hi
-> Even as a work station linux works fine on 486 hardware. Your basing
your
-> argument on what you view as a "workstation." Howeve, without X a
-> 486/66 does fine depending on it's purpose. You certainly don't need
-> pentium power to run vi, lynx, and elm. What else do you n
phew what a thread we got going here... my only addition to this is to say that
one of the reasons i prefer linux over windows is that you don't NEED
excessively fast or "modern" hardware to run linux efficiently.
one of my many complaints about windows in general as an OS is that in order to
run
> "KW" == Kent West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
KW> Guess I should have specified "as a workstation client". As a
KW> server platform, I can understand advertising Linux as running
KW> well on low-end PCs, but as a client machine for someone who
KW> wants to run X and a web br
> I am running slink on 5x86/100, 32 megs of RAM and I quite like it. I'd like
> to have 48 megs just because I run samba and NFS and wannna to have some
> services on it. I use netscape (4.6 now) and i had staroffice installed but
> i removed it cause i didn't like it...
>
> Now, the only one pr
-> Even as a work station linux works fine on 486 hardware. Your basing your
-> argument on what you view as a "workstation." Howeve, without X a
-> 486/66 does fine depending on it's purpose. You certainly don't need
-> pentium power to run vi, lynx, and elm. What else do you need? :> While
->
-> > I have a 486DX2/66 with 8MB which runs perfectly well. Its doing file and
-> > print sharing, e-mail, and IP gatewaying. The same machine running Windows
-> > 95 basically sucked. For that matter, I even compile stuff on it
-> > sometimes.
->
-> I have a similar system running IPmasq & ssh, b
-> Netscape 4.51 for X is just too slow on my slightly dated pentium. Does
-> anyone have any suggestions for a smaller, faster graphical browser? All
-> the possibilities I can find seem to be alpha or beta releases (arena,
-> gzilla, etc.) The browser should also be CSS compliant and have a pr
>
> Netscape *is* a memory hog, especially if it's statically linked against
> Motif, but as someone else already pointed out, once it's loaded it runs
> fine. You can't expect to run Linux, X, and Netscape in 32 megs, however.
I'm running Slink with X and Netscape on a P90 w/24mb. It's a bit s
Lazarus Long wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, May 26, 1999 at 15:12:52 -0500, Kent West wrote:
> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > X-UIDL: 4fd6d8ff3805df00b5ee9a38be13cbf6
>
> > > > Ya know, we really oughtta quit advertising the idea that Linux runs
> well
> > > > on 486's with low memory and d
Kent West wrote:
> On Wed, 26 May 1999, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 23 May 1999 20:51:55 -0500, Matthew W. Roberts wrote:
> >
> > >Netscape 4.51 for X is just too slow on my slightly dated pentium. Does
> >
> > Huh???
> >
> > Netscape 4.51 is everything else but slow. You probably si
Even as a work station linux works fine on 486 hardware. Your basing your
argument on what you view as a "workstation." Howeve, without X a
486/66 does fine depending on it's purpose. You certainly don't need
pentium power to run vi, lynx, and elm. What else do you need? :> While
I didn't try it
On Wednesday, May 26, 1999 at 15:12:52 -0500, Kent West wrote:
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-UIDL: 4fd6d8ff3805df00b5ee9a38be13cbf6
> > > Ya know, we really oughtta quit advertising the idea that Linux runs well
> > > on 486's with low memory and drive resources
> Guess I should
On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 01:45:23PM -0500, Kent West wrote:
> On Wed, 26 May 1999, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 23 May 1999 20:51:55 -0500, Matthew W. Roberts wrote:
> >
> > >Netscape 4.51 for X is just too slow on my slightly dated pentium. Does
> >
> > Huh???
> >
> > Netscape 4.51 is
On Wed, 26 May 1999, Alec Smith wrote:
> I have a 486DX2/66 with 8MB which runs perfectly well. Its doing file and
> print sharing, e-mail, and IP gatewaying. The same machine running Windows
> 95 basically sucked. For that matter, I even compile stuff on it
> sometimes.
I have a similar system r
On Wed, 26 May 1999, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 01:45:23PM -0500, Kent West wrote:
> > On Wed, 26 May 1999, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, 23 May 1999 20:51:55 -0500, Matthew W. Roberts wrote:
> > >
> > > >Netscape 4.51 for X is just too slow on my slightly dated pen
On Wed, 26 May 1999 13:45:23 -0500 (CDT), Kent West wrote:
>On Wed, 26 May 1999, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 23 May 1999 20:51:55 -0500, Matthew W. Roberts wrote:
>>
>> >Netscape 4.51 for X is just too slow on my slightly dated pentium.
>>
>> Huh???
>>
>> Netscape 4.51 is everything
My original reason for switching to Linux was that my poor old box (HANK
r.i.p) was only a 486SX33 with 8MB of RAM. I ran X and Netscape on it with
no problem. It took time for it to start up Netscape and such apps, but once
started the ran with problem.
Now I have a P166 overclocked to 200Mhz ru
On Wednesday, May 26, 1999 at 13:45:23 -0500, Kent West wrote:
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-UIDL: b7f1010c24d9adb791bc476eb3758f69
> > Netscape 4.51 is everything else but slow. You probably simply have too
> > little memory. I suggest to install at least 128 megs.
> Ya know, we re
I have a 486DX2/66 with 8MB which runs perfectly well. Its doing file and
print sharing, e-mail, and IP gatewaying. The same machine running Windows
95 basically sucked. For that matter, I even compile stuff on it
sometimes.
On Wed, 26 May 1999, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 01:
On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 01:45:23PM -0500, Kent West wrote:
> On Wed, 26 May 1999, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 23 May 1999 20:51:55 -0500, Matthew W. Roberts wrote:
> >
> > >Netscape 4.51 for X is just too slow on my slightly dated pentium. Does
> >
> > Huh???
> >
> > Netscape 4.51 is
On Wed, 26 May 1999, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote:
> On Sun, 23 May 1999 20:51:55 -0500, Matthew W. Roberts wrote:
>
> >Netscape 4.51 for X is just too slow on my slightly dated pentium. Does
>
> Huh???
>
> Netscape 4.51 is everything else but slow. You probably simply have too
> little memory. I s
Netscape isn't bad once you get it loaded. Though I do admit it may be
slow on older pentiums with < 64 megs of RAM(32 on faster ones). Check
out opera as mentioned if the port is availble(if don't know) it's
noticably faster than Netscape--at least on win32 machines.
However if you like netscap
On Sun, 23 May 1999 20:51:55 -0500, Matthew W. Roberts wrote:
>Netscape 4.51 for X is just too slow on my slightly dated pentium. Does
Huh???
Netscape 4.51 is everything else but slow. You probably simply have too
little memory. I suggest to install at least 128 megs.
--
Sign the EU petitio
There is a port of Opera for LinuX in progress...don't knnow when it will be
released, but as far as i know opera meets your requirements.
--
<==>
If you wanna contact me for any reason, do it!
You'll reach me at:
24 matches
Mail list logo
