If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by High Plains Thumper on September 1, 2007, 4:34 am
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/eac053a438beb3ba
or http://tinyurl.com/37b53h
[quote]
Linux will run well on older, slower, more expensive hardware
as well as it does on modern, quick PC's. Thus, it can be a
"Harley-Davidson" of an operating system (especially if a US
distro is used like RedHat). Performance is more like a
V-Rod when compared with Microsoft, but with the long distance
stability of an Ultra Glide.
[/quote]
--
Ride safely,
HPT
|
|
Posted by Sean on September 1, 2007, 8:18 am
High Plains Thumper wrote:
> [quote]
> Linux will run well on older, slower, more expensive hardware
> as well as it does on modern, quick PC's. Thus, it can be a
> "Harley-Davidson" of an operating system
Except that if BG were in the motorcycle business he'd be busy
trying to invent a patentable replacement for asphalt so you'd
have to pay a royalty fee every time you took a ride on
a Microsoft road.
SQ
|
|
Posted by Steve T on September 1, 2007, 8:54 am
:Linux will run well on older, slower, more expensive hardware
:as well as it does on modern, quick PC's.
Myth. Linux runs like crap on older, slower hardware.
--
|
|
Posted by Ari Rankum on September 1, 2007, 4:15 pm
Steve T wrote:
>
> :Linux will run well on older, slower, more expensive hardware
> :as well as it does on modern, quick PC's.
>
> Myth. Linux runs like crap on older, slower hardware.
> --
That's not true. Linux is not the same as RedHat, Mandrake, Ubuntu,
etc. I have Linux running on teeny tiny embedded systems with 486s on
them. The Linux kernel can be made to perform quite well in less than 8
MB of RAM. Now, if you want to run a desktop system with a fancy GUI
and a bunch of graphical apps, yeah, you're going to need some hardware
for that.
|
|
Posted by David Steuber on September 3, 2007, 12:51 am
>
> :Linux will run well on older, slower, more expensive hardware
> :as well as it does on modern, quick PC's.
>
> Myth. Linux runs like crap on older, slower hardware.
Perhaps the latest edition of KDE or Gnome does. But Linux itself
will be quite happy on a 566 Mhz Celeron with 384 MB of RAM and a 40GB
drive. It may take a while to comple SBCL or Emacs. But you don't
usually need to do that.
I've also run Linux (actually it is still installed) on a Gateway Solo
laptop with 233 Mhz PII and 128 MB with X11 and KDE 2.x with no
performance issues. It just seems slow compared to a modern PC.
--
Ethics are so annoying
I avoid them on principle
|
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 > last >>
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Re: (OT) Tuttle, OK and Linux | April 11, 2006, 6:23 am |
| Re: (OT) Tuttle, OK and Linux | April 11, 2006, 11:27 pm |
| OT ubuntu/linux question | February 27, 2008, 7:35 pm |
| Re: [comp.os.linux.advocacy] FAQ and Primer for COLA, Edition III | July 23, 2007, 10:36 am |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap