PDA

View Full Version : [ubuntu] 64-bit 10.4-lts



subcook
August 23rd, 2010, 11:10 PM
Here is my Rig:

Intel i5-750
8 GB DDR3 Ram
Nvidia GTX 460
1 TB HDD

I want 10.4 LTS 64bit, but am under the impression is not quite stable (maybe this is the wrong terminology for where its at) I'd rather not install 9.X and wait to upgrade if possible. I'm fairly ne to the linux community, as I hav been messing with it since february. Can some enlighten me? is 10.4 really that bad in the 64bit version???


Thanks in advance to all for all of your help, and thanks to those who have assisted my with other things thus far...


-Cheers

LowSky
August 23rd, 2010, 11:14 PM
Who said 10.04 for 64bit wasn't stable?

It works just fine! Heck its works just as good!

thane1
August 23rd, 2010, 11:30 PM
Ditto;
I find it every bit as stable as the 9-- versions in my experience for 64 bit. Only drawback is the ugly (in not only my opinion) purple startup screens, although that only lasts until you log in and the loss of some control of individual sound event controls. Why not take advantage of the dedicated work of the ubuntu crew in offering an upgrade. Any shortcomings will probably be shortlived and solved by an update. Only caveat I can see is IF you're looking for an absolutely rock solid, stable system in which, you cannot afford maybe a days effort to sort out a minor bug. The new LTS long term version is out and there's a new maintenance release, which means you don't need to run as many security, etc updates after installing the OS. Go for it IMO. Cheers.

KdotJ
August 23rd, 2010, 11:34 PM
Also, for 8gb of RAM you will need to have 64 bit version. You could install the PAE package under 32 bit... But 64bit is definitely your best bet

amauk
August 23rd, 2010, 11:37 PM
PAE is a hack to overcome non-64bit capable hardware

Under PAE, while the system as a whole can address more than 4GB RAM, no single process can address more than 2GB

KdotJ
August 24th, 2010, 01:29 AM
PAE is a hack to overcome non-64bit capable hardware

Under PAE, while the system as a whole can address more than 4GB RAM, no single process can address more than 2GB

Thanks for the details, and another reason for opting 64

subcook
August 24th, 2010, 06:18 AM
Okay,

On a serious note, I'm not trying to trash 10.4-LTS 64 bit...

I did post a thread a few weeks ago which has seemed to disappeared ...and I was going to feed off of that thread until I did notice it disapeared.

This whole idea of mine happened when I went to go download 10.4-LTS 64bit......when I went to go do this, it clearly, and very blantently said " not recommended for personal desktop use"

When I inquired upon these very forums, it was confimed to give a bunch of people problems....

*confused*

Please help me figure this out...as I want Ubuntu on my fancey new Rig....

Thank you very much in advance for helping me clear this up, I am not trying to cause this community problems....


-Cheers


P.S. Ugly purple desktop??? - That is not the concern that I have....


Thanks!

Chauncellor
August 24th, 2010, 06:35 AM
Don't worry: I think the ugly purple that he is referring to is the low res splash screen that proprietary NVidia drivers give.

Agent ME
August 24th, 2010, 06:49 AM
This whole idea of mine happened when I went to go download 10.4-LTS 64bit......when I went to go do this, it clearly, and very blantently said " not recommended for personal desktop use"
I wasn't sure what you were talking about, but I just checked the ubuntu website and it really does say that about the 64-bit version. I'm surprised and I have no clue why they would say that. It works perfectly fine for me and many others. 64-bit linux is very mature and I do not know of any outstanding problems with it.

NightwishFan
August 24th, 2010, 06:51 AM
I highly recommend using 64-bit. Though granted I am just a random guy on the forums. However I have been using 64-bit Ubuntu for a few months longer than even the date on the left. :)

I suppose it is not recommended as it is a newer Linux port than i3/i686. Ubuntu does support 64-bit quite well though.

cascade9
August 24th, 2010, 07:01 AM
I wasn't sure what you were talking about, but I just checked the ubuntu website and it really does say that about the 64-bit version. I'm surprised and I have no clue why they would say that. It works perfectly fine for me and many others. 64-bit linux is very mature and I do not know of any outstanding problems with it.

The 'offical' explaination is on lauchpad-


Hi there,
Here is the official explanation. We revisit the download pages with each release. The goal of the download pages it to make it as simple as possible for the average non-technical user to get the right version. There are software compatibility issues with 64-bit that makes it less suitable for the mass market than 32 bit. We took the view that 64-bit computer users will know that and proceed with downloading the correct version for them. Strongly advising people in one direction we felt would mean fewer people having issues ultimately. A non-technical user might for instance think 64-bit must be twice as good as 32-bit.
I accept that the wording could be interpreted negatively. We will revisit when we update these pages for the 10.10 release. We will also take on board explaining some more about why we make the recommendation which is reasonable and helpful.
So thank you all for the energy. I am going to close this bug.
Gerry Carr - Head of Platform Marketing


https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-website-content/+bug/585940

And here is just one of the many threads here about the issue-

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1526391

I think that there is probably some reason for the whole "64-bit - Not recommended for daily desktop usage" warning, but its badly worded at the very least......

