In late June, Ubuntu developer Dimitri John Ledkov suggested on the Ubuntu mailing list that Ubuntu should no longer support PCs with 32-bit processors. His proposal was to end such support by the time of the Ubuntu 18.04 release, which is planned for April 2018. Other major Linux distributions have already ceased 32-bit support.
Ending support for 32-bit processors would mean that only 64-bit machines could run Ubuntu. In general, any laptop or desktop PC manufactured in the last decade probably has a 64-bit processor (although I can personally attest that the Intel netbook I bought back in late 2009 is 32-bit — but I don’t really use it much anymore, so I’m not complaining).
That means the change is unlikely to affect many people, apart from those using Ubuntu to breathe new life into old computers. And even that group is probably not large, since modern versions of Ubuntu are so resource-intensive that they would not run very well on a ten-year-old PC, whether or not it featured a 64-bit processor. If you want to revive old hardware with Linux, you shouldn’t be using Ubuntu to do it.
For the channel, however, the news is important as another sign of how the PC market is becoming simpler than ever as hardware looks increasingly identical.
A decade ago, vendors and integrators had to pay close attention to the specifications of different hardware platforms when building software. They couldn’t count on all users having access to the same video cards, the same types of processors or the same amounts of memory.
Today, however, video acceleration is basically a given. So is a generous amount of memory. And as far as processors go, no significant number of PCs have had anything other than an x86 CPU since Apple announced that it was ditching PowerPC chips in favor of Intel’s in 2005.
All of this translates to a simpler market for vendors. They no longer have to worry about which types of hardware platforms they support. They can count on all PCs being basically the same.
The flip side is that as PCs have grown more identical, the mobile device market is increasingly less so. Screen sizes, processing power and memory vary widely among different smartphones and tablets. Increasingly, processors vary, too, as manufacturers attempt to build x86-based mobile devices alongside the ARM-based hardware that has traditionally predominated in this market.
From a channel perspective, it would have been much more interesting for Ubuntu to announce a firm commitment to offering better support for mobile devices. While Ubuntu in general runs on ARM hardware, lots of Ubuntu apps don’t. The story is the same on other major Linux distributions.
You can’t pin that on Ubuntu developers alone, of course. Third-party app developers also need to work to make their software more mobile-friendly.
That amount of work required to make open source (and closed-source) operating systems more compatible with mobile devices would be much greater than that needed to continue support for 32-bit architectures. But it’s a change that would create vast opportunity across the open source channel by providing viable mobile OS options beyond Android and iOS. In general, it would make integration for the mobile market much easier.
It would be a shame to remove 32-bit Ubuntu versions.
Poorer, developing countries and schools in poorer districts still use and rely on old hardware.
There are numerous volunteer organizations and people who re-purpose old hardware and have these donated to schools and poorer families, and shipped to third world countries.
The number of downloads of the 32-bit version does not show how many old PCs still rely on it in these poorer regions because many do not even have Internet to do any downloads. Only one 32-bit download is needed for the many refurbished PCs.
I personally use two single-core PCs – one 32-bit, the other 64-bit – (both running 32-bit Xubuntu very adequately even for audio, graphic and basic video editing) for 99% of my computer work at home.
I volunteered for 9 years at a school library where old PCs with only 1Gb ram languished until I installed 32-bit Xubuntu on them. They are still running now and handle printing, scanning, assignment work connected to a multi-function printer / copier as well as video streaming up to 720p — rock-solid day to day. None of the students complain about the speed of the computers as they see little difference compared to their multiple-core Win-based computers at home.
Old hardware is lasting longer than the first PCs and instead of polluting the environment by dumping these 32-bit machines, Canonical should consider continuing to hold on to their mantra of Ubuntu for the people, including those in Africa from which Ubuntu sprang.
The author of this article brought up the fact that maintaining a 32-bit version is less complicated than mobile versions, so why not for the sake of the people who are truly at the grassroots?
I implore Canonical to reconsider (conduct a survey perhaps) and think again about their own grassroots and origins, and at least keep 32-bit versions of Xubuntu., Lubuntu and Mate. The poor and the environment need the 32-bit version.