I doubt very much it'll happen but I'll drink to it anyway.  32 bit is old hat and should have been retired with Win 7.  64 bit is the way to go because it uses hardware more efficiently and provides greater opportunity for growth... and given the rapid growth in hardware development, 32 bit OSes aren't going to keep pace.

I notice more and more that there are fewer 32 bit proprietary machines one sale these days.  Most I see advertised or in stores are 64 bit with 4 or more gigs of RAM, so just maybe 32 bit OSes will die a natural death, if not with Win 10 then maybe with win 12.... if MS stays true to skipping a number to try distance itself from the last cock-up.  This time it's the butt ugly icons and start menu, so not everyone's going to like Win 10.

Me, well I'll get Win 10 anyway, cos under the hood 'll be good, and I'll customise the heck out of it make the GUI respectable.

You must have 64 bit anyway if you're going to go 4+ Gb on the RAM. 32 bit won't see more than 3.xx Gb.

Well, I have a laptop running 10 right now, and it will the only computer I will have running 10 for a looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong time. 

Interesting that as of last month, Windows 8/8.1 has yet to pass XP in current desktop OS share.  An abandoned OS still beats it.

Of Windows desktops, Win7 has 63%, XP 21% and 8/8.1 16%.  According to Net Applications, a web analytics firm.

Even more interesting when compared to late 2013: Win7 46%, XP 34% and 8 7%.

I mention this only because Win10 is going to have to be one helluva OS to move the needle much.

Admittedly good strategy on MS's part (they'll need every leg up they can get), but the impact on OS adoption that will have is unclear given the size of the PC gaming market.  Not sure what percentage of desktops are in that segment but it would have to be relatively small.

Quoting is off slightly. 

Actually that's quite incorrect. A person who dedicates a quarter of a terabyte to just one game and spends weeks on a single repaint of a single 'object' within that game would classify as a serious PC gamer - and FSX can barely handle DX10.  It was also 'broken' by the last 2 versions of IE ...namely 10 and 11.

Such a person will NEVER actually 'need' Windows 10.  Its advancements are totally redundant.

Now, I may have several [dozens] of other games installed and it's also undetermined that any of those will benefit.

AND,

"if it is pink with my little pony theme that's unchangeable"  I definitely won't go near it....wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot barge pole....

Not sure what your on about there, arguing the toss on what is a pc gamer ? I'd say anyone who can't use playstatioN or xbox controller

the dx12 benefits to none dx12 from what I've read will be minimal.. But that's like playing treasure island dizzy and wondering why your quad core processor hasn't inproved it.  You'll start to see a lot of the games switch over to the multi core ultilization in win 10, over the next year and when your mates getting 60 fps and your getting 9 fps on identical rigs on your latest game purchase suddenly the my little pony theme will be looking pretty good! 

I am demonstrating that I definitely classify as a 'PC Gamer' [having done so since before there was a DX anything....more like Dos4GW] BUT also vent my spleen about the infantile GUI of the 'modern windows' since 7.

My PC is 'particularly' Game-centric, from the M.2 PCIe x4 'HD' to the 32gig of DDR4 and the i7 5960x [with ASUS-accessed OC pins] and the GTX980.

It's DX12-ready but at the moment there are exactly zero DX12-specific games I ever wish to run on it.

BTW...current frame-rates for Res Evil 5 under DX10 average at 250.8 fps ...so yes, it's a game PC ...

Nah, I've already planned my next rig, with quite similar specs to Jafo's... though mine will have the next mobo up, liquid cooling and USB 3.1... and Win 10 will naturally go on it.