Do you still use a 32bit DAW?

[Tj Shredder]

It's possible that some people living in certain economic situations are still stuck on 32 bit hardware even to this day.

You could easily get hardware for free or almost free which is maybe 10 years old. 10 years ago all computers sold had a 64-bit architecture but a lot would still install a 32-bit version of their OS which most likely was Windows…
But also whoever is in such a situation has no money to buy software anyway…

[Guenon]

And if they can't afford 64 bit hardware?

Old 64 bit hardware (that is comparably as powerful or more powerful than old 32 bit hardware) is obtainable at the exact same lowest prices these days. The tech is so old it's often free, or sold for a token amount for bookkeeping (one dollar, five dollars, that sort of thing). Also, on the other hand, complete and fully functioning 32 bit packages from the late 90s - early 2000s have little by little started to go for higher prices than (generally more usable by today's standards, but not as historically interesting) 64 bit ones from a few years later, as they have steadily transitioned into the "collectible" and "retro enthusiast" category. However, if one is really looking for a system to do music and other such stuff on, today, the completeness of the system from the collectible perspective is naturally beside the point, heh, just an interesting aspect of all this. In any case, there is no "can't afford 64 bit hardware" barrier anymore.

[Guenon]

Even established charities like WCE who deliver usable computers to the poorest locations on the globe refuse to receive 32 bit systems as donations: https://worldcomputerexchange.org/get-i ... computers/

[Teksonik]

It's possible that some people living in certain economic situations are still stuck on 32 bit hardware even to this day.

You could easily get hardware for free or almost free which is maybe 10 years old. 10 years ago all computers sold had a 64-bit architecture but a lot would still install a 32-bit version of their OS which most likely was Windows…
But also whoever is in such a situation has no money to buy software anyway…

You're projecting the conditions where you live on every part of the world. Not everyone has access to free hardware. Again I'm not saying developers should support 32 bit I'm just saying that there are some people who may be stuck on 32 for financial reasons. If you are unaware of such conditions then consider yourself lucky. Luckily for me all of my computers have 64 bit hardware but I do have sympathy for those who may not be so lucky.

[Teksonik]

And if they can't afford 64 bit hardware?

Old 64 bit hardware (that is comparably as powerful or more powerful than old 32 bit hardware) is obtainable at the exact same lowest prices these days.....In any case, there is no "can't afford 64 bit hardware" barrier anymore.

You too are projecting your condition on everyone else. Certainly there are people who "can't afford 64 bit hardware" just as there are people who can't afford adequate housing, food,clothing etc. There are parts of the world where having an old 32 bit computer would be considered a luxury.

If you are unaware such conditions exist then you too should consider yourself lucky.

Again since I've gone all 64 bit many years ago ago I don't care if developers support 32 bit and in fact I'd prefer they don't since that would give them more time to work on 64 bit versions which I could actually use.

But that doesn't prevent me from having sympathy for those who are stuck on 32 bit through no fault of their own.

Those handful of people who cling to 32 bit out of some form of stubbornness deserve to be left behind since they've made a conscious decision to do so.

Look, the real question here is will a developer lose enough sales by dropping 32 bit support to justify continuing to support 32 bit? I would say no but once again only individual developers know how much work it takes them to update, maintain, and support 32 bit.

My point all along has been the question posed in the poll "Yes. I use the 32bit DAW." doesn't tell the whole story. Does it mean they can't use 64 bit plugins or they sometimes use a 32 bit DAW or ? Only the 11 people who responded yes at the time of this post can say for sure.

[chk071]

Headpalm.

[Tj Shredder]

I guess the only two reasons to run 32-bit plugins is the use of an abandoned 32-bit host, or the use of an abandoned 32-bit plugin forcing you to the use of a 32-bit version of your host. Usually the latter case can be avoided with plugin bridges…
Those I know who are stuck with a 32-bit host are stuck in ProTools 9 btw… When ProTools 9 was released, all the world was already 64-bit since ages… Upgrading ProTools ins‘t worth it in most cases… It can‘t deal with VST anyway…
As a dev I would charge for AAS support twice the price and let that money pay for 32-bit support…

[Teksonik]

I guess the only two reasons to run 32-bit plugins is the use of an abandoned 32-bit host, or the use of an abandoned 32-bit plugin forcing you to the use of a 32-bit version of your host. Usually the latter case can be avoided with plugin bridges…

Or....they're stuck on 32 bit hardware. Yes I know everyone here including myself is lucky enough to have 64 bit hardware. Not everyone in the world is so lucky. Perhaps the current global economic condition is not as well known as I thought.

I see people every day complaining about the CPU usage of certain plugins because they are running older 64 bit hardware. They simply can't afford to upgrade.

Not everyone is financially as blessed as we are simple as that. If that makes anyone "facepalm" then that says a whole lot about them as a human being.

Anyway I've made my point so I'm out of the argument. In my opinion the Poll is poorly worded and will not yield the information needed to decide if 32 support makes financial sense in 2021.

Everyone count your blessings and have a nice day. I'm out

[Guenon]

You too are projecting your condition on everyone else. Certainly there are people who "can't afford 64 bit hardware" just as there are people who can't afford adequate housing, food,clothing etc. There are parts of the world where having an old 32 bit computer would be considered a luxury.

The point is, the 32/64 bit difference isn't a factor. I was responding to your "And if they can't afford 64 bit hardware?" comment. Even in the poorest parts of the world foundations/charities/etc. are bringing people donated computers, and these days even those computers are 64 bit ones.

[Tj Shredder]

You can‘t browse the net with a computer from the past millennium. Unlikely any of those is lurking on KVR. It would be too depressing… As I said its unlikely the hardware which forces musicians into 32-bit…

[syntonica]

I guess the only two reasons to run 32-bit plugins is the use of an abandoned 32-bit host, or the use of an abandoned 32-bit plugin forcing you to the use of a 32-bit version of your host. Usually the latter case can be avoided with plugin bridges…

Or....they're stuck on 32 bit hardware. Yes I know everyone here including myself is lucky enough to have 64 bit hardware. Not everyone in the world is so lucky. Perhaps the current global economic condition is not as well known as I thought.

I see people every day complaining about the CPU usage of certain plugins because they are running older 64 bit hardware. They simply can't afford to upgrade.

Not everyone is financially as blessed as we are simple as that. If that makes anyone "facepalm" then that says a whole lot about them as a human being.

Anyway I've made my point so I'm out of the argument. In my opinion the Poll is poorly worded and will not yield the information needed to decide if 32 support makes financial sense in 2021.

Everyone count your blessings and have a nice day. I'm out

If they're stuck on 32-bit hardware due to economic concerns, then they're probably not able to buy new plugins either. There's a wealth of free 32-bit plugs out there that still sound great and won't tax older hardware. It's time for devs to drop the cruft.

Besides, making music is not cheap!

[cryophonik]

Totally agree. While there may be some legitimate reasons for a developer to maintain 32-bit plugins, doing it for people who are not financially able to buy a 64-bit computer does not really compute IMO. Commercial soft synths are a luxury for those who are fortunate enough to afford them, not a necessity for those who can't, and, as mentioned, there are still plenty of free 32-bit plugins available.

[allofdrab]

I still have, but now very rarely use, Audiomulch, which has been stuck on 32 bit for years, but I don't think I can hold off updating my Mac much longer to something above Mohave. That being said I have heard rumours of a 64bit version planned.

Long-time Audiomulch user here too. The Metasurface for me is the hardest part to let go of; still ground-breaking, and very inspiring; creatively. I do have a 2020 Intel MacBook Pro I hope to get it running on in some way (Parallels? Dual boot?), but I haven’t tried yet. Ross did mention on Twitter a year or two (or three? Life’s a blur) ago that he is (or was?) working on a new version, but we’ll see. In the mean time I keep an old Windows laptop around to use Audiomulch, but the disconnect from my new Mac means I’ve been using it less and less; sadly. Perhaps I’ll get a second audio interface one day.

[Nielzie]

Yes and no. On linux, using a Host that comes only with a 32-bit bridge to Windows vst's. But with an external bidge manually installed that also bridges 64 vst and vst3.

[Passing Bye]

If someone can't afford 64 bit machine that cost less than 100 bucks, he can't really afford buying plugins that cost that much either. Cakewalk, if that is what someone who have no money will use, have internal bridge to run both 32/64 bit plugins, so there's really no reason to use 32 bit free DAW at all to run 32 bit only plugins.