hi,

I installed kde i386 and amd64,
but I think kubuntu-amd64 don't work fine.

I'm wrong or is better I use kde version i386

ps.: I have 64 bits cpu.

tanks

there are things that 64bit does better (database, video/audio editing, compiling - Google you'll see discussions) but it does use a bit more ram. Speed wise in normal usage I'm not sure how big a difference you will see.

If you're having issues they probably aren't because of 64bit and it's probably best to try and address them in the proper forums related to them (as this is for general discussions)

If you have 32bit installed and it works fine then there's no reason not to use it (imho) unless there is a performance or memory reason to use 64bit. I would guess by now most people use 64bit as all the current cpu's are 64bit and have been for years.

google01103 wrote:there are things that 64bit does better (database, video/audio editing, compiling - Google you'll see discussions) but it does use a bit more ram. Speed wise in normal usage I'm not sure how big a difference you will see.

If you're having issues they probably aren't because of 64bit and it's probably best to try and address them in the proper forums related to them (as this is for general discussions)

If you have 32bit installed and it works fine then there's no reason not to use it (imho) unless there is a performance or memory reason to use 64bit. I would guess by now most people use 64bit as all the current cpu's are 64bit and have been for years.

tanks for you post.
I've a good PC... i3 4GB 1TB 3.1GHz
but, some times, linux-amd64 has more bugs than i386 when I was using.
well... I'm a newbie in linux in I'll try 64bits anyway.

tanks again

64 bit software running on 64 bit hardware is generally faster.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=a ... ae64&num=1

tancrackers wrote:64 bit software running on 64 bit hardware is generally faster.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=a ... ae64&num=1

tanks for all your posts, especially about KDE-distros.
I installed a lot of distros(amd64), but almost everyone has a lot of bug.
I was reading some sites, and I found a interesting opinion:
a lot of aplications are 32bits and will run under 64bits,
speed diference between them is not so great,
and compatibility betwenn i386 aplications are better.

the fact is: 90% amd64 distros had bugs, and 10% i386 distros don't.

maybe I'm wrong, but the fact it happned to me up testing them.

tanks a lot again.
your posts was very important to me. (anothers users post too, off course)

the fact is: 90% amd64 distros had bugs, and 10% i386 distros don't.

Funky fact

Give Chakra a go - apparently a lot of people love it to bits.

Also, you may have noticed that you only get 3GB RAM on an i386 install.

toad wrote:<snip>
Also, you may have noticed that you only get 3GB RAM on an i386 install.

actually you can use > 4b on a 32bit os by using the pae (Physical Address Extension) kernel, though this isn't the same as a 64bit kernel

see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/EnablingPAE

Cheers, I was aware. In Arch you can get the pae kernel although it is only in the AUR. Not sure about Kubuntu or Mint.
I also know somebody who still clings on to his 2.4 kernel for his production machine as the 2.6 series is still far too buggy - it takes all sorts I suppose