Sandman
I blamed nothing on you, you illiterate fool

nospam
yes you did:

Sandman: I wonder what happened to your browser when you clicked it. Odd!

Sandman
No, I made a tinyurl directly from the original site. You are clueless as usual.

nospam
yet it ended up linking to an ad-tracker.

Sandman
nospam: lightroom 5 requires a 64 bit processor

The installer comes with a 32bit and 64bit binary:

nospam
nobody said it didn't.

Sandman
<http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5648>

"Windows: The Lightroom installer contains both a 32-bit and 64-bit version of the application. By default, the 64-bit version will be installed only on Windows 7 and Windows 8 64-bit operating systems. All other operating systems will install the 32-bit version by default."

nospam
you are proving my point.

the fact is that lightroom 5 *requires* a 64 bit processor

and windows 7 or later, which means that anyone who can run lightroom 5 is *guaranteed* to have the necessary hardware and software to run lightroom 6. period.

i didn't say there *wasn't* a 32 bit version. all lightroom 6 does is drop the 32 bit version that almost nobody was using anyway.

Sandman
You're used to being wrong.

nospam
you're used to lying.

Sandman
According to Steam stats, 12% of Windows 7 users are still at 32bit, but since most gamers are more likely to use 64bit I bet real-world numbers are a bit higher.

nospam: steam stats?? what does that have to do with adobe's customer base?? oh right, absolutely nothing.

Exactly. I don't have access to Adobe stats, so I googled and the first thing I found was steam stats. As I said, I suspect real world stats shows more using 32bit Windows 7.

nospam
steam stats are not relevant.

adobe most likely has *more* 64 bit users than steam does since a lot of gamers are kids or hobbyists who can't afford the latest and greatest hardware or software, whereas adobe's customers are typically on the cutting edge of technology.

Sandman
nospam: adobe customers were pining for a 64 bit version of photoshop nearly *ten* years ago, leading up to cs4's release on windows in 2008 and also upset that mac users had to wait for cs5.

Irrelevant to current usage stats.

nospam
it's *exactly* relevant.

adobe's customers want 64 bit apps and have for nearly a decade. they don't want 32 bit apps anymore and haven't for a long time.

Sandman
nospam: even if it is as high as 12%, it's still not enough to matter. they can easily be ignored (and should be).

I agree, and as I said, I'm just curious of how many that won't be able to upgrade.

nospam
as i said, none of them, since anyone who can run lightroom 5 is *guaranteed* to be able to run lightroom 6.

Sandman
nospam: if someone hasn't upgraded from xp, they're certainly not going to be buying new software. why waste time supporting it?

Who said they should?

nospam: they shouldn't, that's the whole point.

I.e. no one has claimed they shouldn't.

nospam
you are implying it will be an issue.