Although there are 64 bits releases of Linux, I wouldn't use it (yet),
but that is a personal choice. The most important reason (for me) is
problem when using additional software.

For example, the Flash plugin isn't working on a 64 bits system.
Likewise with Java.
Using a 32 bits release on a 64 bits system won't give you a problem
and offers all the software (like Flash and Java) without a problem.

More about it here:
http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/linux-tutorials-howtos-reference-material/69585-should-you-choose-32-bit-64-bit-linux.html

By the way, I did use a 64 bits release on our corporate webserver,
but mainly because I didn't intend to install additional (3rd party)
software on it.

Regards,
Patrick



2008/4/11, Jim McCarthy <[log in to unmask]>:
> Hello --
>
>  I recently acquired an HP zx6000 dual Itanium-2 workstation, and so I was
>  very pleased to find Scientific Linux (version 4.1) available for the IA-64
>  architecture.  But according to the SL news archive, SL 4.1 for ia64 was
>  released 08-Aug-2005, and it appears none of the other SL 4.x or SL 5.x
>  releases run on ia64.
>
>  Are there many SL users running on ia64 ?  Are there plans to continue SL
>  support for this architecture ?
>
>  Many thanks,
>
>      -- Jim
>  ___
>
>  My SL 4.1-ia64 install went smoothly, and so far my only regret is finding
>  that the Open Motif X11 window manager (mwm) "experimental" version 2.2
>  (openmotif-2.2.3-9.RHEL4.1.ia64.rpm) was chosen for SL 4.1 (as well as for
>  RHEL) and not the Open Group's officially supported and more stable
>  "openmotif-2.1.30" release.
>
>  http://www.motifdeveloper.com/tips/Motif22Review.pdf
>