[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: system requirements for debian



Bob Hynes wrote:
> I have debian running on a 500Mhz box with 256MB ram. It's pretty
> slow...slower than windows would be. Is there anyone who know what I
> could be doing to speed things up? turning off services, adding ram? I'm
> also considering tying another version of Linux, but maybe this box is
> just too slow at 500Mhz?

    Others have give you some good directions on where to look for
optimizations and I don't want to duplicate their excellent advice.  I just
want to chime in with my experience.

    For my desktop purposes I am running Debian on a PIII-667 Dell Latitude
CPx w/256Mb of RAM.  My (lite) desktop environment of choice is XFCE4.  I run
Thunderbird, Firefox, Gaim and VNC 24/7 with no problems with speed.
Furthermore I fire up Openoffice.org for editing on a personal writing
project.  Again, no problems with with speed at all.

    This has been my preferred workstation for going on 6 years.  In that time
I have run some funky setups up to and including a dual-boot Win2k/Debian
setup with VMWare on both sides to boot into the other.  IE, if I booted to
Win2k VMWare was running with Debian inside.  I booted to Debian, VMWare was
running with Win2k inside.  While it has been ages since I've had Win2k on
this machine I don't recall Win2k ever being faster than Debian.

    I've never really felt the desire to upgrade this system in terms of
hardware in that time and doubt I will want to do so in the future.  I don't
know what other aspects of your machine are outside of RAM/CPU but I don't
think the 166Mhz difference between my machine and yours would account for an
unusable drop in speed.

-- 
         Steve C. Lamb         | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
       PGP Key: 8B6E99C5       | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: