On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 19:48 -0700, James McKenzie wrote: > Scot L. Harris wrote: > > On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 17:35, akonstam@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > > > Any system today with just 128M of memory is going to run slow > > regardless of if it is Linux or Windows. On top of that the OP is > > running Linux in a virtual machine which has its own over head added to > > the mix. In such an environment the OP should consider running without > > a window manager and many of the other optional packages that Fedora > > comes with. However I doubt that is what he is looking for. > > > Why have such high requirements? This is called "Bloat" and could be > intolerable. What if I want to install Linux on a 'minimal' system? > Some folks out there cannot afford a new system every couple of years > and some folks feel it is a waste to place into the trash system their > old systems. Sure, you can recycle, but why buy a new system just to > keep up with your Operating System? ---- Let's not confuse Fedora or even Red Hat with Linux. Fedora is meant as a edge technology with an eye towards becoming the next 'stable' distribution of RHEL. It is not targeting being the lean and mean distribution for lower hardware thresholds. There are distributions better suited for this than Fedora. Yes, a Gnome and KDE and latest versions of openoffice, gimp etc. are going to be bloated. These are close to the edge releases that are feature driven rather than performance optimized as one would expect a 'stable' OS to be. There's so many expectations for Fedora that aren't realistic - the objectives for the Fedora product are clearly stated but it's as if people ignore their published objectives and want whatever it is that they want. I considered 256Mb a minimum for a desktop system 5 years ago, whether it was Linux, Win2K or Macintosh OS 9. "Why buy a new system just to keep up with your Operating System?" Only if you value performance. Craig
