32 bit hardware

The availability of 32-bit computers for testing may drive the decision. Is anybody still selling 32-bit only computers?

Is anyone maintaining 16-bit processor compatibility in a modern, current Unix operating system?
I currently only use 64-bit computers, my desktop is pretty new and my phone (Android Galaxy S20 FE) is also a 64-bit computer. A lot of people are currently using 32-bit machines, and there are more than a few people out there with ridiculously old computers. There were a huge number of them manufactured from the 50's to the 90's, so it's really not surprising.
 


There are a lot of applications that are still 32 bit only, if I am not mistaken the Linux Steam client is 32bit software as well.
Ouch! It is rough when current software does not support the current hardware. All too often the developer takes a hard look and says that it will be too much cost and effort to port the software to run in 64-bit. For your sake I hope that Steam takes on that eventual challenge.

I am currently fighting with the same issue now. I must upgrade macOS on my personal computer. Unfortunately, I run a number of essential legacy 32-bit applications that must be replaced. I am in the planning stages to figure out how to replace them. Some will be purchased upgrades because their quality is high, they do something that is not available elsewhere, or the simple fact that I enjoy using them over other choices.

One of the primary reasons I came to Linux.org was looking for help finding free applications that can replace many of those 32-bit applications. I would like to run them first on Mac, but I expect that my next computer will run some version Linux and want to plan ahead, too. I will replace Microsoft Office with LibreOffice, for example. Whatever replacement applications I choose, they must run in a 64-bit architecture.
 
Ouch! It is rough when current software does not support the current hardware. All too often the developer takes a hard look and says that it will be too much cost and effort to port the software to run in 64-bit. For your sake I hope that Steam takes on that eventual challenge.
Also I think it has to do with backwards compatibility, 64 bit systems can run 32 bit software but 32 bit systems can't run 64bit software.
 
I think there is value is seeing how much you can do with limited hardware resources.
Hear me out.

Yes we can just keep adding more money and more resources, a bigger faster CPU, more RAM.. etc..
(To be honest that's typically what I do )

But there gets to be a tipping point, where given the same amount of resources, I can do more.
More spend more money if I don't have to? Admittedly 32-bit CPUs are getting long in the tooth.

But cars for example, have smaller engines on the whole than they did in the 70s. They are more powerful
now, some 6 cylinder cars make more power than 8 cylinder engines of the past. They get better gas
mileage and still make more power. Some do this at the expense of longevity. Super-charged and turbo-charged
engines usually have a shorter life span than naturally aspirated.

Now 32 bit support may not be around much longer, I don't know. Perhaps there will always be a niche market.
But what about embedded devices, smart phones, smart TV's, and smart refrigerators? Do they need huge
resources? Smart phones in particular always have battery length problems.

But Do I need a 32 core Ryzen or i9 with 128GB of RAM? What is the efficiency of the kernel and code
improved so much over the years, that I could do the same thing on an i5 CPU with 16GB of RAM?

This has happened to some extent. Code has gotten more efficient. But I remember when MacOS, WindowsXP,
and slack Linux fit on a single floppy disk. Now None of these fit on a CD-Rom anymore, some won't even fit
on a blu-ray disk. Do these OS's really do that much more? Or are they just bloated code from lazy programmers?

Having said all that, I see where IBM has a development version of a 128bit CPU. They are working with CERN and NASA
to develop a 3-D map of the milky-way galaxy with spatial data. Hundreds of billions of objects, with billions of billions
of vector points between the objects. This will have thousands of zettabytes of data. So we always need to move forward,
but do we need to do it at the cost of efficiency?
 
Also I think it has to do with backwards compatibility, 64 bit systems can run 32 bit software but 32 bit systems can't run 64bit software.
Can't they?

I'm presently posting this from the current release of Opera (which is 64-bit only).....running in the 32-bit version of Xenialpup 7.5.

peebee of the Puppy Linux community has built his own 'take' on the pioneering work done by the maintainers/developers of the current SliTaZ 'rolling-release'. All it takes is a 64-bit kernel and a number of compatibility dependencies.....which can be loaded 'on-the-fly' as an SFS package.