64bit user myself here (though not ubuntu), and I haven't had any issues at all.

subcook
August 24th, 2010, 07:46 AM
This is great, and I'm glad that others understand my my concern.

I have had my new rig for over three weeks now. The first thing I did when I got it was to go to that very web page and see the "10.4-LTS-Not recommended for daily desktop use"

---I thank you all for following through with my claims, and taking the time to understand my concern----

My red flag was extremely raised, when the initial thread I posted was suddenly deleted, this thread confirmed, by many people that 10.4-LTS was causing everyone problems...

The oringinal thread I started, I actually meant to continue, or rather, keep my initial thread going.....tonight, but it mysteriously disappeared....so I had to start a new one, which you all are reading now......hopefully this one will not disappear.

Because you all have been so kind as to enlighten me, and I am a fairly new Linux user, I will keep very heavy tabs, and provide feedback on how my experience goes.... I'll give something back.... meaning, feedback on the traditional smoothness of ubuntu....

I don't know why my original thread of this matter was deleted, but it is irrelevant at this point..... Thanks for the help all....


...subscribe...


Again, thanks for all of the assistance.....I'll keep you in the loop....

-Cheers

Paqman
August 24th, 2010, 07:54 AM
My red flag was extremely raised, when the initial thread I posted was suddenly deleted, this thread confirmed, by many people that 10.4-LTS was causing everyone problems...


Remember that this is a support forum. People generally only post here when they have problems. The silent majority who have perfectly working systems aren't going to come here and say so.

oldos2er
August 24th, 2010, 05:09 PM
I don't know why my original thread of this matter was deleted, but it is irrelevant at this point.

Are you referring to this thread? http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1526391

sadaruwan12
August 24th, 2010, 05:25 PM
I wasn't sure what you were talking about, but I just checked the ubuntu website and it really does say that about the 64-bit version. I'm surprised and I have no clue why they would say that. It works perfectly fine for me and many others. 64-bit linux is very mature and I do not know of any outstanding problems with it.

I think the webmaster of canonical must have blown a brain gasket or some thing to put such thing under 64-bit version I'm using 64-bit version over 1 year now it runs smoothly as the 32-bit and It just be me I think 64-bit is more stable than the 32-bit.

So don't worry use it for your new rig and theres nothing wrong with that version.

uRock
August 24th, 2010, 05:31 PM
PAE is a hack to overcome non-64bit capable hardware

Under PAE, while the system as a whole can address more than 4GB RAM, no single process can address more than 2GB
BS! I have a close friend who does programming in 32bit and he utilizes his 8GB RAM to the fullest. Don't spread FUD. And here is a link that shows someone accidentally using their 8GB. http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=9753391#post9753391

subcook
August 24th, 2010, 07:27 PM
FYI to everyone:

been messing with it all day with no problems, installed perfectly, all I have to do is install the driver for my GTX 460.

Thanks to all!!

amauk
August 24th, 2010, 11:46 PM
BS! I have a close friend who does programming in 32bit and he utilizes his 8GB RAM to the fullest. Don't spread FUD. And here is a link that shows someone accidentally using their 8GB. http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=9753391#post9753391you might want to re-read my post
FUD it is not


Under PAE, while the system as a whole can address more than 4GB RAM, no single process can address more than 2GB

Under PAE, the system as a whole can address up to 64Gb, but the amount of address space per process is limited

uRock
August 24th, 2010, 11:56 PM
you might want to re-read my post
FUD it is not

You are causing people to doubt that the PAE kernel will stand up to its fullest capabilities, which may cause someone to fear wasting time setting it up, which may leave them feeling uncertain.


Under PAE, the system as a whole can address up to 64Gb, but the amount of address space per process is limited
That is not what I have heard. Why would a developer who specializes in customized Linux applications use PAE if it doesn't work to its fullest? I doubt he would be using it if it didn't stand up to his company's needs.

amauk
August 25th, 2010, 12:05 AM
That is not what I have heard.Then you heard wrong

Why would a developer who specializes in customized Linux applications use PAE if it doesn't work to its fullest? I doubt he would be using it if it didn't stand up to his company's needs.Most likely because he does not have a 64bit processor

Oh, I'm sorry
it's a 3Gb limit per process, not 2
http://kerneltrap.org/node/3816

uRock
August 25th, 2010, 02:06 AM
Then you heard wrong
Most likely because he does not have a 64bit processor

Oh, I'm sorry
it's a 3Gb limit per process, not 2
http://kerneltrap.org/node/3816
He does, but he has to build using 32bit for client support. Anyway, have fun. I am not here to argue.