Stabilized without hiccups at 128mb ram , that's without youtube lagging out
, you can go lower no doubt.

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Dallas Wiebelhaus <>wrote:

> By the way , Chrome fits in like it's native and is running hella fast on
> this DE on my test box. I'm about to crank the ram down and see how low I
> can get.
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Andrew Woodhead <
>> wrote:
>> This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard
>> repos can be used to install apps if they are needed.
>> If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a
>> minimal install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed
>> off the repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland
>> efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating the
>> system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are fully
>> installable once the installation has completed but the initial base system
>> should be slick and quick
>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby 
>> <>wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote:
>>> <discussion of "keep it light" or "feature complete" elided>
>>> Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between
>>> "ease of use/fully featured" on the one hand and lightweight on the
>>> other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to
>>> build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest.
>>> I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the
>>> list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks
>>> where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the
>>> possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering
>>> "bundles" to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the
>>> FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind.
>>> The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable
>>> system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the
>>> real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or
>>> grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to
>>> install.
>>> More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have
>>> yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of
>>> bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system
>>> performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user
>>> could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice
>>> would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they
>>> mean for the final installed system.
>>> My $0.02.
>>> Cheers
>>> C David Rigby
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mailing list: 
>>> Post to     :
>>> Unsubscribe : 
>>> More help   :
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: 
>> Post to     :
>> Unsubscribe : 
>> More help   :
Mailing list:
Post to     :
Unsubscribe :
More help   :

Reply via email to