John Aldrich wrote:
>
> Well, he DID say he was running KDE. :-) Besides which, he said he'd had
> some "fun" setting up KDE, so to my way of thinking, he's not going to take
> a suggestion to switch window managers very well. ;-)
Probably true. It just struck me that Linux is always mentioned as
needing little memory in comparison to the Windows variants. KDE and
GNOME have done little to reinforce that concept.
> > John Aldrich wrote:
> > >
> > > No.... Linux will run just fine in 32 megs. I've got 32 mb on my machine at
> > > work. It's a bit sluggish sometimes, but it works pretty well. Having played
> > > around with my new (new to me...used parts machine <G>) dual-PPro 200 with
> > > 198 MB RAM, I can tell THAT machine is going to SCREAM! :-) RAM *does* help,
> > > but you can run an X-client is 32 mb or less of ram, it'll just be
> > > SLOOOOOOWWWWW!!!
> >
> > Alot of that has to do with KDE grabbing such a huge chunk of memory.
> > Using something like fvwm or WindowMaker or AfterStep will do alot in
> > speeding up your work in X with a smaller memory system.
> >
> > There's not alot that's changed in X over the years, and my first Linux
> > experiences were on a 8M system.
> >
> > > > Hi eveyone.
> > > >
> > > > I just picked up a copy of Mandrake 6 on CD Rom on front of magazine
> > > > whilst I was on holiday in France ( I live in England).
> > > >
> > > > Managed, eventually, to install it on my back-up computer - the only
> > > > instructions I had were in French.
> > > > I'm 64 and have only been computing for about 7 years so my learning curve
> > > > has to be steep. Had some fun setting up KDE but it's now functioning.
> > > > It has Netscape 4.6 installed but everytime I try to run it the HD grinds away
> > > > and nothing much else happens. I've seen a suggestion that I need 64 meg
> > > ram
> > > > to run effectively. Can anyone confirm this and also suggest any good
> > > > literature.
--
Steve Philp
Network Administrator
Advance Packaging Corp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
