[mdlug] Linux is "greener"

[Dan Pritts]

On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 03:20:21PM -0500, Rich Clark <rrclark at rrclark.net> wrote:
> 
> 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.

I run XP on a P3-600 with 256M ram.  I have disabled various
components (notably themes) to get there, but the system is very
usable for web browsing, mail, general office apps, etc.

I could also do this with linux, of course - but i would similarly have
to strip out a bunch of gunk that wouldn't fit (like, KDE or Gnome).

the "windows = bloat" meme is certainly based on lots of truth - but 
the modern linux desktop is playing a great game of catch-up.

now, fvwm on a 25MHz sparcstation IPC with a whopping 16MB ram under
SunOS 4.1.3...that was quite responsive and definitely not bloated.
ALthough sadly lacking in most of the GUI applications we take for
granted nowadays.

danno
--
dan pritts
danno at umich.edu
734-929-9770