Re: Is 64MB enough?
On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 10:00:54AM -0300, Rogério Brito wrote:
> On May 21 2005, Johan Kullstam wrote:
> > "John Moore" <john7919@hotmail.com> writes:
> >
> > > Thanks but the old clunker's motherboard is not expandable to 256M
> > > :-(
> >
> > Star/Open-Office is not going to be pleasant. TeX, on the other hand,
> > will run like a treat.
>
> Indeed. Let alone the typographical quality that you get with (La)TeX and
> that you don't get with other systems (if LaTeX is properly used, of
> course).
I think it's not easy to use LaTeX so it will generate ugly output.
> I also don't use a desktop environment---I prefer to use a single window
> manager instead, and the solution that I found closer to my needs is
> fluxbox. I "saw the light" after experimenting with many window managers
> (like windowmaker, blackbox, oroboros etc) and some desktop environments
> (Gnome and KDE, mostly -- both inappropriate for a low resources machine).
>
> Fluxbox is small, functional, configurable, mostly useable with the
> keyboard (if you configure it correctly) and *fast*. Highly recommended.
But it's getting more and more eye-candy stuff. Transparent menus,
little icons along with menu entries... And it's getting big. It was
quite slow on my box, so I switched to openbox -- and I can say it's
FAST!
BTW, looks at their sizes:
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1.2M 2005-04-19 13:41 /usr/bin/fluxbox
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 200K 2005-02-21 19:59 /usr/bin/openbox
I still do everything I used to do, without that extra 1Mb.
I know the extra size doesn't necessarily mean it's slower, but it's
more memory you'll be using, and if you're short on memory, it *will*
slow down your system, no matter how good the code is.
And fluxbox is very slow (at least it feels slow to me). I have 1.1 Mb
RAM and I sometimes had to wait ten seconds or more just to open a menu.
In the same environment, openbox opens menus instantly.
J.
Reply to: