[extropy-chat] Optimal computer configurations [Was: Commentary: Does Karl Schroeder's opinion reallymatter?]

[BillK]

On 4/29/06, Robert Bradbury wrote:
> I can understand 386's and 486's but what would be the problem with basic
> Pentiums?  (The fact that I've got Unbuntu running on one would seem to
> suggest there isn't any real fundamental problem.)


Many Puppy and DSL Linux users are running on 486s with little memory.  :)

The DSL FAQ states:
There are currently no plans to move to a 2.6.x kernel, for the
following reasons.
    * The 2.6.x kernel is significantly bigger than the 2.4.x kernel,
so it would cramp DSL's functionality.
    * The 2.6.x kernel drops a lot of support for legacy technologies,
hardware, etc, and we want to keep DSL functional on as much hardware
as possible
    * All major improvements that have occurred to the 2.6.x tree have
been, and are being backported to the 2.4.x tree, by a very active
backporting team.


> I thought X was a requirement for graphics displays -- am I misinformed?
> Aren't Fvwm and IceWM stand-ins for GNOME or KDE (but still run on top of
> X)?  I will admit that GNOME isn't lightweight and I'm under the impression
> (though I haven't tried running it yet) that KDE is even worse (based on the
> package install sizes from Gentoo) so Fvwm | IceWM would seem like
> reasonable choices for the legacy hardware.

Sorry, my confusion here.
Fvwm, Fluxbox, etc. are small, fast windows managers only.
KDE and Gnome are full (bloated) desktop environments.
<http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/XWindow-User-HOWTO/windowman.html#AEN979>


> How much memory is on your machine and how long do you keep FF running?  You
> probably will not see them unless you have a machine with 512MB or less and
> leave the browser running for days.  The problem is basically heap
> fragmentation interacting with Linux page management.


I only have 256MB memory. (Used to be 512MB, but one of the memory
cards failed and I haven't bothered to replace it as I didn't notice
any performance difference).

There is still much ongoing discussion about Firefox memory usage.
See <http://kb.mozillazine.org/Reducing_memory_usage_(Firefox)>
Some extensions have been suggested as memory eaters, SessionSaver,
for example.

But I keep it simple. I don't have Flash or Shockwave installed,
rarely use Adobe Reader, never play movies, and mostly just stick to
text websites. I power off my pc overnight, so Firefox usually runs
for no more than 12-15 hours.  Works for me.   ;)



BillK