I can tell you that using slackware64 makes a huge difference on my netbook. It's underpowered and using 64-bit helps a lot performance wise, even with 2 GB of RAM.

This old athlon64 wouldn't benefit from 64b methinks. I used to think I needed wine or some other 32b app but now since I don't actually use them anymore it's because I'm way too lazy to keep up with multi-lib.

Well none of those reasons fit. I had to select Other.

I use Slackware on 32-bit machines because Slackware64 won't work. I use Slackware64 on 64-bit machines.

I have Skype running just fine on Slackware64 (no multilib).

If I need to run 32-bit software, I will install Alien Bob's multilib. :hattip:

Maintaining Slackware64 is identical to maintaining Slackware. Multilib does not add much to the difficulty factor. Truth be told, I am a bit lazy, I use Sébastien Ballet's outstanding multilibpkg and compat32pkg tools to manage multilib. :hattip:

You can type free -l and then you see "Low" and "High" memory. Stuff in the "High" memory has a little performance penalty when accessed due to virtual address space constraints. You can disable High memory in the kernel configuration, but then you can only access 896 MB of RAM.

BTW: There is no hard 4 GB limit in existence*), the memory limit for IA32 is 64 GB. But the issue described above happens with more than 896 MB (almost 1 GB) of physical RAM installed. You can solve it by booting a x86-64 kernel (with matching modules of course). You don't need to have a complete 64 bit distribution, neither multib. When doing so, all your 32 bit stuff fits into "Low" memory.

*) The Windows limit is a licensing restriction and the Slackware limit is a configured one, which is gone in 14.0.

I have 32-bit Slackware 13.37 on my Dell Mini 10v netbook. I don't think it supports 64-bit and, regardless, I don't see myself upgrading any time soon. The netbook does what I want (basically VIM and serving as a dumb terminal to my home network).

I also have 32-bit 13.37 on machine that has a Lightscribe DVD burner (for which only 32-bit drivers are available, last I checked). I've yet to use Lightscribe but my initial intent was to test it out (I picked up this Pentium 4 machine at a rummage sale for $5). I may switch to 64-bit next upgrade (and try multi-lib) so that I can add it to my distcc hosts.

My remaining machines all run 64-bit, no multi-lib. The larger memory addressing space isn't (yet) an issue as none of my machines have more than 4Gb, but I find 64-bit provides a noticable performance improvement (my guess is this is mainly owing to its having double the registers).

i use old hardware

using 64 bit on all capable machines, only left one laptop on 32 bit for the odd compatibility issue and to compile 32 bit packages (sometimes for use with multilib on the 64 bit machines)

Other: Compatiblity

Slackware is my main OS and I just need it to work in as many situations as possible. I don't know of any applications that I want/need to run that aren't available in 32bit. I thought about switching to 64bit for 14.0, but I'll probably end up waiting at least a few more years before I switch over.

I made a small stupid mistake
 

I saw just after I voted that it was a multiple choice poll.

Yes I am too lazy to maintain 64-bit and possibly multilib!
(is that a sin?) :D

I also must run 32-bit-only software (like Skype, wine, etc.)

Some of my computers are only 32-bit capable.

And 32-bit Slackware just works.

I've used only 64-bit Linux on my desktop for many years now. I was using 32-bit Linux on my laptops for a while because I was using Skype and because dosbox wouldn't work on 64-bit platforms, but that was a while ago. I no longer use Skype, and modern dosbox works on 64-bit systems just fine, so I run 64-bit Linux on my laptop as well.

Back when I was messing with cryptographic algorithms, the ability to perform 64x64->128bit multiplication operations was a big performance win (each equivalent to four 32x32->64bit multiplication operations).

In more recent years I've been doing data mining / ETL work (both for work and for personal projects), and the ability to have individual processes larger than 4GB was a necessity. (32-bit systems can of course access more than 4GB, but only with multiple processes. It's possible to split data across multiple processes, but that's a PITA and I've done that quite enough, and do not want to anymore.)

Part of the reason, too, is because this is the 21st century, and 32-bit desktop systems are about as ludicrous and out-of-place as 16- or 8-bit systems. Old 64-bit systems can be picked up at garage sales or thrift stores for about $20. You can replace that ancient i586 for the price of four Starbucks cappuccinos.

Well, I have done, and still do, things with 8 bit machine code that blows the wheels off 64 bit multi-threaded code badly written by programmers so-called who have no clue what their application actually requires, or what their hardware is actually capable of. And I am nothing special, just an old biker with an attitude!

The value of CPU cycles is dependent more on their use than their byte-width or clock speed. For the most part, all the current incredible hardware and storage capacity, which we could not even dream of a few short years ago, is totally wasted on many people who own it. All that ludicrous out-of-place hardware that you mention, combined with the great gift of Slackware, has been nothing short of lifesaving for myself and many others. And our very maginalization is in large part a result of decisions taken by the 64-bit gaming cappuccio set.

And it is true, my only 64 bit systems actually did come from a thrift store - one of them from the dumpster behind the thrift store. And I can only imagine that it was put there by some other unthinking, uncaring cappuccio swilling person with no idea what a treasure their garbage actually was... for which I am oddly thankful.

Do I sound offended? Yes, I am a little bit, maybe about 32 bits, but then I am an old, obsolete guy. And the next time you decide to throw out some of that old ludicrous hardware, take it down to the thrift store instead, someone will surely recognize it for what it is worth. Or send it to me, I'll buy you a cappuccino and pay the shipping.

I voted for "Other", because I can boot zipslack on my old Dell box.

I've yet to see any *real*, make-an-app-work-twice-as-fast-and-twice-as-well advantage to using 64bit, so I don't. It's easier to keep it 32bit (yes, I chose lazy as one option, but if I were still on dialup - which I only recently got away from after 15 years! - it wouldn't be laziness). I also can't afforst to keep up on all the latest and greatest hardware, so a lot of what I have is only good with 32bit.

There are plenty of benchmarks and there do exist such advantages, although usually not twice as much (only sometimes):
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...204_3264&num=1
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...210_3264&num=1

Well, if you have a 1000 elements array even a so-called programmer can sort it with his so-called algorithm O(n^2) quicker than you with your impossibile O(1) alghorithm.