Please apologize for maybe a dumb question - but why are there certain MikroTik products with 32bit OS on a 64bit CPU architecture available?
Why don’t these devices also obtain a 64bis OS?
Just out of interest…
IDK. But the next line down likely tells the story, the RAM. More bits use more memory. So if most things are 32-bit numbers, you waste a lot of memory when they get stored in 64-bit slots.
e.g. 32-bit Windows XP shipping on 64-bit Intel CPU. Vista was always 64-bit. People liked XP more I’d say. You only needed 64-bit if memory was >4GB…
… and storage. But I don’t see this being the reason on hAP ax lite, both RAM and storage are generous.
Totally understand and agree on the Windows story Amm0 
But still - a brand new device with 512 MB RAM would deserve a future-proof 64bis OS I guess…
Don’t get me wrong - I am not complaining whatsoever - I just want to understand it…
IF there’s a specific reason.
But I guess there IS - to develop and maintain dedicated trains.
Is it to not cannibalize or keep the gap to other devices/big brothers?
E.g. L009 ↔ RB5009
Just a thought…
Even Raspberry PI is 64bit nowadays.
I guess it has more to do with the drivers.
Compiling for 32/64 bit is just a flip of a switch.
But the drivers need to be incorporated …
AX2 and AX3 are full 64 bit but they use a different chipset then AX Lite.
…bit-count apart, that had another reason.
Vista was a disaster !
Every used NT ? That was also each time a "challenge’ when you wanted to use something USB related.
I presume there is some relative reasonable why, perhaps several. I kinda view it Mikrotik’s job to make my generic config run “best” on the platform it’s on. Config scripts don’t care about bit-ness.
But related question, my question on these “CPU: 64-bit (32-bit RouterOS)” devices…
Does /container allow ARM64 images, or do those have to be ARM32?
I don’t have any to know, but that be my concern here. WAY less ARM32 docker images than what’s available ARM64.
This model runs 32bit OS because it does not have enough resources to run 64 bit OS. Since it’s a lightweight home device, there is practically no benefit anyway. It is the cheapest device after all.
Can you elaborate about which resources on L009 are scarce?
+1
Would be interested in this as well.
More specifically, there is no performance difference or any other gain to add 64bit support if you only have 128MB of RAM, the differences begin with bigger RAM.
Hence the question why an L009 with 512MB memory is not getting enough love to give it a 64bit OS?
Like I said, the lack of RAM is not a problem.
There is no benefit for device with only 512MB RAM. You need 2GB to feel any difference.
64Bit OS takes up more space and can be even slower if you only have 512MB
Thank you normis.
So we can say that 64bit OS availability generally (as for now) starts at 1GB memory?
E.g. RB5009
Then all is clear 
The 32bit systems “vulnerability” is the “2038 year problem - Y2K38”.
What happens when they get time from NTP after the date of 2038 ?
Hope that the ROS will then be based on Linux kernel 5.6 or higher and that you own/use device that supports it. https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/1/29/355
Edit: ROS7 is already on 5.6 so no worries if you can use it.