As pointed out not entirely correct. 64-bit windows is standard these days, but the difference is that all 32-bit and 64-bit programs work on it (I'd say equally well) because of the 32-bit windows-on-windows subsystem. Compiling for 32-bit has therefore been a safe choice for many companies and developers for years because it would run everywhere without having to sort out 64-bit specific bugs. 32-bit programs on 64-bit Windows tend to actually run more stable than 64-bit programs, because a certain level of hardware abstraction happens for 32-bit programs that avoids e.g. driver quirks, which we encounter more often than not. In addition, if you have other 32-bit software it can often only directly communicate with ours if we are on the same architecture.vannilla wrote:32 bit Windows: a standard Windows installation.
64 bit Windows: a modernized Windows where most programs won't work because they are compiled for 32 bit.
That being said, 32-bit Windows on modern hardware is a lot more common to encounter than 32-bit Linux (which is pretty much limited to very old systems), especially on low-spec endpoint machines that don't need more than 2-4 GB of RAM in them.
As such, for now, we continue 32-bit Windows builds, but will eventually discontinue them once 32-bit Windows finds itself in the same situation as 32-bit Linux is now. Different environment, different audience; different criteria to consider.