On 9 July 2018 at 17:01, Steve Dower email@example.com 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?
I agree, I'd rather see the 64-bit version be more accessible.
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'm happy to go with your research on whether the 32-bit version should be the obvious choice, but I don't think that means we have to hide the 64-bit version as much as we do.
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.
I agree, having 2 versions of the installer seems fine to me.
Perhaps we should add non-button text below the button saying "Get the 64-bit version"?
Why not just have a second button, "Download Python 3.7.0 (64-bit)" alongside or below the "Download Python 3.7.0" button? People who don't know the difference will just ignore it, people who do will be able to choose straight from the main download page.