PDA

View Full Version : 32 bits



oneleded
July 3rd, 2018, 06:29 AM
8 bits is long gone. i remember 16bit programs more, then they bit the dust [no pun intended]. soon 32bit will, being replaced by 64bit, followed by 128bit..
anybody care to speculate on 32bit. it wont be too much longer. a year or 2, maybe 4. firefox has dropped 32bit support recently, i think firefox support for 32bit, last till august, this year 2018.:( oh well, progress in its many forms an fashions..

pauljw
July 3rd, 2018, 12:23 PM
8 bits is long gone. i remember 16bit programs more, then they bit the dust [no pun intended]. soon 32bit will, being replaced by 64bit, followed by 128bit..
anybody care to speculate on 32bit. it wont be too much longer. a year or 2, maybe 4. firefox has dropped 32bit support recently, i think firefox support for 32bit, last till august, this year 2018.:( oh well, progress in its many forms an fashions..

It can't happen soon enough as far as I'm concerned. Even 10yr old systems have 64bit processors in them. Why would anyone expect devs to support a platform that virtually no one is using. It's hard enough to keep the current systems up to date and safe without then turning around and duplicating the efforts for antiquated platforms.

For a couple hundred dollars, you can buy a modern i3 or i5 laptop w/4G RAM and 500G hard drive on eBay any day of the week. Time to move into the modern era. JMHO

oneleded
July 4th, 2018, 02:43 AM
good point

pauljw
July 4th, 2018, 12:33 PM
I do understand, sometimes we have a system for several years that we've painstakingly configured to be the "perfect" system for our use. But over time they just become too outdated and unsupportable. It's happened to me several times and it's always painful to start over, yet it can be fun playing with new technology and the newer software for it. As I get older, the fun factor isn't what it used to be, but I keep telling myself that the mental challenge is good for me. :)

mastablasta
July 4th, 2018, 01:39 PM
just checked and while we use 64 bit on work PC, programs such as office, ERP + some legacy stuff are all 32 bit.

not so long ago there were 32 bit atoms still made there are also plenty 32bit ARMs. i would imagine that at least in the business environment the 32bit is not going away any time soon.

i am not quite sure why it held on for so long (16bit ->32 bit change was faster as i remember) but i guess it has something to do with bad experience with some 64bit apps at the start. even now some opensource apps that are made for 64bit windows 10 do not work properly on all machines while the 32 bit ones work just fine.

oneleded
July 5th, 2018, 05:57 AM
probably wont go away in the government either, here for a while. they seem to lag behind 20, 30 years, or longer.:p

Paddy Landau
July 6th, 2018, 01:49 PM
As a number, 32-bit is limited to ± 2 billion. That's just not enough for modern times; it's only 2Gb.

As a number, 64-bit is limited to ± 9 quintillion (around 9 times 10^18, or 9 exabytes). That is a gigantic number, enough to last us for well past the foreseeable future.

Unless quantum computing opens up an unimagined need (like, really unimagined), it is unlikely that we'll ever need a 128-bit machine. Because 128-bit is limited to a humongous gazillion (nearly twice 10^38 to be specific), which makes 64-bit look like a miniscule dot. It even makes the number of atoms in the sun look piddly.

So don't worry about conversion to 128-bit. It's not going to happen in our lifetime, or that of our children or grandchildren.

Disclaimer: I could be wrong…

poorguy
July 6th, 2018, 02:07 PM
@ Paddy Landau

That's mind blowing as hell :confused: and good to know that my old computers will still be usable throughout the rest of my lifetime. :D

Yeah I used to be a die hard 32 bit user it was the norm and now I'm in the modern 64 bit world and still using 10 year old computers. ;)

HermanAB
July 6th, 2018, 02:15 PM
There has been all kinds of processors, including 4 bits, 24 bits, 48 bits *and* 128 bits (DEC VAX for example). I think there even was a 12 bit calculator chip.

At university, I designed a 24 bit processor and implemented all of two instructions in micro code: add and xor - W00h00.

