Strangely enough this has been my very first 64-bit installation. Let me perhaps rephrase that so it is more clear:
This installation I did of Ubuntu Mate 16.04 over the past weekend, is the very first time in my 46 years of age and 35 years of computing that I installed and started to make normal use of a 64-bit operating system.
I’ve came late to the party for several reasons. Doesn’t matter what.
What matters is that Ubuntu is becoming less and less a representative of certain core ideas in the Linux system and more and more of an outsider playing a completely different role in the community. And that’s fine. I’m not saying that is necessarily bad. They are just showing themselves for what they are. With this move – if they eventually proceed – they are just showing how they position themselves as a distributor of linux software; More engaged in the masses, more forward thinking (note, not necessarily a compliment) and with an internal strategy and culture not different from any other commercial business offering operating systems and software to the market. Their right, their call.
What I don’t like is sweeping under the rug all the consequences of this decision by basing it solely on its reasons or its merits. I don’t like PR speech; speech aimed at convincing me of something. I prefer frank and open speech, where honesty prevails and all the angles are addressed. What that post isn’t telling you is that, with this decision moving forward, Canonical will be effectively abandoning the market it helped create; no company helped foment Linux in the so-called 3rd World like Canonical. And by removing themselves from 32-bit computing, Canonical will deal a tremendous blow to the market they almost single-handedly created. A market with a vast number of home and business legacy 32-bit system that isn’t going to change for a long time.
Had this move come from distro maintainers like Ubuntu MATE, or Linux Mint, or any other group of enthusiast maintainers that nonetheless have to deal on a daily basis with lack of personnel, it would be completely understandable. But coming from Canonical, it is simply hard for me to accept blindly – just because I’m being told – that they are having problems maintaining the 32-bit ecosystem. I’m almost tempted to say, it is a downright lie. Moreso, because maintaining a 64-bit Linux OS, means that the 32-bit package maintenance task is alleviated by the tests ran on the 64 bit versions. That is, you don’t have twice the work to maintain both a 64-bit and a 32-bit version.
What’s more troubling is that this will inevitable trickle down the Ubuntu chain. It will become inevitable that all depending on Ubuntu as their upstream source, will be forced to abandon 32-bit computing. And to those for whom Ubuntu is completely abstracted away from the end user (Linux Mint, for instance) they may still be able to offer 32-bit computing but at a greater cost to them.
The second part of his post I decided to ignore as a blatant irresponsible thing to say. To claim that the future is here and other somesuch nonsense has nothing to do with Linux. Leave that to the usual corporate PR verbal diarrhea. That’s not what Linux represents. It’s fine if they, Canonical, want to ride with the technology, leaving legacy behind on a constant basis and staying on top of the wave, or whatever they may want to call it. But don’t try to put that on me as a good thing, or make me feel bad because I don’t have whatever is your worthy tech of the day. I don’t accept it. Not in the Linux ecosystem, I won’t!
“We need to move forward” is fine. Nice speech. But at least admit you are moving forward at the expense of those you are going to leave behind. Present your reasons, but also make it clear you know very well who you are going to damage because of this.
And about the Server edition… unbelievable what they are proposing to do. I cannot even start to overstate the dependency of the 3rd world business on legacy 32-bit computing.