Take the 64-Bit Pledge!

[jonrd463]

14 minutes ago, KerBlammo said:

Some people might want to change their OS just for the sake of playing KSP.  For most its not a realistic option.  

Personally I am OS-agnostic, I use different OSs on different machines depending one what I use them for, I don't see the OS as a life-style choice or a badge of honor, just a tool to let me do things I need or want to do.  Right now, on the computer I play KSP on Windows is the best choice for me and if I'm going to "upgrade" the OS it will be to Windows 10.

 

(for the record I have used Windows (starting with 3.1 (ugh)), OS X, OS/2,  Linux, and BeOS (my all time favorite) on my various computers over the years)

I share the exact same feelings as you, only differing with the current OS. For me, it was after reading how people were getting good performance on Linux with KSP. Since I'd basically taken a break on any other game but KSP, I decided to set up a partition with the Mint distro and check it out for myself. I was very pleased, once I got everything in order. Up until this point, I'd never used Linux. Mint was such an easy install, and had just about every feature I needed in an OS at the time (plus included Office suite) that I just stuck with it, and continue to do so. This doesn't make me Team Linux or anything. I still have a Windows partition that I use for the odd thing here and there that only works on Windows. I use whatever is best suited to the specific task at hand. Right now, it's web browsing, KSP, Netflix, email, and occasional word processing. 99% of the time, I find I can do it just fine in Linux, so that's where I am now.

[KSPFan85]

I'm so ready for 64 bit! :-) I stopped playing KSP when they removed the 64 bit windows option so yeah.. I want my KSP back ! :-) HYPE!

[Cornholio]

2 hours ago, HebaruSan said:

I would summarize it as SQUAD stating their intent to make 64-bit work but not wanting to make it an ironclad commitment. I.e., they're trying hard to make it work, but just in case there are some unsolvable problems at the last minute, it's not a promise.

Personally I'm guessing they agree with you and that that's the reason this release is taking nearly a year to develop.

Keep in mind that 64-bit was only one of the reasons for the Unity 5 migration. Another was console support, which opens up a whole new market and may or may not require 64-bit. So if they hypothetically ended up in a situation where 32-bit Unity 5 support was solid and 64-bit didn't work, it could still make sense to do a 32-bit release. Of course that would cost some community goodwill, but that would simply have to be weighed against all the other factors relevant to that decision.

If 64-bit was not going to be the sole reason for the transition to Unity 5 and taking this much time to make it happen, the devs would most definitely have spoken up by now.  The vast majority of the comments in every dev notes Tuesday is about anticipation for 64-bit compatibility.  I have more respect for Squad than to assume that they would just ignore this overwhelming assumption that all of our problems will finally be fixed. 

Also, I have to say, with as poorly received as the news of the console ports was, there would be an unprecedented magnitude of negative feedback if no 64-bit client was released and console support/preparation was implied.

Squad would have been weathering the storm for some time now had any of this been the case.

[Maars]

2 hours ago, GreeningGalaxy said:

It does not matter if your OS is 64 bit. KSP for Windows is a 32-bit application at this time, meaning that it cannot make use of more than about 4 gigabytes of RAM in any circumstances, even on 64-bit operating systems.

If you mean that people should upgrade to Linux, well, I can't say I don't share that opinion, but I also understand that most people don't want to put in the time it takes to install and learn how to use Linux, and I can't really blame them for that.

Actually, do you know how hard it is to install linux and learn how to use it?  As hard as it is installing windows and just as easy and intuitive to use.  Anyone that tells you otherwise used linux about 15 years ago.

[terryammon]

The fact is, if ksp 1.1 supports Direct x 11, we won't need to use 64bit for more ram :-)

[suicidejunkie]

Yeah, this is all why it would make a good poll question

[MGCJerry]

I will use what works best for me.

Why use something that doesn't work? If it turns out there is a 1.1 in 64bit on windows and if it constantly has problems ill be using the 32 bit. If 32bit has constant problems I'll stick with 1.0.4 & 1.0.5.

[Guest]

No.

I'm on Mac.  I'm on x86...

[eddiew]

3 hours ago, KerBlammo said:

Some people might want to change their OS just for the sake of playing KSP.  For most its not a realistic option.

This. When my software dev environments and art programs and all my other games work in Linux, then I can move off windows. I will not willingly retrain what in some cases is a decade of specialist experience in specific software just for KSP.

 

[GreenWolf]

I mean, dual booting is a thing. As is booting from a flash drive.

[Kar]

No vote for me. Simply because I think, when 64bit is ready, is ready. I quit playing KSP on 32 bit since I cannot play without mods. To do that, I need a better stable KSP and of course more memory, less lag, more FPS.

64 bit might do the trick, I said again "might" since with a new release, more bugs will happen. KSP will have to be developed way much more then 1.1.

So, yes, I would love to play on 64 bit if it was stable, and did not eat my computer ram over time. Playing KSP is like a tic-tac time bomb waiting to explode (crash) the more time I play. This is not KSP fault, Unity.

I am not a dev, I do not know crap about programming or making a game. All I want is a stable game. So, let it come when it is ready. 

@SQUAD

Give me my 64 bit KSP, when it is ready. Do not rush it and just forget this thread.....

 

Quote

 

Reporter: When will Doom be ready?

John Carmack: When it is done.

