ajkidle wrote: > I'm running SqueezeCenter on a dedicated WinXP computer right now. It's > very underpowered, but generally gets the job done. I'm wondering if I > could expect better performance by using some variant of Unix rather > than WinXP, which seems to be way overkill for what I need this machine > to do. > > The computer needs to be able to: > Run SqueezeCenter > Store 200GB of music (trivial requirement) > Cycle through photos in screen saver mode > > The hardware: > VIA 600mhz mini itx (ME6000G) > 256mb RAM > Connected to network via ethernet > > The system is not very responsive, as you might expect. It works, but > it's not uncommon for my SBC to pause as I go through the menus, > presumably it's waiting for the computer. I'm also concerned that when > I get a second Squeezebox I'll run into issues sync'ing playback with > this level of hardware. > > Can I expect to gain significant performance efficiencies by ditching > all of the unneeded overhead associated with WinXP and installing some > flavor of Unix? Or would such a change just be a waste of time? (Or > will a Unix install also have all kinds of overhead I don't need???) > > Thanks, > Andy > > Linux is generally accepted to perform better on equivalent hardware than Windows, and especially so for lower end machines. The real question here will be whether you've got any Linux experience and if you're prepared to go through a bit of pain learning a new operating system in order to benefit from better performance?
-- Graham White <graham UNDERSCORE alton AT hotmail DOT com> _______________________________________________ unix mailing list unix@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/unix
