On Wednesday 20 Nov 2002 3:55 pm, Technoslick wrote: > From: "Anne Wilson" > The external bus speed on a 233 MHz processor is 66.6 > MHz, so I would think that you should be able to use PC133 memory.
I think it will be OK if I can't get PC100. I'll just stick to the one DIMM, I think - mixed speed problems avoided. > Would /swap and /home on 1 drive and the rest on the other be a good > configuration? > > T: I have to chuckle on this question because I am so lazy with this that I > usually let Mandrake partition for me. If you do, it will most likely make > the second drive your /home partition, dividing up the primary drive as / > and /swap. The pros on having seperate partitions for the other critical > directories seem moot on such a small drive configuration, but I'm sure > there are many others that would have a different opinion. For what you > want to do with this box, K.I.S.S. works fine in my book. Mandrake will > automatically try to make /swap about 400 MBs for 128 MBs of RAM. It works > for me. The rest of the primary drive is enough to squeek in pretty much > all that he is going to have horsepower to run (IMHO). The 4 GB /home gives > him tons of space to download his updates (and keep them, if he needs them > again) or to store his personal stuff. > Sounds OK to me. I'll leave it to it then. > > My bad, I think. I meant to imply that it was absolutely average. I don't > have the specs, but I could probably get some - it's a Goldstar. > > T: Goldstar has never been appreciated as quality componentry, but my > experience with their goods is that they perform, and keep performing long > after the name-band stuff has died and become a memory. However, the only > way to know is to see if you can get specs off the manual or find them on > the Web. Of all the stuff that you have in a PC, I think frying the monitor > has got to be the easiest 'no-no' to accomplish. Then again, I carry my own > personal, customized black cloud with me all the time, so who am I to say? > Lastly, the monitor that I fried not too long ago in > Linux had no problems running 1024X768, 24-bit and at a frequncy of 70 Hz > in Windows. Linux is notorious for trying to drive refresh rate well beyond > 75 Hz, which will kill older monitors. My monitor is a low spec Taxan LCD, so not capable of high refresh rates. The display problem I had there under 8.2 was that the os identified it as a high performance 1024x768, capable of 70Hz. When I booted up I had a large blue patch saying that 85Hz was not advisable. 85Hz? Anyway, I found that the next entry on the list was 1024x768 without the high performance bit, and everything was fine after that. But I still don't know whey it was trying 85 when it had identified it as capable of 70. > I couldn't care less about owning up > to what I don't know, as long as someone is willing to teach me more. I'm not proud - I'll pick anyone's brains ;-) > > Anyway, it seems that you have the making of a 1st-timer. As long as your > grandson doesn't expect the world from it, he should enjoy it. You do > realize, don't you, that if his mind grabs on to Linux, you will be asking > him for help very soon? <giggle> Can't wait! Anne
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
