Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-27 Thread Hans
list not shown: ;> >Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2000 12:04 PM >Subject: Re: Pathetic Performance > > >> after using afterstep for so long twm just feels bland..id use it if i >> needed it(was low on memory) but if i had a choice..ack! i cant see my >> self using it cept i

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-27 Thread Paul Kallstrom
For tight ram systems, I use blackbox. It's very clean and FAST. - Original Message - From: "aphro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Hans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Debian user mailinglist" ; Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2000 12:04 PM Subject: Re: Pat

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-27 Thread aphro
after using afterstep for so long twm just feels bland..id use it if i needed it(was low on memory) but if i had a choice..ack! i cant see my self using it cept in last resort..i havent used it much so im sure i havent gotten to appreciate it's benefits(if it has any other then memory conservation

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-27 Thread Hans
>and i'd suggest going to fvwm (or even twm *shiver*) to reduce memory >usage even further. Why would you shiver over twm. I dumped all my wm's and now run twm exclusively and I'm happier than ever :^) -- Hans

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-26 Thread Kenneth Scharf
>The 486-33 (Carol) has 42mb ram and I was wrong about >the 486- >100 (Alice) machine it's only got 20mb of ram. Alice >has a Cirrus >Logic GD54xx series PCI card with 1mb ram. Both >systems use >the svga xserver. As far as swap space Carol has a >swap partition >but Alice has a swap file on the

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-26 Thread Dänzer
--- "W. Keegan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've since recompiled the kernel and while it's much smaller and I > "think" its faster then before it's not at par with the 486-33. I told you :) > The 486-33 (Carol) has 42mb ram and I was wrong about the 486- > 100 (Alice) machine it's only got

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-26 Thread aphro
add more ram.. in cases with 64MB and below, swapping to disk more then you have available memory really causes severe performance problems esp in a GUI enviornment regaurdless of OS. and/or get another physical hdd to swap to. or, run it off of NFS and run the swap from local disk. with a decent N

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-26 Thread W. Keegan
> I'm running Corel/Debian v1.0 on a AMD 486-100. 24mb ram, >1G hd, > networked with three other PCs. This workstation is 5X slower then a > 486-33 running RH 5.0 acting as a gateway, Samba server, mail, etc. I > welcome any suggestions towards finding what must be a gross > misconfiguration. I'v

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-26 Thread hawk
also make sure that you caches are turned on in the bios. I ran into sluggish performance a couple of months ago after a bios reset, and this was it. Of course, this gateway p120 is still about the same speed as my 486/50 thinkpad with 4m less memory (ok, except when rendering postscript or

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-25 Thread Bruce Sass
On 25 Jan 2000, John Hasler wrote: > Jesse writes: > > Sure, it's not a K6, and more ram would help, but this should be > > sufficient for a comfortably fast non-graphics-intensive workstation. > > He's running Corel, which means KDE with bells on. With only 24M he'll be > into swap before he tou

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-25 Thread John Hasler
Jesse writes: > Sure, it's not a K6, and more ram would help, but this should be > sufficient for a comfortably fast non-graphics-intensive workstation. He's running Corel, which means KDE with bells on. With only 24M he'll be into swap before he touches the mouse. Dump KDE and install a small w

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-25 Thread Dänzer
--- Jesse Jacobsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OTOH, Netscape is always sluggish, as is Enlightenment and some others. It's kinda fast on my Athlon/500 :) Michel = "Software is like sex; it's better when it's free" -- Linus Torvalds "If you continue running Windows, your system may b

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-25 Thread Jesse Jacobsen
On 01/25/00, Michel Dänzer addressed "Re: Pathetic Performance": > --- Bill Keegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm running Corel/Debian v1.0 on a AMD 486-100. 24mb ram, > > This is very little RAM. However, I ran a machine with exactly the same specs for

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-25 Thread aphro
what windowmanager are you using in corel? and in redhat? i highly reccomend AGAINST KDE on any 486 or any machine with less then 48MB ram. i bet much of hte problem is kde taking up all the memory and the machine has to swap to the end of helll to run any app :) nate On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Bill Ke

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-25 Thread Dänzer
--- Bill Keegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm running Corel/Debian v1.0 on a AMD 486-100. 24mb ram, This is very little RAM. > >1G hd, networked with three other PCs. This workstation is 5X slower then a > 486-33 running RH 5.0 acting as a gateway, Samba server, mail, etc. How much does thi

Re: Pathetic Performance

2000-01-25 Thread Patrick Kirk
Bill, Corel have a marvellous installer - I can get my laptop to look great with it but it never even starts X with Debian. However, you do need to recompile the kernel immediately you decide to stick with Corel because it loads loads of irrelevenat stuff. Patrick