Should 32-bit support be cut from the next MediCat DVD release?

[Jayro]

If you guys aren't aware, major Linux distributions (namely the *buntu line, but others will follow) will be dropping 32-bit support going forward after the 16.10 release in October. There's an article about it Here.

Now, the main reason I am taking this pole is because I want to see if I should kill off the 32-bit Windows Recovery Discs and 32-Bit Mini Windows 10 in my up-coming October release. The reality is that most people are using 64-bit Windows 7, 8.1, and 10. The 32-bit discs I am wanting to remove would shave off 850MB in total from the ISO, so I can replace the 32-bit Mini Windows 10 with the 64-bit version. There won't be much file size change in the ISO. (old ISO is 5,134MB vs new ISO is 5,112MB)

32-Bit Mini Windows 10 will also be retired.

Pros and Cons:

PRO: Saves precious ISO space.
PRO: Moves forward with 64-bit computing, cutting legacy support
PRO: Easier to maintain and develop one universal version instead of two separate versions.
PRO: More hardware resources are available, keeping things quick without bottlenecks.

CON: All systems will require 64-bit instructions in order to run.
CON: Most AMD Athlon XP/MP, AMD Duron, Intel Celeron, Intel Atom, and Intel Pentium 4 systems will have their support dropped.

I am in favor of cutting 32-bit support, but I'd like your guy's opinions on the matter. This poll will remain active through the end of September, so please give your vote before the 30th of September.

And thank you ALL for your input and ideas!

 

[mgrev]

for your part. yes. for everyone who uses this frequently. no.
in my opinion you could drop it, but provide the old builds with 32 but support

 

[Raylight]

Id say cut support for it. Everyone that uses a PC has x64 now. if not they need to upgrade and it's pretty cheap

 

[Deleted member 370671]

Would there even be a reason to keep 32bit support? All computers nowadays use 64bits CPUs, and it's been like this for almost 10 years.

 

[Jayro]

for your part. yes. for everyone who uses this frequently. no.
in my opinion you could drop it, but provide the old builds with 32 but support

That's a good idea... I could still have the 32-Bit ISO files hosted in the Download section. MediCat is modular afterall, and people can always add them back if they chose.

 

[Frederica Bernkastel]

The majority of CPU architecture which has been coming out for the past decade supports 64 bit operations, so it's a fairly safe move to drop support. Remember, deprecation doesn't mean that you can't make the older releases available.

For those with older machines, they'll be able to pick up an older version and will still be able to continue on with what they want, meanwhile you'll be able to focus your efforts on making the x64 experience better.

Just remember to follow the semver creed, and perform a major release for this breaking change.

 

[Jayro]

The majority of CPU architecture which has been coming out for the past decade supports 64 bit operations, so it's a fairly safe move to drop support. Remember, deprecation doesn't mean that you can't make the older releases available.

For those with older machines, they'll be able to pick up an older version and will still be able to continue on with what they want, meanwhile you'll be able to focus your efforts on making the x64 experience better.

Just remember to follow the semver creed, and perform a major release for this breaking change.

Oh man... I'm not sure how I'll be able to pull that off, since the last version was pretty ground-breaking... but I'll try to make this one absolutely robust and amazing.

 

[endoverend]

I think not; half the time I need to revive a PC, it's an old one, and old ones ten to run on 32-bit architecture.

 

[Frederica Bernkastel]

I think not; half the time I need to revive a PC, it's an old one, and old ones ten to run on 32-bit architecture.

You're still completely free to download a slightly older version of a given operating system or tool.

To require people to spend their free time and energy supporting CPU architecture that is no longer manufactured or sold seems quite unreasonable, and I fully understand where the various linux distributions are coming from. In their case it's a bit difference, as older versions will get security patches and what-not, but I see no reason in this case why an older version of a fully featured tool is disadvantageous.

 

[Jayro]

I think not; half the time I need to revive a PC, it's an old one, and old ones ten to run on 32-bit architecture.

I've been fixing computers for 13 years, and in the past 3 years, only one was a 32-bit machine. They eventually gave it to me after they upgraded, so I now have a 32-bit Prescott-core Pentium 4 system to play with, having 2GB of DDR800, and a low-profile Radeon HD 4650 1GB. Runs 32-bit Windows 7 Pro.

 

[endoverend]

I don't think anyone here would complain if you cut it, but I have no idea how much effort it takes to keep supporting it so if you feel that's the best choice then cut away.

 

[Jayro]

You're still completely free to download a slightly older version of a given operating system or tool.

To require people to spend their free time and energy supporting CPU architecture that is no longer manufactured or sold seems quite unreasonable, and I fully understand where the various linux distributions are coming from. In their case it's a bit difference, as older versions will get security patches and what-not, but I see no reason in this case why an older version of a fully featured tool is disadvantageous.

Absolutely. Hiren's Boot Disk may be old and depreciated in many ways, but it still works for many people and eventhough it was discontinued in 2012, it's still the fan favorite go-to utility disc. I simply offer an up-to-date bleeding-edge alternative to Hiren's disk, for today's hardware and software demands. Each serves it's purpose.

 

[JoostinOnline]

I've been fixing computers for 13 years, and in the past 3 years, only one was a 32-bit machine. They eventually gave it to me after they upgraded, so I now have a 32-bit Prescott-core Pentium 4 system to play with, having 2GB of DDR800, and a low-profile Radeon HD 4650 1GB. Runs 32-bit Windows 7 Pro.

In the past 3 months I've had at least 20 that were 32-bit.

 

[Joom]

I feel you should release a standalone 32bit image for those that need it. You wouldn't necessarily have to keep it as up to speed as the 64bit variant, but this would give people the option to use something like YUMI so that they could have both architectures on hand and wouldn't have to use an older release just for 32bit.

 

[SomeGamer]

Wut? My only 64-bit device is my smartphone. All laptops here are x86.

 

[Luckkill4u]

I think you should drop 32 bit support but as well release a stable legacy medicat that still can use a 32 bit system. Old hardware is well old... but not useless.

 

[JoostinOnline]

I've had 2 more 32-bit computers since my post on Wednesday. It's absolutely your choice to cut support, but know computer technicians still work on a ton of 32-bit systems.

 

[Nyap]

Wut? My only 64-bit device is my smartphone. All laptops here are x86.

64bit simply means that a device can handle a buttload more memory (32bit can only handle 4gb)
x86 is an architecture

 

[SomeGamer]

64bit simply means that a device can handle a buttload more memory (32bit can only handle 4gb)
x86 is an architecture

I'm not an IT pro so for me 32bit=x86 and 64bit=x64.

 

[The Catboy]

Yes! It's time we moved past 32-Bit systems! Even several Linux distros are dropping support for 32-Bit systems.