Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal)
On Tue, May 30 2023, Steve Langasek wrote:
> For businesses, the transition from 32-bit to 64-bit was several
> depreciation cycles ago.
>
> In my city, there is a non-profit that accepts donations of old computers,
> refurbishes them, installs Linux, and both sells them and provides them free
> to people in need.
>
> They receive x86-64 systems that they determine are *too old to be worth
> refurbishing* and they e-cycle them.
>
> Hanging on to systems using power-hungry chips from 20 years ago instead of
> intercepting a system such as this is not reducing the number of computers
> that end up in the waste stream, it just keeps you stuck with a more
> power-hungry system.
I still have several Asus EeePCs (Atom N270 which had a TDP of 2.5W)
from around 2008ish. One of them is in active use as an amateur radio
digipeater, while the others see occasional use. These don't support a
64-bit instruction set but are perfectly servicable for certain use
cases.
I understand that a 9" screen and an Atom isn't going to be suitable for
the segment of the population that wants to use it for modern web
browsing and video calling, so I understand why your nonprofit is doing
that.
I wouldn't buy a used EeePC today. Still, I see no reason to contribute
to the waste and carbon stream by replacing these perfectly usable
machines with something newer. Capability-wise, they are roughly
similar to a Raspberry Pi, but they have the added benefit of a screen,
keyboard, and battery all integrated in a small device.
Not everything from that age was power-hungry.
I guess the question is: is this use case too niche for Debian to
continue supporting? I would suggest that as long as we have 32-bit
ARM, are the challenges for 32-bit x86 really worse?
- John
Reply to: