Difference between revisions of "Talk:Installing Fedora 8 on a ThinkPad T61p"
m (yes, 64-bit is fine.) |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
-- I see no reason to do that, you only have less application support and probably other unknown problems. AFAIK it gives you no markable performance advantages. --[[User:Thhart|Thhart]] 18:42, 11 January 2008 (CET) | -- I see no reason to do that, you only have less application support and probably other unknown problems. AFAIK it gives you no markable performance advantages. --[[User:Thhart|Thhart]] 18:42, 11 January 2008 (CET) | ||
| + | |||
| + | -- 64-bit on the T60p (with the appropriate core2 duo processor upgrade) works fine. You can still run 32-bit applications on it for those cases where there is no 64-bit version yet (e.g. Wine). No reason the 61p would be different in that regard. Whether you care about being able to run 64-bit applications at all is up to you. --[[User:noahf|noahf]] 13:03, 11 January 2008 (PST) | ||
Revision as of 22:06, 11 January 2008
Can the same trick of Fedora 7 be applied to Fedora 8 regarding the alsa drivers and the sound buttons?
-- Yes of course, should be working as well. --Thhart 18:42, 11 January 2008 (CET)
32-bit or 64-bit?
The T61p should work with 64-bit, right? How well does that work? --Whizkid 18:37, 28 December 2007 (CET)
-- I see no reason to do that, you only have less application support and probably other unknown problems. AFAIK it gives you no markable performance advantages. --Thhart 18:42, 11 January 2008 (CET)
-- 64-bit on the T60p (with the appropriate core2 duo processor upgrade) works fine. You can still run 32-bit applications on it for those cases where there is no 64-bit version yet (e.g. Wine). No reason the 61p would be different in that regard. Whether you care about being able to run 64-bit applications at all is up to you. --noahf 13:03, 11 January 2008 (PST)
