Where are you at?
Well, running both on 32 bit and 64 bit processors… I fit the OS to the processor so this should be a multiple check box in my case 
64bit is where it’s headed, so if I have the choice, 64bit it is!
Cheers,
Wj
Pretty much same for me.
I’ve been using 64-bit Linux since 2004 when it was all brand new and broken. It’s settled down considerably now; pretty much everything I use has a 64-bit compatible version.
Where’s “Both”? 
64 for me, I have all my apps(yes, including firefox, nspluginwrapper let me have flash :)) except wine(obviously) as 64 bit versions, haven’t run into any problems 
64bit for me. i’m doing a lot of audio and video encodings, and on 64bit systems you get a nice speedup of up to 15%
I actually use all 32bit/32bit, 64bit/32bit and 64bit/64bit. But I went ahead and voted 64/64.
A lot of the hold up on 64/64 is due to the stupidity of a company in Redmond I believe… 
Anyhow, as Microsoft is trying to play catch up in the 64bit arena, the use of 64bit/64bit in Linux will only increase. There was a time not terribly long ago where if you answered 64/64, you automatically knew the person was running Linux (if on an Intel/AMD base).
On 2008-07-03, wandm <wandm@no-mx.forums.opensuse.org> wrote:
> Question: 32/64 bit poll
> Where are you at?
64/64 on desktop
32/32 on laptop and (my old) server
–
The sand remembers once there was beach and sunshine
but chip is warm too
– haiku from Effector Online, Volume 1, Number 6
Running a 32-bit userspace on a 64-bit CPU is pretty stupid. It does make sense for sparc64, but AMD64 does not incur much of a penalty for 64-bit ops. Running 32 on 64 means you are giving up the SSE2 floating point unit for standard programs in favor of the olde i387 stack. And the fact that SUSE has proper biarch support means you can run 32 and 64 alongside (I have had unverified reports that certain distributions from the Debian camp fail getting it right), the hell with any “but multimedia runs better in 32…” claims.
SUSE, in my experience, has always been the most mature x86_64 supporting distribution. Almost everything works just right.
But, thanks to Sun, I have to stick to 32bit firefox for all my java needs…
g
On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:16:04 +0000, wandm wrote:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> A poll associated with this post was created, to vote and see the
> results, please visit http://forums.opensuse.org/showthread.php?t=388550
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Question: 32/64 bit poll
>
> - I have 32-bit processor and use a 32-bit operating system - I have
> 64-bit processor but use a 32-bit operating system - I have 64-bit
> processor and use a 64-bit operating system - I’m not quite sure…
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Where are you at?
32-bit OS on 32-bit procs.
64-bit OS on 64-bit proc.
Jim
On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 19:46 +0000, jengelh wrote:
> Running a 32-bit userspace on a 64-bit CPU is pretty stupid. It does
…
> from the Debian camp fail getting it right), the hell with any “but
> multimedia runs better in 32…” claims.
>
>
32bit has fewer multimedia and java applet issues… oh dang!
Sorry… I just had to say it.
There are a few issues still left to work out with a pure 64bit
environment. The 32bit multimedia side is pretty much fixed…
it’s that stupid java plugin support that is still missing (for
those that need that). Good thing java isn’t that popular
as an applet… bad news for those that need it.
So… until all is well… 32bit on 64bit CPUs will live
on for a bit (at least for some).
64 bit on office desktop computer
major task: making models and rendering 3d images from blender/yafray (nvidia gforce 7600)
making models using google sketch-up with wine
2d plans using bricscad 8.2 with wine
32 bit on laptop
major task: making models with blender/no rendering because of weak video card (intel)
making models using google sketch-up with wine
2d plans using bricscad 8.2 with wine
openoffice impress presentations
spreadsheets with openoffice calc
greenmachine wrote:
> SUSE, in my experience, has always been the most mature x86_64
> supporting distribution. Almost everything works just right.
>
> But, thanks to Sun, I have to stick to 32bit firefox for all my java
> needs…
Well… not that I’m a huge Sun fan, but thanks to Sun and a bit
of work from the folks with the head gear in the lower color
spectrum, OpenJDK work is progressing and I figure we may have
a usable 64bit Ffox browser plugin by the end of this year.
>
I don’t really run into sites that need Java all that often, so I don’t care that much. However, I was under the impression that IceTea provides a 64-bit OSS Java plugin that works.
I was also under the impression that nspluginwrapper allows you to use 32-bit plugins in 64-bit Firefox. I know it works for Flash, and I believe that is what I’m currently using for Java as well.
64/64 on my laptop
32/32 on desktop
And voted for 64/64.
enderandrew wrote:
> I don’t really run into sites that need Java all that often, so I don’t
> care that much. However, I was under the impression that IceTea
> provides a 64-bit OSS Java plugin that works.
Works on a small minority of sites and applets.
>
> I was also under the impression that nspluginwrapper allows you to use
> 32-bit plugins in 64-bit Firefox. I know it works for Flash, and I
> believe that is what I’m currently using for Java as well.
>
>
That’s interesting… I really can’t say.
Well the only reason I use the 32-bit system on my 64-bit machine is that gstreamer ffmpeg codecs are availible for 32-bit architecture only. (I use Gnome)
I’m running both on 32 bit and 64 bit processors.