[lug] M$ does it again...down under

Ferdinand Schmid fschmid at archenergy.com
Tue Aug 7 12:35:18 MDT 2001


OK,
If you want to run Linux on a slow system you need to think what you
want to use.  For this particular charity you need to compare the
functionality/speed of DOS/Windows3.11 to a Linux equivalent.  KDE and
Gnome won't be a good choice unless you spend lots of time to customize
it, which may be difficult given the many different systems you will
need to install.

I am running an old Sparc Classic on 32 MB of RAM and 500 MB HDD.  I
haven't tried to run StarOffice on it - most likely it wouldn't even
fit.  BUT it runs Afterstep, Netscape, the usual editors, ... very
nicely.  As far as office suites are concerned - that's another story. 
I would experiment with the lower weight software but don't know enough
to specifically pick a product.  

So don't expect to run out and buy a new Linux distro for a really old
computer.  It will work just as poorly as a new Windows version.  Win2k
doesn't even try running with less than 64 MB, some Linux versions will
install but simply not perform well.

Ferdinand

Jenni wrote:
> 
> .> How much work is involved?
> .>
> .
> .Interesting.  How good are the prospects of running a
> .Linux/XFree86/StarOffice/Konqueror setup on, say, a P-133 32MB RAM?
> .Will it be starved for resources and hopelessly slow?  Or will it be
> .even more responsive and usable than Windows/Office/IE 95 on a similar
> .system?
> .
> .I think that Linux once had a reputation as being a good choice for
> .older/outdated systems.  Does that still hold true with the modern suite
> .of software that accompanies most distros?  Or has it made a shift to
> .higher-end systems?
> 
> I just installed SuSE 7.2 with KDE 2.1 and StarOffice on my mom's P166
> laptop with 80MB (I think.) of RAM, and it's painfully slow.  The worst of
> it is when KDE first loads, but the rest is also pretty bad.
> 
> I have a RedHat 7.0 KDE 2.whatever P166 desktop with 128MB of RAM and it
> runs much smoother.  KDE still loads slow, but once it's up, the rest
> seems to work just fine.
> 
> -Jen
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug

-- 
Ferdinand Schmid
http://www.archenergy.com
303-444-4149 x231



More information about the LUG mailing list