Paddy Landau
July 6th, 2018, 03:21 PM
There has been all kinds of processors, including … 128 bits
Woah! That's crazy. Some of those old machines, as I recall, had many CPU instructions (before RISC became popular), so for that reason they needed larger words for efficiency. But 128-bit? Wow. They were looking into the far future, ha ha!

oneleded
February 9th, 2019, 06:58 AM
i got lubuntu, on the old 32 bit windows i got in 2000. and while, when i upgrade, to a more advanced system. i still want to keep lubuntu. i have to learn a lot, to, still use this os. when learning how to use a free system, even being free to learn how.. why even try to learn, when its as windows. and uncomfortable zone, spy's. i'm only 63, yet, i still need to learn.
innovation, comes from desperation, and new ideals. why, keep older things going?, because it leads to progress, an innovation. getting old tech, to work well, makes new tech work better. if linux was only for new tech, i would be the less for it.

JayKay3OOO
February 9th, 2019, 09:36 PM
We're at the best point of computer technology at the moment - At least up to the point where we work out how to get it to do all our jobs and we're all just computer mechanics working out how to make a computer to do that job too - Oh skynet, were you such a crazy idea....:popcorn:

lammert-nijhof
February 10th, 2019, 04:45 AM
I just installed 32-bits Peppermint 9 Respin on a 2003 Pentium 4 HT with 2 x 40 GB of IDE disks. It uses btrfs with "RAID-0" and LZO compression. It boots in 45 seconds.

I hate those modern times, there is no time anymore to fetch a cup of coffee during booting, even not with a 32-bits PC.

This beautiful piece of antiques from 15˝ years ago has been made very useful again with super modern Linux Software. What hardware do we have here:
- A case with Windows 98-SE sticker from Compaq
- A motherboard with a last update of October 2003
- A Pentium 4 HT on 3.0 GHz (32 bits) a CPU with dual memory access. Very modern for 2003.
- 2 x 1 GB DDR memory at 400 MHz
- Classic PCI sound card
- 2 x 40 GB IDE disks, each with ~60 MB/s throughput
- 1 x DVD ROM
- 17" Philips Monitor (CRT) at 1280 x 1024
- 600 Watt power-supply, as a bonus for the purchase of a new cabinet for my future AMD Ryzen PC. The power-supply had 2 old Molex connectors for the old IDE disks.

Firefox loads in ~1 second from the cache with only one exception; the 1st time after booting (5 seconds). Who needs YouTube HD videos, if you can run it at 480p? The cache size using Firefox is >1 GB.

I think we should keep 32-bits. Who needs >4 GB, it runs perfectly in 2 GB :)

mastablasta
February 11th, 2019, 02:08 PM
.... we're all just computer mechanics working out how to make a computer to do that job too ....

meh, they will do that as well. they already compose songs and such. the programming will be probably something like programing the computer in star trek.

"computer take me to the nearest M planet and drop out of warp at teleport distance".

poorguy
February 11th, 2019, 03:54 PM
I just installed 32-bits Peppermint 9 Respin on a 2003 Pentium 4 HT with 2 x 40 GB of IDE disks. It uses btrfs with "RAID-0" and LZO compression. It boots in 45 seconds.

I hate those modern times, there is no time anymore to fetch a cup of coffee during booting, even not with a 32-bits PC.

This beautiful piece of antiques from 15˝ years ago has been made very useful again with super modern Linux Software. What hardware do we have here:
- A case with Windows 98-SE sticker from Compaq
- A motherboard with a last update of October 2003
- A Pentium 4 HT on 3.0 GHz (32 bits) a CPU with dual memory access. Very modern for 2003.
- 2 x 1 GB DDR memory at 400 MHz
- Classic PCI sound card
- 2 x 40 GB IDE disks, each with ~60 MB/s throughput
- 1 x DVD ROM
- 17" Philips Monitor (CRT) at 1280 x 1024
- 600 Watt power-supply, as a bonus for the purchase of a new cabinet for my future AMD Ryzen PC. The power-supply had 2 old Molex connectors for the old IDE disks.

Firefox loads in ~1 second from the cache with only one exception; the 1st time after booting (5 seconds). Who needs YouTube HD videos, if you can run it at 480p? The cache size using Firefox is >1 GB.

I think we should keep 32-bits. Who needs >4 GB, it runs perfectly in 2 GB :)
Peppermint 9 is an excellent Linux Distro.

