[aclug-L] Re: Linux Time-Table

["Jonathan Hall" <flimzy@xxxxxxxxxx>]

The fact that X requires about 128mb RAM minimum to operate is a problem,
IMO.  I can run Windows (granted, an old version, but it will still run
modern applications) in 32mb and achieve nearly the same performance (as far
as graphic output, not sheer number crunching).

My 486 laptop, as an old example, has 24mb RAM and runs Win95 "comfortably."
It takes me about 30 seconds to open a web browser.

In X on the same system, it takes a good 5 minutes to open a web browser,
due to swapping.

Granted, a 486 is not exactly a good measure of how modern operating systems
should perform.  But the fact that I can run the latest version of most
applications on a 486 with Windows (slowly, granted) but not in X, makes it
at least a somewhat valid comparison, IMO.


Of course, compared to Windows XP, X is a great improvement, as far as
system requirements are concerned.  But I think that, too, is a flawed
comparison, b/c Windows XP doesn't use the resources it consumes for
anything useful :)

Anyway... I just don't see X as a good option for a general-purpose GUI.

That's not to say that OpenSource couldn't come up with something better :)

-- Jonathan


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Goerzen" <jgoerzen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <discussion@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 10:24 PM
Subject: [aclug-L] Re: Linux Time-Table


>
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 10:05:17PM -0600, Jonathan Hall wrote:
> > Free software, maybe.  I don't think Linux should do it.  Call me
> > old-fassioned... but I like Linux on my servers.  It's doesn't make an
> > effecient desktop OS though.
>
> What do you think makes it inefficient?
>
> > Perhaps if we get away from X, that could change.
>
> XFree86 is really a pretty slick system these days.  Applications running
> atop a modern XFree86 installation will do a lot better than those running
> on a plain vanilla X11R6 installation.
>
> Of course, XFree86 is now doing more to advance the state of the art of X
> than the X Consortium / TOG is.
>
> The GNUstep people are also making a lot of nice progress.  GNUstep does
run
> atop X, and yet it achieves a lot of the advanced rendering capabilities
> that are available on NeXT and MacOS X environment.  Sorta a best of both
> worlds thing.
>
> -- John
> -- This is the discussion@xxxxxxxxx list.  To unsubscribe,
> visit http://www.complete.org/cgi-bin/listargate-aclug.cgi
>
>

-- This is the discussion@xxxxxxxxx list.  To unsubscribe,
visit http://www.complete.org/cgi-bin/listargate-aclug.cgi