Hans-Peter Fischer wrote:
> jesus X <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> I frequently see people with 200 MHz Pentiums (and even the occasional
>
> 486)
>
>> complain about Mozilla (among other apps) running slowly on their machine.
>> Ditto with people who have 16 or 32 megs of RAM. I don't mean to offend,
>
> but
>
>> expecting modern apps to run on hardware that is 5 years old is
>
> unreasonable.
>
> I'd consider it unreasonable *and irresponsible* to buy new hardware every
> one or two years, among other things because of the environmental impact
> that would have, from the exploitation of ressources caused by the
> production and transportation of this hardware to the heaps of electronic
> waste we would leave behind (and are already leaving behind).
>
>
>> 128 MB or RAM
>> costs $45 (at Pricewatch), while in 1995 you'd have to mortgage your house
>
> to
>
>> buy that much RAM (fitting it in your computer was another matter). HDD
>> companies are selling 80GB hard drives for $250 (Pricewatch again), while
>
> in
>
>> 1995 Seagate had a HUGE 9GB drive for a mere $10,000. Things have change
>
> QUITE
>
>> a lot.
>
>
> If I could only think dollars I would probably find your argumentation
> convincing, although I would still think of the many people on earth who -
> fortunately - cannot afford such a ruthless consumer attitude.
>
> Besides, I have a Pentium 166 in my home PC running Linux and everything
> works fine, even complex applications like The Gimp and WordPerfect (or
> games like Rocks 'n Diamonds). This seems to indicate that I don't have a
> hardware problem.
I have a Windows98 P100 with 16 MB RAM and was running Mozilla as my
exclusive browser back in the Msingledigit days and as my exclusive
mail-news app back starting at about M11. It was dog slow. It was
painful. I wanted it to get better. It has. I still want it to get
better. It is.
>
> What do I suggest, then, if Mozilla has a performance problem? - Get rid of
> all the "appearance" stuff such as themes etc. and concentrate on
> "substance", i. e. functionality and performance. If that had been done from
> the outset we (or you) would probably have a stable and well-performing
> finished product by now.
>
This statment demonstrates a poor understanding of how Mozilla works.
> Performance has improved a lot recently, though, and I am quite confident
> that I will eventually be able to use Mozilla *without* having to buy new
> hardware. ;-)
Mozilla "runs" on my PC with 16 MB RAM, it's quite a bit less painful on
my PC with 32 MB RAM and it rund great on my PC with 128 MB RAM.
-Asa
>
> Regards,
> Hans-Peter
