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

Recommendations for Low Resource System



I have an old Mitsubishi Amity, which is smaller than a laptop, but not 
as small as a palm top.  It's old and built to run Windows 95, but I 
know people have gotten Debian to do well on this computer.  It has 48 
MB of memory and a 1.4 GB hard drive, which means it does not have many 
resources and, by today's standards -- well, let's not even talk about 
speed.

I will be using this because I can put it in my backpack with my books 
and papers and easily take it along without a case, a laptop cooler, 
and a lot of other toys (just the power supply).  My main goal is to be 
able to write on it, save, and import into OpenOffice later.  (OO 
requires too much RAM to work on this).  I may, later, end up using it 
to do some troubleshooting by hooking it up to my clients' LANs, but 
most of what I need for that is ssh, ping, traceroute, and similar 
utilities that are all command line based.

While I use vi quite often and have used emacs, I prefer a GUI based 
word processor when I'm in "writing mode."  It just matches the way I 
think when I'm writing instead of programming.

Can anyone recommend or tell me about what window managers they use on 
low resource systems with good results and what word processors they 
use in that situation?  I know AbiWord only requires 16 MB, and that 
makes it a good candidate.  I thought about GEdit, but a little more 
formatting would be nice, since I am often writing film scripts, and 
margins are needed for those.  That doesn't make it unusable, but just 
makes it less desirable than AbiWord (which I have heard can be 
programmed with macros to do easy margin changes quickly).

Any other comments on programs, desktops, windows mangers, and such that 
people are using on older/smaller systems would be appreciated.  I'm 
planning on sticking with Sarge, so I don't want to use programs in 
Sid.  Etch is a possibility, but I'd rather wait and stick with Stable.

Thanks!

Hal



Reply to: