SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

October 2011

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Christopher Tooley <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Christopher Tooley <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:29:59 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
On 2011-10-17, at 9:20 AM, Yasha Karant wrote:

> On 10/17/2011 06:38 AM, Mark Stodola wrote:
> [...]
> Now I have a decision to make:  IA-32 SL 6.1 or X86-64 SL 6.1 .  The 
> processor will support X86-64, but the machine only has 4 Mbyte of RAM 
> as delivered (upgradeable to 8 Mbyte -- but this is a cost) -- which is 
> only 0.5 Mword in X86-64 64 bit mode.  The hard drive is 500 Gbyte SATA 
> at 5400 RPM -- not a high performance unit.
> 
> There is no special need for 64 bit work on the machine that primarily 
> is an end-user linux workstation: web browser (including use of 
> university services only available through such an interface), IMAP 
> email client, OpenOffice, various LaTeX interfaces, some display of 
> video, use of Linux VirtualBox to use MS Win (for which the unit is 
> licensed) to use a MS Win only application, but no development or 
> programming -- and the ability for a skilled end user under Network 
> Manager to connect to whatever 802.11 WAP that is available without my 
> intervention.
> 
> Thus, my feeling is to stay with the IA-32 environment.  Any thoughts to 
> the contrary?
> 
> Yasha Karant

I would recommend using 64 bit for any virtual machine usage.  Besides which, I think the only thing that wasn't 64 bit on linux for desktops was flash-plugin - which, I think is no longer the case (I cannot find any references though, anyone care to correct/confirm me?)
 
-Chris

ATOM RSS1 RSS2