This is a discussion on Realistic system req within the Slackware Linux Support forums, part of the Unix Operating Systems category; --> what are the realistic system requirements for slackware? If I do replace the workstations I need to be able ...
| |||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||
| what are the realistic system requirements for slackware? If I do replace the workstations I need to be able to do essentially what I did under windows. That is, office apps, typing programs, surfing for research, etc, and basic programming. I need to know the minimum system requirements to do this. My slowest machine in the lab now does these thing with 450 MHz and 64 MB ram. Most other machines are far faster but I still have 6 of these acers left that we won't upgrade for a while, except maybe memory |
| |||
| On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 03:23:18 -0500, Liam Marshall wrote: > what are the realistic system requirements for slackware? > > If I do replace the workstations I need to be able to do essentially what > I did under windows. That is, office apps, typing programs, surfing for > [snip] > My slowest machine in the lab now does these thing with 450 MHz and 64 MB If you want to run KDE I think a 450 is enough CPU, but you'll want more RAM. You could set up a non-"desktop environment" window manager and live happily on such a machine as it is, but that would require some configuration and user adaptation. My kids are running KDE 3.1 on a 400 with 284MB. It's adequate. If you have one really good machine on the network, and a good Fast Ethernet (100Mbit) LAN, you could have users run their X apps on the good machine and paint the pictures on the low-powered box. This should work quite well, except that it goes against the popular concept of a "personal computer". -- /dev/rob0 - preferred_email=i$((28*28+28))@softhome.net or put "not-spam" or "/dev/rob0" in Subject header to reply |
| |||
| Liam Marshall <lsrpm@mts.net> wrote: > what are the realistic system requirements for slackware? > If I do replace the workstations I need to be able to do > essentially what I did under windows. That is, office apps, > typing programs, surfing for research, etc, and basic > programming. I need to know the minimum system requirements to > do this. > My slowest machine in the lab now does these thing with 450 MHz > and 64 MB ram. Most other machines are far faster but I still > have 6 of these acers left that we won't upgrade for a while, > except maybe memory I run slack 9.0 on a 200mmx with 128 megs and a 2 meg video card. I run X with fvwm/xfce/icewm/windowmaker and firefox or opera. For a wordprocessor I use abiword although openoffice is doable (I no longer write academic papers). I work mostly from the CLI. cordially, as always, rm |
| |||
| On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 03:46:06 +0000, Realto Margarino wrote: > I run slack 9.0 on a 200mmx with 128 megs and a 2 meg video card. > I run X with fvwm/xfce/icewm/windowmaker and firefox or opera. For Do you find that browsing is annoyingly slow? That's how I felt toward the end of my days on a P166 workstation. Back then (about 1.5 years ago) it seemed that none of the browsers were very friendly to weak old CPU's. I used Opera mostly. "links -g" was the best for system resources, but a bit odd to work with in numerous ways. > a wordprocessor I use abiword although openoffice is doable (I no > longer write academic papers). I work mostly from the CLI. Just curious, ignore if you wish (of course field? -- /dev/rob0 - preferred_email=i$((28*28+28))@softhome.net or put "not-spam" or "/dev/rob0" in Subject header to reply |
| |||
| On 2004-04-13, Liam Marshall <lsrpm@mts.net> wrote: > what are the realistic system requirements for slackware? > > If I do replace the workstations I need to be able to do essentially what > I did under windows. That is, office apps, typing programs, surfing for > research, etc, and basic programming. I need to know the minimum system > requirements to do this. > > My slowest machine in the lab now does these thing with 450 MHz and 64 MB > ram. Most other machines are far faster but I still have 6 of these acers > left that we won't upgrade for a while, except maybe memory My primary desktop is an old, 6 year old, Dell P2 256 something or other with 64 megs of ram...it runs slack 9.1 without a hitch. That said, I also avoid KDE and Gnome (don't like them anyway) and use fluxbox. Prior to installing slack, I used Mandrake 9.x and used Star Office. Took a while to load the office app, but once it was loaded...no real problems with speed. It's how you install and what you have running ... ken |
| |||
| Liam Marshall wrote: > what are the realistic system requirements for slackware? > > If I do replace the workstations I need to be able to do essentially what > I did under windows. That is, office apps, typing programs, surfing for > research, etc, and basic programming. I need to know the minimum system > requirements to do this. > > My slowest machine in the lab now does these thing with 450 MHz and 64 MB > ram. Most other machines are far faster but I still have 6 of these acers > left that we won't upgrade for a while, except maybe memory I am building a wireless access point on a k6 333 mhz machine. I had a 30 gig drive and a bunch of memory so I put it in and installed everything in 9.1. I'm running KDE as my window manager and it all works fine. I'm sure if I used a window manager like blackbox it would be even faster. I think if you upgraded the memory you would be fine for just about anything you wanted to do. Try to get as much as you can to reduce swapping to disk. On the K6 I am using I put 512meg into it only because I had it. After I am done with the setup and compiling I think I will pull 256meg out of it for another machine. Joseph |
| |||
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 In alt.os.linux.slackware, Liam Marshall dared to utter, > My slowest machine in the lab now does these thing with 450 MHz and 64 MB Damn I wish that was the slowest machine I've loaded slackware on! Everything you have will run slackware fine to one degree or another. You may want a little more RAM though. - -- It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise, Than for a man to hear the song of fools. Ecclesiastes 7:5 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAe2mBL3KiNGOqr6ERAu/dAJ90O5yHz0nHcb0yBioAoDESStTimwCfR68x UhH8PFDSQmzh0rS4jz+5xZo= =Zjbt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| |||
| Liam Marshall <lsrpm@mts.net> says... >My slowest machine in the lab now does these thing with 450 MHz and 64 MB >ram. Most other machines are far faster but I still have 6 of these acers >left that we won't upgrade for a while, except maybe memory Here is an interesting idea for you to think about; combine two of your older machines to make a faster machine that shares the work. Look here: http://www.volny.cz/basiclinux/oldpc/ http://www.volny.cz/basiclinux/oldpc/x-on2.html -- Guy Macon, Electronics Engineer & Project Manager for hire. Remember Doc Brown from the _Back to the Future_ movies? Do you have an "impossible" engineering project that only someone like Doc Brown can solve? My resume is at http://www.guymacon.com/ |
| ||||
| On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 03:23:18 -0500, Liam Marshall wrote: > what are the realistic system requirements for slackware? > > If I do replace the workstations I need to be able to do essentially what > I did under windows. That is, office apps, typing programs, surfing for > research, etc, and basic programming. I need to know the minimum system > requirements to do this. I'd say a Pentium-II with *lost* of RAM will do, even for KDE cq GNOME. > My slowest machine in the lab now does these thing with 450 MHz and 64 MB > ram. That shouldn't be much of a problem. Two machines i helped out with their lately: one has AMD k6-2, 96meg - other i586 233mmx 192meg. Now the latter is noticeablely more "snappy" then the former, it just boots slower... (Both run Slackware 9.1 with some tweaks and KDE desktop (no KDM though.)) > Most other machines are far faster but I still have 6 of these acers > left that we won't upgrade for a while, except maybe memory I'd recomement the memory upgrade. If their supposed to stay in service for some jears to come (and why not?). The SDRAM DIMM modules you can probably still get at the local hardware shop today! HTH. -- -Menno. |