Old slow computers can still crank away (Formerly RE: Portsnap vs CSup)
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 16:48:26 +0100 From: woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl To: millenia2...@hotmail.com CC: f...@bomgardner.net; ch...@monochrome.org; cho...@charter.net; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Portsnap vs CSup compiling the kernel on that could take several days by itself let alone compiling X and then a thick GUI like KDE or GNOME. amazing that a 100MHz system with 48 megs of ram can still run so fast if you build it right. for sure not KDE, but X and FreeBSD itself with good software running on it works FAST on 100Mhz machine with 48MB RAM. Yes compiling is slow, but normal usage is FAST. I never used gnome or KDE on it, ran Blackbox insted. _Sean ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Old slow computers can still crank away (Formerly RE: Portsnap vs CSup)
for sure not KDE, but X and FreeBSD itself with good software running on it works FAST on 100Mhz machine with 48MB RAM. Yes compiling is slow, but normal usage is FAST. I never used gnome or KDE on it, ran Blackbox insted. of course it's fast. and even slower machines like 486/33 without HD/FDD could be used as X terminals ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Old slow computers can still crank away (Formerly RE: Portsnap vs CSup)
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:12:12 -0400, Sean Cavanaugh millenia2...@hotmail.com wrote: Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 16:48:26 +0100 for sure not KDE, but X and FreeBSD itself with good software running on it works FAST on 100Mhz machine with 48MB RAM. Yes compiling is slow, but normal usage is FAST. I never used gnome or KDE on it, ran Blackbox insted. I can ensure that it is still fast. My slowest FreeBSD system, a 150 MHz P1 with 64 (now 128 MB) EDO RAM, is completely usable with WindowMaker and applications that do not try to be an all in one solution, such as mplayer for videos, xmms for MP3 and OGG, gv, xzgv, StarOffice, LaTeX, Opera and other specialized software. In terms of server usage these old systems run quite well, don't consume much power (important when they run 24/7/365). To add this, my 300 MHz P2 with 128 MB RAM runs SLOWER (!) with FreeBSD 5 than my 2 GHz P4 with 768 MB (SDR-SD) RAM with FreeBSD 7. This is mostly due to the software running on top of it. While FreeBSD itself gave a speed boost (in booting and performance), this advantage was eaten up by the new applications completely, due to improved libraries. X starts slower, windows render slower, browser runs slower, nearly everything. I'm not lying, it's the truth. -- Polytropon From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
