On 09.07.2018 19:01, Steve Dower wrote: > On 09Jul2018 0803, Cosimo Lupo wrote: >> If one goes to httWhps://www.python.org/downloads >> <https://www.python.org/downloads> from a Windows browser, the >> default download URL is for the 32-bit installer instead of the >> 64-bit one. >> I wonder why is this still the case? >> Shouldn't we encourage new Windows users (who may not even know the >> distinction between the two architectures) to use the 64-bit version >> of Python, since most likely they can? > > The difficulty is that they *definitely* can use the 32-bit version, > and those few who are on older machines or older installs of Windows > may not understand why the link we provide didn't work for them. > > From the various telemetry I've seen (and I work at Microsoft, so I > have better access than most :) ), there is still enough 32-bit > Windows out there that I'm not confident enough with "most likely". I > haven't checked any location data (not even sure if we've got it), but > I'd guess that there's higher 32-bit usage among less privileged > countries and people. > > I've thought a bit about making a single installer that can offer the > option of 32-bit/64-bit at install time, but I don't actually think > it's that big a problem to deserve that much effort as a solution. > > Perhaps we should add non-button text below the button saying "Get the > 64-bit version"? > Maybe infer the bitness from User-Agent instead. This seems to be the trend among official sites in general. > Cheers, > Steve > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev at python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: > https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/vano%40mail.mipt.ru
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4