[mdlug] Linux is "greener"

[Robert Adkins]

> On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Ingles, Raymond wrote:
> 
> >  Well, it certainly *can* be faster, and usually is. But recent 
> > distros of Linux can be pretty darn memory-hungry. The 
> latest Ubuntu 
> > is a bit sluggish on our "new-to-us" laptop with 384MB of RAM. I'm 
> > working on ways to trim the fat off; I might look at Xubuntu.
> 
> Even Windows would be sluggish with only 384MB RAM. You might 
> want to get a stick of RAM for that machine since it's pretty 
> cheap for a GB.
> 
> >  That being said, Linux's 'sweet spot' seems to be around 512MB of 
> > RAM. For XP, it seems to need about double that, 1GB.
> >
> >  Of course, I recall when Linux with 16MB RAM was faster 
> than Windows 
> > with 32MB... :->
> 
> I fear that Linux will be faster on anything when compared to 
> running Windows.  Windows == bloatware.

	Linux still would run faster. Nobody says that you MUST use a GUI or
install every single service under the sun in order to run Linux.

	Although, who would really want to do that in this day and age when
there is so much hardware available for so relatively few dollars these
days.

	-Rob