On 4/21/07, Zahn Daltocli <daltocli@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Bloatware is bad. The idea is to be minimal, then install what you want.
Having apps available is good, yes, but installed by default? That's
just resource and space-wasting.
I have a great spec laptop (Core 2 Duo 1.66GHz, 2Gb RAM, 160Gb HDD with
128mb Graphics), I keep everything minimal with ArchLinux. At a push my
resources are 0-1% CPU usage and *absolute* tops 12% RAM useage. Why
bloat up a system when you can install a minimal distro, then install
only what you need? It's rather newie'ish just installing bloatware.
Cheers,
~ Tom
While I agree that bloating your system with a bunch of unnecessary
apps is a good idea ("Why bloat up a system when you can install a
minimal distro, .."), I have to play devil's advocate and ask, why
purchase such a capable laptop given you use max 1% of your CPU and
12% of your RAM? If you are using the machine to run virtual machines
on it, then of course you'll want to keep it at minimum so that you
can maximize the number of virtual machines you can run on that
hardware (thus decreasing your hardware cost). But that aside, what
is the value of only using 1% CPU and 12% RAM vs 25% CPU and 65% RAM?
Both are still well within the abilities of your system hence
performance degradation is not a significant factor (if one at all).
Personally I do install whatever I think I may need. If you have 160
Gb HDD, so what if 8 gigs of it is used up by dormant apps installed
on your system? Your system usage (aside from HDD space) will still
be 1% CPU and 12% RAM unless you install a bunch of unnecessary
daemons or other apps that fire up at boot but serve no purpose for
the user. I normally don't run a web server. But every now and then
I may need to do something that requires a web server. So I install
it but don't run it unless I need it, then turn it off again once no
longer needed.
Jacques B.
