Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 1st Dec 2015 00:37 UTC, submitted by Anonymous
Google

To provide the best experience for the most-used Linux versions, we will end support for Google Chrome on 32-bit Linux, Ubuntu Precise (12.04), and Debian 7 (wheezy) in early March, 2016. Chrome will continue to function on these platforms but will no longer receive updates and security fixes.

We intend to continue supporting the 32-bit build configurations on Linux to support building Chromium. If you are using Precise, we'd recommend that you to upgrade to Trusty.

The first signs of the end of 32bit are on the wall - starting with Linux. I wonder how long Google will continue to support 32bit Chrome on Windows. For some strange reason, Microsoft is still selling 32bit Windows 10.

Thread beginning with comment 621510
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Drumhellar
by Drumhellar on Tue 1st Dec 2015 01:16 UTC
Drumhellar
Member since:
2005-07-12

For some strange reason, Microsoft is still selling 32bit Windows 10.


For some reason? Come on. Microsoft goes to great lengths to ensure backwards compatibility.

In this case, I'm sure it's because they have enough customers that still use 16-bit DOS or Windows applications. Intel was still selling 32-bit chips merely 3 years ago, too (Small ones, but, still...)

Systems with 4GB of RAM also benefit from being 32-bit, too. And, as Windows performance has increased, and system resources decreased relative to Windows 7, it means 32-bit systems that ran Windows 7 would still benefit from an increase.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Drumhellar
by tylerdurden on Tue 1st Dec 2015 04:04 in reply to "Comment by Drumhellar"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Nah. It's simpler than that: microsoft transition to 64bits has been a complete and utter mess.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by Drumhellar
by Drumhellar on Tue 1st Dec 2015 04:16 in reply to "RE: Comment by Drumhellar"
Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

How so?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by Drumhellar
by dpJudas on Tue 1st Dec 2015 06:34 in reply to "Comment by Drumhellar"
dpJudas Member since:
2009-12-10

In this case, I'm sure it's because they have enough customers that still use 16-bit DOS or Windows applications. Intel was still selling 32-bit chips merely 3 years ago, too (Small ones, but, still...)

If only that was the main reason. The 32 bit version is cheaper, and as a result some budget PCs come with it (on 64 bit hardware).

10% of all PCs (current steam hardware survey stats) run 32 bit. I can't imagine that many people are still using 25 year old software.

Systems with 4GB of RAM also benefit from being 32-bit, too.

That's debatable as a 32 bit Windows only offers half of its memory to applications. Add the problem with fragmentation in a 32 bit flat memory model and it gets even harder to use all the memory. Only running many smaller processes seem to be an advantage here.

You also lost that the compiler can always take advantage of newer registers and instructions (SSE, AVX).

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Drumhellar
by chithanh on Tue 1st Dec 2015 06:57 in reply to "RE: Comment by Drumhellar"
chithanh Member since:
2006-06-18

Steam is hardly representative of the PC market.

Besides, 64 bit systems with 32 bit UEFI cannot run x64 Windows, so either Microsoft needs to fix that or provide 32 bit support indefinitely.

Similar problems for old 64 bit systems that don't support CMPXCHG16b (support for those was dropped with Windows 8.1).

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Drumhellar
by Drumhellar on Tue 1st Dec 2015 07:14 in reply to "RE: Comment by Drumhellar"
Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

If only that was the main reason. The 32 bit version is cheaper, and as a result some budget PCs come with it (on 64 bit hardware).

10% of all PCs (current steam hardware survey stats) run 32 bit. I can't imagine that many people are still using 25 year old software.


Quick look at NewEgg has OEM versions of 32-bit and 64-bit at the same price. Windows 8.1 has both on the same disc, IIRC.

Also, Steam stats are a poor source for hardware stats, as they are geared heavily towards gamers.

That's debatable as a 32 bit Windows only offers half of its memory to applications. Add the problem with fragmentation in a 32 bit flat memory model and it gets even harder to use all the memory.


True, but on the other hand, being 32-bit also conserves bandwidth. It is a toss-up, of course. Extra registers from 64-bit mode helps in some situations, extra bandwidth available in 32-bit mode helps in others. 32-bit programs often use less memory, though.

But, again, few organizations are as good as Microsoft when it comes to maintaining backwards compatibility.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Drumhellar
by bhtooefr on Tue 1st Dec 2015 10:24 in reply to "RE: Comment by Drumhellar"
bhtooefr Member since:
2009-02-19

If only that was the main reason. The 32 bit version is cheaper, and as a result some budget PCs come with it (on 64 bit hardware).

It's not that it's cheaper to license (it may be, but I don't believe so), it's that it's cheaper in hardware to implement. You need more storage (Microsoft recommends another 4 GiB - which really means you need double in these extremely small devices, so instead of 16 GiB, you need 32, or instead of 32, you need 64) with a 64-bit OS, and you need more RAM with a 64-bit OS. Plus, there is the legacy driver and software compatibility issue.

"Systems with 4GB of RAM also benefit from being 32-bit, too.

That's debatable as a 32 bit Windows only offers half of its memory to applications. Add the problem with fragmentation in a 32 bit flat memory model and it gets even harder to use all the memory. Only running many smaller processes seem to be an advantage here.
"
It's a trade-off here. First off, it's allowing 2 GiB per process, not 2 GiB for all applications. So, huge 32-bit processes (I'm looking at you, Firefox (which just got a 64-bit stable Windows version)) do badly, but Chrome actually does fine due to its multiprocess model, until you run out of RAM. I can't speak to the fragmentation issue, though, although I'd think the MMU could be used to solve that to some extent, and fragmentation could be resolved by the OS during times of low memory pressure? (It probably isn't, but it could be.)

You also lost that the compiler can always take advantage of newer registers and instructions (SSE, AVX).

SSE4 and AVX can, I believe, be run from 32-bit code, for what it's worth...

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Comment by Drumhellar
by kittynipples on Tue 1st Dec 2015 14:09 in reply to "Comment by Drumhellar"
kittynipples Member since:
2006-08-02

For some reason? Come on. Microsoft goes to great lengths to ensure backwards compatibility.


Or when they just can't be bothered to produce 64bit versions of libraries that have wide usage. Case in point, the common control and CAPICOM libraries that were never updated, requiring that 32bit versions of MS Office be used. So if your enterprise has developed office solutions that use them, and Microsoft some day decides to stop providing 32bit Office binaries, then you are screwed.

Reply Parent Score: 2