On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 03:07:25PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 09:59:15PM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 04:55:24PM -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > > I would be happy to write up this Change page if we can get the WG to > > > agree. Are there good reasons to hold on to shipping i686 Workstation > > > media? > > If I remember mattdm's flock talk correctly, the statistics of downloads > > for 32-bit workstation are ~15% of all ISO downloads. > One explanation for the discrepancy may be that people who have less > powerful systems and therefore want i686 are less likely to be > regularly connected to the Internet for updates. But that's just > guesswork. Yes, that's what I'd expect too. If you can fork out for a static internet connection, then you're also more likely to have upgraded your machine in the last ten years. > I'm looking at the numbers I have. From the release of Fedora 21 until > F22 release, 23% of all ISO "pings" are for i686. (Less than 1% are > > The 15% 32-bit comes from a different data source: package update > connections (again, pings, really). The exact number isn't terribly important. Either number supports my point: dropping i686 Workstations will _significantly_ reduce our installation base. I know that it's hard to find volunteers to work on 32bit. I myself haven't used a non-arm 32bit machine in years. But we'd have to work a lot to increase the user base by 15% to make up this loss. Zbyszek -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