It essentially gives you a 64-bit environment within a 32-bit one. Kinda like a 'chroot', but without the complex control mechanism needed to run one (all that 'mounting & binding')..... Perfect for those Puppians who are really happy with an existing 32-bit set-up on elderly hardware, yet at the same time giving access to modern, up-to-date secure browsers.

------------------------------------

Responses to such a thread as this are pretty much what I've come to expect from the global 'tech' community. Almost to a man, geeks en masse always want the newest, most up-to-date & most powerful hardware possible. It's got nowt to do wi' "security", either.....but everything to do with "bragging rights"!

(*shrug*)

I'll doubtless get castigated for making such a statement. I've come to expect it.....and y'know what? I couldn't care less. I'm the original 'square peg', forcing its way into a round hole..!! :p


Mike. ;)
 
Last edited:
Can't they?
I found the answer in a github issue, it has to do with that there are still a lot of games in the Steam Store that are only 32 bit only.
The only way to have to not have an 32 bit libraries on your system is by running a distribution where you get to choose whether a 32 bit repo is enabled or not and in that case the only option of running the Steam Flatpak version.
 
I think there is value is seeing how much you can do with limited hardware resources.
Hear me out.

Yes we can just keep adding more money and more resources, a bigger faster CPU, more RAM.. etc..
(To be honest that's typically what I do )

But there gets to be a tipping point, where given the same amount of resources, I can do more.
More spend more money if I don't have to? Admittedly 32-bit CPUs are getting long in the tooth.

But cars for example, have smaller engines on the whole than they did in the 70s. They are more powerful
now, some 6 cylinder cars make more power than 8 cylinder engines of the past. They get better gas
mileage and still make more power. Some do this at the expense of longevity. Super-charged and turbo-charged
engines usually have a shorter life span than naturally aspirated.

Now 32 bit support may not be around much longer, I don't know. Perhaps there will always be a niche market.
But what about embedded devices, smart phones, smart TV's, and smart refrigerators? Do they need huge
resources? Smart phones in particular always have battery length problems.

But Do I need a 32 core Ryzen or i9 with 128GB of RAM? What is the efficiency of the kernel and code
improved so much over the years, that I could do the same thing on an i5 CPU with 16GB of RAM?

This has happened to some extent. Code has gotten more efficient. But I remember when MacOS, WindowsXP,
and slack Linux fit on a single floppy disk. Now None of these fit on a CD-Rom anymore, some won't even fit
on a blu-ray disk. Do these OS's really do that much more? Or are they just bloated code from lazy programmers?

Having said all that, I see where IBM has a development version of a 128bit CPU. They are working with CERN and NASA
to develop a 3-D map of the milky-way galaxy with spatial data. Hundreds of billions of objects, with billions of billions
of vector points between the objects. This will have thousands of zettabytes of data. So we always need to move forward,
but do we need to do it at the cost of efficiency?

Hi @dos2unix,
I found your post very thoughtful and interesting.
In regard to your comment,
"Super-charged and turbo-charged engines usually have a shorter life span than naturally aspirated."
it got me to thinking about life spans in general.
I have come to the conclusion that everything has a life span. Whether we like it or not, everything eventually dies out, even technologies.
I remember several years ago when I was doing some copying of cassette tapes to mail out. I doubt that many younger people today would even know what cassette tapes were. They were replaced with CD's and DVD's.
Now, most of the CD's and DVD's are being replaced by flash drives or thumb drives or AKA as memory sticks.
Are they more efficient than CD's? Yes, and they are faster too and can hold a lot more information for less money per gigabyte.
Some time in the future we will probably see some other technology come along that will improve on the memory sticks.
Change is inevitable. We can't avoid it nor can we stop it. We are stuck with it.
The best we can do is to try our best to get along with it.
Just some rambling thoughts from .....
an Old Philosopher,
OG TC
 
I have come to the conclusion that everything has a life span. Whether we like it or not, everything eventually dies out, even technologies.

It's true, but it's sad that it took us eons to come this far, only to see that might take only the last three hundreds years to destroy everything.
The goldfish keep asking for more food without realizing they can die from their own excrement. I hope we are smarter than goldfish.
 
I doubt that many younger people today would even know what cassette tapes were.

They're actually "kind of" coming back into fashion, but not at the rate vinyl has returned to fashion.

You're correct in that not a whole lot of 'em will know what it is - but you might be surprised by how many that do know.

After all, a portion of those kids who are just at the age of developing their music taste are raiding their parent's old cassettes left in the attic for the past 20 years.

Also, hipsters... It's always hipsters!

Check out the price of a working Sony Walkman cassette player on eBay.

Then, if you want to gasp, check out the prices on some vintage turntables.

Again, I blame hipsters.
 
I have come to the conclusion that everything has a life span.
Pretty much, even if you conceptualize "a rock", it gets worn away with weather overtime and becomes particles again. So just because you are too fleeting to conceptualize how old a rock will be, the rock also "dies".
 
After all, a portion of those kids who are just at the age of developing their music taste are raiding their parent's old cassettes left in the attic for the past 20 years.
Yah know, me approaching middle age is a really strange thing for me, just because i'm always hearing about "the younger generation" yet i don't know what they are specifically referring to. I've talked to gen z a fair amount (both my niece and nephew are whipper-snappers) and i just don't see how they are much different than people born in the 80's and 90's. The C64s and WIndow 95s got replaced with smart phones, but it seems like the attitudes that adults and children have had towards each other haven't changed a whole lot.
 
it seems like the attitudes that adults and children have had towards each other haven't changed a whole lot.

And so it goes...

We don't change nearly as much, nor as rapidly, as people think. Just because today's kids like cell phones doesn't mean they're not human kids with the same fundamental concerns we had at their age.

And so it goes...
 
Just out of curiosity because of this topic I thought I would see if I can remove all 32bit libraries from my system and I actually succeeded. I currently have Steam and Lutris installed through Flatpak and all my games work. Will see how the experience is for the time being and see if I notice any difference with my gaming experience.
 
Last edited:
So what's wrong with Windows XP.
I use Windows XP with old versions of Microsoft Flight Simulators.
I keep my Flight Simulator desktops disconnected from the internet.
I had an old 98 machine (off internet and network) up until 5 or 6 years ago that I used to play "Dogs Playing Poker" on. But I'll never admit that out loud.
 
Do you think Linux OSes should still cater to 32 bit machines?

I say no, time to move on. But who am I???

I also say no...32bit is a thing of the past like PATA Drives and floppy disks.
m1213.gif


I haven't used 32bit for many years...it was slow and limited to about 4GB of RAM which 64bit is not...Linux Mint only comes in 64bit now.
m1212.gif
 
I also say no...32bit is a thing of the past like PATA Drives and floppy disks.
m1213.gif


I haven't used 32bit for many years...it was slow and limited to about 4GB of RAM which 64bit is not...Linux Mint only comes in 64bit now.
m1212.gif
Amen brotha!
 
32bit is a thing of the past
It may well prove to be such. Poverty may never be, however.
Don't limit poor peoples' options for the sake of profit is what I say.
 
It may well prove to be such. Poverty may never be, however.
Don't limit poor peoples' options for the sake of profit is what I say.
I think the main thing going on in this thread is limiting poor peoples options for the sake of performance:D
 
I think the main thing going on in this thread is limiting poor peoples options for the sake of performance:D
... and security ... and stability.

... and freeing up resources that can be applied to issues with the greatest impact to the most people, poor or otherwise.
 
... and security ... and stability.

... and freeing up resources that can be applied to issues with the greatest impact to the most people, poor or otherwise.
To be completely honest though, i don't think staying with 32-bit or 64-bit has much of an impact on "poor people" per say. If you start manufacturing more 64-bit processors, it makes them cheaper, therefore more people will be able to buy them. The main problem i have with chucking 32-bit is you've got all this stuff laying around, and it just goes into the landfill when people want/need computers anyways.

I don't know for sure which one is better, but i do know for sure that a lot of those incredibly expenses graphics cards and monitors just aren't necessary.
 

Members online


Latest posts

Top