Have a look at this if you really want to make that computer fly.

https://antixlinux.com/about/

oneleded
February 12th, 2019, 07:09 AM
I just installed 32-bits Peppermint 9 Respin on a 2003 Pentium 4 HT with 2 x 40 GB of IDE disks. It uses btrfs with "RAID-0" and LZO compression. It boots in 45 seconds.

I hate those modern times, there is no time anymore to fetch a cup of coffee during booting, even not with a 32-bits PC.

This beautiful piece of antiques from 15˝ years ago has been made very useful again with super modern Linux Software. What hardware do we have here:
- A case with Windows 98-SE sticker from Compaq
- A motherboard with a last update of October 2003
- A Pentium 4 HT on 3.0 GHz (32 bits) a CPU with dual memory access. Very modern for 2003.
- 2 x 1 GB DDR memory at 400 MHz
- Classic PCI sound card
- 2 x 40 GB IDE disks, each with ~60 MB/s throughput
- 1 x DVD ROM
- 17" Philips Monitor (CRT) at 1280 x 1024
- 600 Watt power-supply, as a bonus for the purchase of a new cabinet for my future AMD Ryzen PC. The power-supply had 2 old Molex connectors for the old IDE disks.

Firefox loads in ~1 second from the cache with only one exception; the 1st time after booting (5 seconds). Who needs YouTube HD videos, if you can run it at 480p? The cache size using Firefox is >1 GB.

I think we should keep 32-bits. Who needs >4 GB, it runs perfectly in 2 GB :)

i have near the same set up. a dell, optiplex 270. i can add 2 more memory, at 1GB DDR 400 MHz. to the motherboard.
on my 2nd HD, i have lubuntu installed. it takes a bit to start, but is so much faster than XP, when i visit xp, on the 1st HD, i cant believe how slow it is to start, or shut down.
once ya get a shot of linux, is enough to want more.

oneleded
June 16th, 2019, 09:27 AM
even the small dristro's for the most part, are going 64 bit's. sum, of the linux sites say, with in two years, 32 bit's will be gone. it had a good run though. ya cant knock that. 64 bit's, will it run that long? dont know. windows XP, had a long spell. after it, more an more version's. even the light dristro's, linux are going 64 bit's,, a sign of the times. time to upgrade, an understatement big time. lols
on the side, ford keeps making their trucks bigger. dont know why. my small 85 ford ranger would get 27mpg, on the open road, pulling a fully loaded john boat, camping stuff, an such. the newer trucks, 15-16 miles per gallon on the open road, huge, as find a parking spot,[granted the ranger i had was small,4-cyl], an now all the companies, US, want to get rid of small vehicles. crazy, aint it. sorry, i got carried away..and off subject.

kpatz
June 16th, 2019, 05:51 PM
When 16 bits became the norm in the MS-DOS days, even Bill Gates said we would never need more than 640K of memory. I remember those days (yes... I'm a geezer)

Then when 32 bits became popular with the 386 and higher, we could then access 4 GB of memory. Back then, that was a LOT... never imagined we'd max that out, especially since virtual memory could be even bigger on these chips. Now we're buying machines with at least 8 GB, and more often, 16 GB RAM standard, and high-end machines with 32GB or more. I remember when hard drives were measured in tens of megabytes. LOL.

Now we're in 64 bits and have plenty of address space for any amount of RAM we're likely to have now, but for how long? Even though each bit doubles the address space, and the numbers are increasing exponentially, we may end up getting into the exabyte RAM territory in another 20 years. And we'll be asking when 64-bit will die as we install 128-bit Ubuntu 40.04 LTS. LOL.

There's additional benefits to "more bits" besides memory size... data size. 64 bit CPUs can process 8 bytes at once, and assuming the data bus is 64 bits, can write 8 bytes to and from RAM at once. It can do integer math up to 2^64 without additional instructions. 128 bits will increase that even more (16 bytes at once).

ubotbuddy
June 17th, 2019, 08:22 PM
My old analog system runs on a binary system, and my processor id faster than anything on the market and it is 100% hack proof.

OH wait! Are we talking about computer OS's?

I haven't reboot my brain in years and I still dream in Assembler. Ahhhhh the good ole days.

Yes, I'm an old geezer too.

Buddy

Shibblet
June 18th, 2019, 07:00 PM
With emulation and virtualization technologies available, going from 32bit to 64bit should be a no-brainer.

oneleded
June 19th, 2019, 08:22 AM
tis a sad day, yet, a better day. i some feel like i lost a best friend.. good thing i met linux...

sisco311
June 19th, 2019, 09:48 AM
My old analog system runs on a binary system, and my processor id faster than anything on the market and it is 100% hack proof.

OH wait! Are we talking about computer OS's?



Not enough data. But...

If androids do dream of electric sheep, then there is a chance (depending on the observer) that your old analog system runs on a quantum computer.

42 :)

oneleded
June 20th, 2019, 07:20 AM
is 42 the ultimate answer?
work's for me

oneleded
June 22nd, 2019, 05:33 AM
Ya ever get the feeling it's time to move on, but the HP deskjet 5150, dont use much ink, and the Logitech, Wireless Optical Trackman Mouse, you will not ever find anything like that again.
yes, i dream of the 55,1st edition, Chevy Truck Apache, an much more. when andriod's dream of electronic sheep,
then they will find eventually out, 42, is the answer..

TheFu
June 22nd, 2019, 02:55 PM
There will be embedded 32-bit processors used for the next 50 yrs.
i386 CPUs are still being made today for embedded, industrial, use.
There are computers sized smaller than your pinky fingernail. They don't need 64-bit.

I earned a living porting 16-bit programs to 32-bit and again, porting 32-bit programs to 64-bit systems. Most of WINE is still 32-bit, so if you are a gamer, the dropping of 32-bit support by Ubuntu and other Linux distros is a huge problem for you. I have probably 20 games from the 1990s that are fun to run still. There isn't any 64-bit version and there never will be. I'll probably need to install Debian to run those games ever again. Some of them weren't cheap - over $100.

IPv6 is 128-bit addressing, BTW. I've heard that it is large enough to assign every molecule in the known universe a unique IP. ZFS has been using 128-bit addressing for 15+ yrs now. If you work with huge data, you want more data transferred in larger blocks to speed up processing. The data channels always lead before the CPUs can handle larger instructions natively.

There have been very odd size CPUs, which seems counter intuitive, since binary leads to powers of 2 solutions.
There have been 24, 26, 28, 31, 60 bit computers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/31-bit lots of other sizes that weren't too popular, but 31-bit was used on IBM 370s, which was crazy popular.

Don't be so elitist. Smaller bit-sized computing has a place.

superian
June 23rd, 2019, 09:33 PM
Most of WINE is still 32-bit, so if you are a gamer, the dropping of 32-bit support by Ubuntu and other Linux distros is a huge problem for you.

I get that servers is where Canonical make money, but this is how you alienate a big chunk of your desktop users.

It's particularly striking that the issue with Steam and WINE was known on the mailing list that decided this over a year ago, but this announcement seems to have come as an unpleasant surprise to both.

Artim
June 24th, 2019, 01:56 AM
They may continue the 32-bit libraries that Wine depends on... if they don't care to lose a bunch of desktop gamers.

TheFu
June 24th, 2019, 02:00 AM
I get that servers is where Canonical make money, but this is how you alienate a big chunk of your desktop users.

It's particularly striking that the issue with Steam and WINE was known on the mailing list that decided this over a year ago, but this announcement seems to have come as an unpleasant surprise to both.

They knew it was coming, but like a death in the family by someone with a chronic illness, it is still a surprise when it actually happens.
Valve developer says they won't support Ubuntu after 18.04.
https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2019/06/steam-announces-that-its-dropping-support-for-ubuntu

I don't game much, but I have a few games that I'd like to run from the 1990s at some point.

wildmanne39
June 24th, 2019, 02:28 AM
They may continue the 32-bit libraries that Wine depends on... if they don't care to lose a bunch of desktop gamers.
At the link below users can follow and contribute to the discussion of 32 bit support in Ubuntu.

https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-announce/2019-June/000245.html

There seems to have been a miscommunication that there will no 32 bit support from 19.10 on but apparently there will be, it will just be frozen updates like many of the programs that use 32 bit anyway.

