That explains it :) "Sometimes called "newbie" distros, the graphical distros have a lot of similarities, though Arch is quite different from them. Arch may be a better choice if you want to learn about GNU/Linux by building up from a very minimal base, as an installation of Arch installs very few packages in comparison."
Arch should deliver better performance, I suppose. As you said, it's not better to move with Arch using dial up. Thinking of kubuntu-desktop :) Thank you. On 9/11/09, ashik salahudeen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The experience should be the same. I do not know about other parameters. > > "The Arch base and all packages are compiled for i686 and x86-64 > architectures, offering a potential performance boost over > i386/i486/i586 binary distros, with the added advantage of expedient > installation." -- from > http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Compared_To_Other_Distros > > You can check that wiki article. > > > -- Ashik S > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ "Freedom is the only law". "Freedom Unplugged" http://www.ilug-tvm.org You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ilug-tvm" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For details visit the website: www.ilug-tvm.org or the google group page: http://groups.google.com/group/ilug-tvm?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