 

 

[Jim DiGriz]

3 hours ago, GreenWolf said:

I mean, dual booting is a thing. As is booting from a flash drive.

dual booting is a PITA.

linux has right now has crap support for scaling 4k displays (particularly with mixed 4k and 2k displays on the same desktop) and i need to use some Mac apps, so my triple-boot desktop has been booted to OSX for the past 3 months...

[hellblazer]

I've been using the 64 bit Windows workaround for the last 6 months. Over 50 mods installed. Either way I'll be using 64 bit version. 

[Wallygator]

Having hacked the 64bit Mac OSX KSP version, I'm flying fine. Running RO/RSS with about 50 mods and no crashes or hangs since conversion more than a month ago.

1.1 64bit will have to hit a high mark of reliability for me to use it as my base install at this point

dual booting is a PITA.

linux has right now has crap support for scaling 4k displays (particularly with mixed 4k and 2k displays on the same desktop) and i need to use some Mac apps, so my triple-boot desktop has been booted to OSX for the past 3 months...

(Throws SCO Unix 3.5" floppies in bin... Cries...)

Edited February 18, 2016 by Wallygator
Sadness

[GreenWolf]

15 hours ago, Jim DiGriz said:

dual booting is a PITA.

linux has right now has crap support for scaling 4k displays (particularly with mixed 4k and 2k displays on the same desktop) and i need to use some Mac apps, so my triple-boot desktop has been booted to OSX for the past 3 months...

Live booting isn't though. It takes about five minutes + however long it takes to download the latest Ubuntu ISO to set-up a persistent live boot USB stick.

[severedsolo]

Your poll is flawed. The correct answer is clearly "I will use whatever version is best for me" - why wouldn't you?

[GreeningGalaxy]

22 hours ago, Maars said:

Actually, do you know how hard it is to install linux and learn how to use it?  As hard as it is installing windows and just as easy and intuitive to use.  Anyone that tells you otherwise used linux about 15 years ago.

I use Linux full-time, and while I don't at all think that it's hard to use, I do understand that most lifelong Windows users are uncomfortable with the idea of partitioning their hard disks, booting from external media, and doing all of the other low-level and risky-if-done-wrong things that go into installing Linux. Sure, Ubuntu and Mint make those steps ridiculously easy, but it's still a fair time commitment for first-time users, and often a complete impossibility for users who play KSP on family systems that they can't tinker with.

Yes, installing Linux is free and easy if you're willing and able to try it out, but as a Linux user, I know very well how frustrating it can be when a different OS from the one you're using is the only one that a given piece of software will run on. While I might not have joined the crowds clamoring for Windows 64-bit support to be the number-one development priority in the months before the Unity 5 announcement, I also don't think that "just use Linux" is a good general solution for KSP's community.

[JedTech]

5 hours ago, severedsolo said:

"I will use whatever version is best for me" - why wouldn't you?

Utilitarian, for the greater good type of stuff (won't make much sense to average millennials)

The thought was that is everyone uses 64-bit and is constantly communicating 64-bit problems to Squad, then Squad will make it a higher priority to make 64-bit work. 
Whereas, if everyone tries 64-bit, decides it doesn't work, and then goes back down to 32-bit; then Squad will only hear about 64-bit problems for a short period of time and will not make it a high priority.

Edited February 19, 2016 by JedTech

[Choctofliatrio2.0]

7 hours ago, severedsolo said:

Your poll is flawed. The correct answer is clearly "I will use whatever version is best for me" - why wouldn't you?

I, for one, am too lazy to change my version, so i use whatever steam loads.

[Jim DiGriz]

9 hours ago, GreenWolf said:

Live booting isn't though. It takes about five minutes + however long it takes to download the latest Ubuntu ISO to set-up a persistent live boot USB stick.

I have Ubuntu already installed.

9 hours ago, Wallygator said:

Having hacked the 64bit Mac OSX KSP version, I'm flying fine. Running RO/RSS with about 50 mods and no crashes or hangs since conversion more than a month ago.

1.1 64bit will have to hit a high mark of reliability for me to use it as my base install at this point

(Throws SCO Unix 3.5" floppies in bin... Cries...)

Goddammit, I'm trying to get through XCOM here while I'm waiting for 1.1...  Don't be telling me I can run 64-bit on OSX right now...

[Wallygator]

3 hours ago, Jim DiGriz said:

I have Ubuntu already installed.

Goddammit, I'm trying to get through XCOM here while I'm waiting for 1.1...  Don't be telling me I can run 64-bit on OSX right now...

Ok, I'm not telling you that you can. I am only telling you that I have.  ;-)

There is a post somewhere that details to the steps to edit the contents of the ksp executable, delete the unity 32bit bits and install the unity 64bit bits, along with a few other bits. If I can find it, I will post a link... In a bit. 

[Wallygator]

As mentioned - all OS X users can take action - not just a pledge!

[ModZero]

If all this activist spirit went into campaigning for better energy efficiency or human rights, instead of being able to add more clouds to KSP...

[Wallygator]

Hey man, even activists have the right to undertake hobbies.

[ModZero]

35 minutes ago, Wallygator said:

Hey man, even activists have the right to undertake hobbies.

Ah, you misunderstood me a bit. Risking getting a bit too serious for my original joke, I'm actually a bit of activist myself, but I do find the specific application of energy a bit on the silly side, mostly due to the "take action" tone, which will soon lead to people burning 64 truck tires in front of Squad's office. But, of course, a sad activist is an inefficient activist. Unless they're a poet. Everyone knows poets are supposed to be sad.