https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/i386-architecture-will-be-dropped-starting-with-eoan-ubuntu-19-10/11263/84?u=d0od

freemedia2018
June 24th, 2019, 05:46 AM
There seems to have been a miscommunication that there will no 32 bit support from 19.10 on but apparently there will be, it will just be frozen updates

That miscommunication has taken the tech press by storm. If there are corrections to be made, they will need to travel far beyond this forum. Steam is supposedly dropping Ubuntu support over this. Wine is concerned as well.

wildmanne39
June 24th, 2019, 05:57 AM
That miscommunication has taken the tech press by storm. If there are corrections to be made, they will need to travel far beyond this forum. Steam is supposedly dropping Ubuntu support over this. Wine is concerned as well.

Indeed, but I am sure Canonical will work it out.

oneleded
June 24th, 2019, 06:20 AM
@ The Fubut; 31-bit was used on IBM 370s, which was crazy popular.
i thought there was something not quite with with mostly 2 squared, an beyond, being used.
maybe just using the prime number's? Hmmm 37
or maybe multible's of 42

mastablasta
June 24th, 2019, 08:46 AM
That miscommunication has taken the tech press by storm. If there are corrections to be made, they will need to travel far beyond this forum. Steam is supposedly dropping Ubuntu support over this. Wine is concerned as well.


Indeed, but I am sure Canonical will work it out.

"PR & marketing is easy, anyone can do it.", they said. :) same goes for sales etc. seen some brilliant engineers take over these things in projects they were assigned (or volunteered for) only to be brought to the ground by the market. hard.

in any case i do hope they will continue to offer the 32 bit libraries.

i am upset that they declared the main reason to be a financial one. but (at first glance) the pros clearly outweigh the cons and the financial part could have been resolved by crowdfunding, marketing or asking interested parties for funding. surely we are not talking about a million Euros per year. can one person maintain this? if yes, how much would it cost to hire them for a year?

i can understand they do not want to package the 32 bit apps, but the libraries that are used for backwards driver compatibility, wine, games... must stay. windows understands backwards compatibility, while in linux we have hardware compatibility dropped and now (it seems) software.

i am still crossing my fingers that they keep the libraries around at least until we get hardware that can run some kind of 32Box emulator. i doubt this will happen any time soon. the jumps in PC computing power are not as big as they were back in the 90's and 00's.

mastablasta
June 26th, 2019, 08:49 AM
well.... not sure if this will calm anyone down.

Statement on 32-bit i386 packages for Ubuntu 19.10 and 20.04 LTS:
https://ubuntu.com/blog/statement-on-32-bit-i386-packages-for-ubuntu-19-10-and-20-04-lts

also is Debian dropping support? aren't these packages the same in both OS?

Artim
June 26th, 2019, 09:42 AM
Debian isn't dropping 32-bit support yet.

vanquishedangel
July 1st, 2019, 01:37 PM
Honestly my opinion on this:

OK guys just to point out, the first mass produced 64 bit processors will now be 16 years years old (actually some are older) Any ones computer these days is capable of 64 bit, and therefore should be running a 64bit OS already. If you decided not to run a 64 bit OS knowing it will eventually replace 32 bit, and it has been announced for years now that this will happen, it is your fault.
As for programs not running in 64 bit, almost all do nowadays, and if a developer has not made their program 64 bit capable by now, it is that developers fault and you need to get on them about it, they are keeping us in archaic technology.
As for wine games, wine still runs 16 bit games fine and support has been gone for 16 bit forever now, so I think that will be fine.
The cost to maintain 32 bit when most are now on 64 bit, is outweighing the benefits of keeping it. I think they are dropping their 32 bit os, and they should be.

uRock
July 1st, 2019, 02:30 PM
Honestly my opinion on this:

OK guys just to point out, the first mass produced 64 bit processors will now be 16 years years old (actually some are older) Any ones computer these days is capable of 64 bit, and therefore should be running a 64bit OS already. If you decided not to run a 64 bit OS knowing it will eventually replace 32 bit, and it has been announced for years now that this will happen, it is your fault.
As for programs not running in 64 bit, almost all do nowadays, and if a developer has not made their program 64 bit capable by now, it is that developers fault and you need to get on them about it, they are keeping us in archaic technology.
As for wine games, wine still runs 16 bit games fine and support has been gone for 16 bit forever now, so I think that will be fine.
The cost to maintain 32 bit when most are now on 64 bit, is outweighing the benefits of keeping it. I think they are dropping their 32 bit os, and they should be.

