32 of course.
Yes I posted a while back about how I moved my Ubuntu installation over to 64 bit, and I really enjoyed it, only had a very minor issue with Flash, but nothing that couldn’t be solved with a quick fix.
Yet I’m back to 32 bit…why? Because it’s less hassle with flash, and also the fact that I don’t really NEED 64 bit processing at the moment, I mean, I don’t do any Video Encoding/Re-encoding, or anything like that, or Image Editing. So when I managed to break the install, I just thought I’d go back to 32 bit.
I still would recommend 64 bit if you have a capable PC, to make the most out of your hardware.
March 16, 2008 at 8:19 pm
Hello, stumbled upon your post on google.
I currently have 7.10 64-bit running on my home PC. From the point of installation to where I am now there have been little or no problems outside of browser plug-ins. That is until I wanted to start working with Eclipse. I don’t blame Ubuntu for Sun and Macromedia’s lack of support, but it’s getting a bit silly.
I don’t even want to think about a system update when a new release is available. I can’t even keep track of what is 64-bit and what is 32-bit anymore. If you want a complete system change over with your OS (like from Windows 2000 to GNU/Linux as a web designer with no budget for a Apple Macintosh) I would say stick with 32-bit.
My situation does not bring a completely wasted processor. Originaly it came with a 32-bit AMD Sempron but I swapped it out for a 64X2. I still get to keep the dual-core feature out of the $40 I spent to upgrade the processor. Not a bad deal!
Stick with 32-bit for a desktop until there is full support. But go ahead with a 64-bit for a server. That is where 64-bit shines: script and code execution.
I’m hoping one day that this system will serve well for remote web, ssh , email and http://ftp.