distinction on download page between x86 and x86-64 misleading

[Alexander van Loon]

I mean this download page here: http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download

This page asks the following question:

"What type of computer do you have?
∘ Standard personal computer (x86 architecture, Pentium™, Celeron™, Athlon™, Sempron™)
∘ 64bit AMD and Intel computers"

This doesn't make much sense, because 64 bit is the standard now. Almost every new PC contains a CPU which supports x86-64. The wording should obviously be changed, not only to make it correct and more simple, but also by providing a link to information describing exactly which CPU's support the x86 instruction set and which support x86-64. I propose the following:

"Does your PC have a 64-bit processor?
If you do not know, choose "No". The 32-bit version of Ubuntu will also work on 64-bit processors. Click (link)here(link) for a list of processors which support 64-bit and to learn about the advantages of 64-bit (especially mention the amount of RAM memory which can be used with 64-bit processors).
∘ No, download the 32-bit version
∘ Yes, download the the 64-bit version"

[Alexander van Loon (avanloon)]

It seems that a few hours later today the download page was changed with the introduction of 8.10. It now reads:

"Custom Options

Only change these if you know you need different values.
Computer Architecture
∘ 32bit version: This works with most computers
∘ 64bit version: May provide additional capabilities to computers that are able to use 64bit software"

Which is a lot better, probably better than the text I proposed in my previous comment. However, I'd like to emphasize that it would be a good idea to include a link to a page on https://help.ubuntu.com/ or anywhere else which lists all x86 and x86-64 CPU's so it will be easier for users to decide if they can use the x86-64 version. Also mention that x86-64 will allow using more than 4 GB RAM – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit#Memory_limitations – and that the Macromedia Flash plugin is not available for x86-64, for example.

Besides that, "32bit" and "64bit" shouldn't be written like that, the Wikipedia page – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit – uses the word "64-bit". The word "value" seems strange to me, because value refers to either the x86 or x86-64 version here and not a numerical value.

[Dean Sas (dsas)]

The page has been changed since your original report, do you still see it as a problem?

[Alexander van Loon (avanloon)]

The page is still identical to my description in my last comment (not my original report), comment #1. My criticism is still valid, because the download page offers no information on the advantages of 64-bit. 4 GB RAM is even more widespread now, so there is even more reason to inform people that they cannot use the full amount of their 4 GB of RAM unless they use the x86-64 version. Neither does the download page point to information on how to figure out if the CPU can handle x86-64. This is important because unfortunately there is no rule of thumb that every recent CPU is x86-64 capable, the Intel Atom isn’t for example.

It’s disappointing to see that it has taken almost a year before someone replied to this bug report. Hopefully that doesn’t deter from taking this bug serious, because it’s still as valid as a year ago.

[Alexander van Loon (avanloon)]

Forgot to change the status to ‘New’ after my last comment.