This reminds me of why I stopped using Windows. I have hardware that was no longer supported when Windows 7 came out and even more hardware that became unsupported with Windows 10. Linux has always been advertised as being able to run on older hardware, but now we're supposed to just toss our hardware?

On the software side of things; While working at one of my previous employers I would get calls from people still using Windows XP, because they had custom software that would cost thousands to have rewritten to work on newer systems. I empathized with those people and I still do today.

People should not have to throw things away just because there's something newer. It is wasteful.

oneleded
July 2nd, 2019, 12:26 AM
I bought a gaming motherboard once, because my nephew used my computer. then he got a laptop, right after, and no longer used my PC. it is a S-series GICABYTE. i cant game.. anyhow, it runs 32 32/64 64 bits. still, it dont solve a problem if 32 bit, is not supported, i suppose.

mastablasta
July 3rd, 2019, 06:56 AM
People should not have to throw things away just because there's something newer. It is wasteful.

i have windows XP on my PC, i added a new disk where i installed Kubuntu to it. I bought the PC in 2004 with the intention of replacing the CPU later on with Phenom. I didn't do that so now i am stuck with single core AMD64. It had a few smaller upgrades and replacements (PSU, GPU, hard disk), but overall the configuration remained the same (e.g. replaced GPU has similar computing power, just a bit more ram). now the PC does all i need it to do. sure it is not the fastest (benchmark is about 500 points, compared to nowadays 10.000+ points), but it can do web browsing well, i can do online banking on it, tax return submissions, office work, picture editing, videos (watching and editing up to a point)... it can even run most directx9 as well as games up to about 2013 (but it depends on their GPU and CPU demands). i don't have that much time for games these days, but the kids do and they would use it for that. i also enjoy it sometimes to relax a bit.

so why should i throw it away if it works and works well for my needs? i though it would die and have been planning on getting a new one for a while, but it just keeps on working. also spending 60 EUR on a new 80 bronze PSU replacement is cheaper than getting a new 400 EUR PC.

CatKiller
July 3rd, 2019, 08:20 AM
i have windows XP on my PC, i added a new disk where i installed Kubuntu to it. I bought the PC in 2004 with the intention of replacing the CPU later on with Phenom. I didn't do that so now i am stuck with single core AMD64.

Unsurprisingly, an AMD64 processor is perfectly capable of running software compiled for the AMD64 architecture. The fact that distros are starting to no longer provide i386 install images won't affect this 15-year-old computer in the slightest.

The Cog
July 3rd, 2019, 10:03 AM
It affects all my netbooks though. Useful mini-laptops with (typically) a 7 inch screen.

uRock
July 3rd, 2019, 02:26 PM
i have windows XP on my PC, i added a new disk where i installed Kubuntu to it. I bought the PC in 2004 with the intention of replacing the CPU later on with Phenom. I didn't do that so now i am stuck with single core AMD64. It had a few smaller upgrades and replacements (PSU, GPU, hard disk), but overall the configuration remained the same (e.g. replaced GPU has similar computing power, just a bit more ram). now the PC does all i need it to do. sure it is not the fastest (benchmark is about 500 points, compared to nowadays 10.000+ points), but it can do web browsing well, i can do online banking on it, tax return submissions, office work, picture editing, videos (watching and editing up to a point)... it can even run most directx9 as well as games up to about 2013 (but it depends on their GPU and CPU demands). i don't have that much time for games these days, but the kids do and they would use it for that. i also enjoy it sometimes to relax a bit.

so why should i throw it away if it works and works well for my needs? i though it would die and have been planning on getting a new one for a while, but it just keeps on working. also spending 60 EUR on a new 80 bronze PSU replacement is cheaper than getting a new 400 EUR PC.

Indeed!


It affects all my netbooks though. Useful mini-laptops with (typically) a 7 inch screen.

I only have one Netbook, but it refuses to die. It is getting a fresh install of Debian 10 as soon as it releases. I am in no hurry since my desktop is running the Motion cameras for now.