support x86-64
All Atom processors implement the x86 (IA-32) instruction set; however, support for the AMD 64 instruction set was not added until the desktop Diamondville and desktop and mobile Pineview cores. The Atom N2xx and Z5xx series Atom models cannot run x86-64 code. The Centerton server processors will support the Intel 64 instruction set.
Only the very last models. The overwhelming majority of Pentium 4 CPUs were x86 only.
(Similarly, almost all Pentium 4 CPUs didn't support the NX bit, which means Windows 7 is the last Windows which can be installed on them.)
Both snap and flatpacks are a hipster solution to portable Linux programs.
playing old games is a start :^)
static binaries have already existed for a long time. theres no need for these new memes.