[NBLUG/talk] Red Hat 8- too slow

Dustin Mollo dustin at sonic.net
Sun Mar 28 14:26:01 PST 2004

On Sun, Mar 28, 2004 at 02:04:02PM -0800, Steve Johnson wrote:
> n Sun, Mar 28, 2004 at 11:37:03AM -0800, Dustin Mollo wrote:
> > but i'd also point out that the machine you are running linux on is probably
> > best suited to console-only and not X.
> Now, wait a minute..   His machine is fine for X, He just needs a less
> memory intensive window manager.
> I've run X wiht AfterStep on Pentium 150s and it runs great with out a
> hitch.  So saying this P2 233 box is to old for X is not right.

ok.  it's too old and slow for *me* to run X on and get any productive work
done.  as it's been stated already, it's more correct to say that GNOME and
KDE are a bit too much for this configuration.  it all depends on what you
want to get done with a box of this generation and how well you know linux.

if you are a new-to-linux person and expect to run linux on this as you
would for your everyday tasks and/or play with linux to find out what it can
do for you, i'd suggest not doing so, as your experience is going to be less
than stellar (as Aman as apparently found out.)

i'm all for keeping older hardware usefull (i've got a p166 at home i use to
do nothing but burn cd's and poke around debian's inner workings on), but at
some point, to really squeeze performance out of an old box, you need know
what you are doing in linux, or at least expect the road to be very bumpy
and long while getting to that point.


More information about the talk mailing list