On Sat, 6 Nov 2010 12:09:34 -0700 Chip Camden <sterl...@camdensoftware.com> wrote:
> Yes, I would recommend that configuration also, because FreeBSD is > much more lightweight of the two, so you don't impose the overhead of > running Windows when all you need is FreeBSD. I'm not sure that's true, actually. FreeBSD by itself may be a lot more lightweight than Windows but once you add in Xorg and KDE I think it needs about the same, if not more, memory. People will argue that you don't have to run KDE or GNOME but as can be seen from the success of Ubuntu people like complete desktop environments. -- Bruce Cran _______________________________________________ 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"
