Are the unofficial 64-bit versions of Slackware unacceptable? I've heard good things about Slamd64.
One of the reasons that Slamd64 is not recognized is that the maintainers ability to keep it going.
The folks I have talked to immediately decide against Vector if they have invested in 64-bit technology.
What is that 64 bit has that the folks are not getting in 32 bit?
My impression was that some significant apps are 64-bit. This is a real issue.
Please explain this in more detail. My clients are not able to use heavy apps (AutoDesk) in 64 bit to
get the most out of the floating point integers.
How about an explanation to backup persuing a 64 bit distribution. Vector is for the Desktop. There
are justifiable reasons to go for 64 bit. Running math intense applications for one (compiling).
Now in running servers using hashing algorithms 100s' of users at a time, then you bet 64 bit is it.
There are alot of heavy applications that are not 64 bit. Open Office is just getting 64 bit together.
Office 2007 is not 64 bit.
The problem is this IMHO users are stating they want the latest and greatest, 64 bit being in that group. The same user does not even have a clue about how much processor they use. The users
that are aware are those with limited hardware and resources. Vector is based on those users. Just
because KDE is being used does not mean it has to be bloated. The KDE team has recognized the
resource hog it was, this is being fixed. The true fix will be difficult due to X being a mess, I do not really agree that going modular will help.
I pose this ... think about the state of 64 bit computing it is still somewhat fragmented even today a couple years since 64 bit became available. When having to redesign a program why waste time on
64 bit when 128 is around the corner. The same work even better benefits.