Which Ubuntu?

[SDA]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 08:54:07PM +0100, Ralf Mardorf via ubuntu-users wrote:

Except they have no XOrg, systemd, and a tuned kernel.

> On Wed, 2022-11-16 at 11:59 -0500, SDA wrote:
> > AntiX: https://antixlinux.com/
> 
> Hi,
> 
> it's a X based distro and they mention the same WM as I already did.
> 
> "What window managers are available in antiX?
> 
> These window manager options come installed and ready to use in antiX-
> full and antiX-base:
> 
>     the lightweight Rox-IceWM (default)
> 
>     the lightweight IceWM
> 
>     the lightweight SpaceFM-IceWM
> 
>     the minimalist manager Rox-Fluxbox
> 
>     the minimalist manager Fluxbox
> 
>     the minimalist manager SpaceFM-Fluxbox
> 
>     the very minimalist manager Rox-JWM
> 
>     the very minimalist manager JWM.
> 
>     the very minimalist manager SpaceFM-JWM." -
> http://download.tuxfamily.org/antix/docs-antiX-19/FAQ/index.html
> 
> On Tue, 2022-11-15 at 22:27 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > One very lightweight window manager is jwm.
> 
> What I actually did in the past was, as recommended by Robert...
> 
> On Tue, 2022-11-15 at 16:26 -0500, Robert Heller wrote:
> > Install from a *server* image
> 
> I unchecked everything server related and anything else I don't need.
> IOW instead of a default server install, I minimized the server install,
> but after that I added X, jwm and more. However, I prefer openbox over
> jwm. If I use a file manager, then it's usually SpaceFM, but most of the
> times I'm in favour of bash (not for scripts, but as the login shell
> used as a file manager replacement etc.). For the OP's purposes I
> recommend to stay away from Rox, Rodent and similar. I could recommend 
> panels, editors etc., but all this doesn't make much sense.
> 
> On Wed, 2022-11-16 at 12:01 -0500, SDA wrote:
> > I forgot to mention that this distro includes LibreOffice. It runs 
> > well, probably because the OS has a small footprint overhead.
> 
> It runs well, because you are using just around a decade old hardware
> with 4 GiB of RAM, but the OP mentions
> 
> On Tue, 2022-11-15 at 19:45 +0000, Ian Bruntlett wrote:
> > 1GiB upwards
> 
> I'm using "weak" hardware myself. A dual-core Model 6.60.3 Intel(R)
> Celeron(R) CPU G1840 @ 2.80GHz and used even way weaker hardware before.
> There's no big difference between 4 GiB, 8 Gib or 16 GiB RAM on my
> machine. 4 GiB is the lower limit, hence 8 GiB is better, but 16 GiB
> don't gain much noticeable differences. However, below 4 GiB it's
> getting tight.
> 
> To start LibreOffice Writer you already need 3.5 GiB of RAM to hold the
> splash screen. I'm exaggerating, but it describes the problem well.
> 
> I can run realtime audio, due to professional audio hardware and a tuned
> operating system. I can run bloatware and even bloated desktop
> environments without issues on my machine. I just don't like those
> desktop environments. It's at least a dual-core Celeron with more than 4
> GiB of RAM. I need an hour to compile virtualbox and two hours to
> compile a common (not minimized) kernel. Running LibreOffice Writer is
> no issue at all. It doesn't make a big difference if I'm running a jwm,
> openbox, Xfce, or even a GNOME session.
> 
> This is possible with around 10 year old hardware and >= 4 GiB of RAM
> and still having fun. If the machine is weaker, then it's no fun
> anymore, even if it should still be possible to run LibreOffice and
> similar bloated software. Btw. there is no guarantee that Abiword will
> run better than LibreOffice on a weak machine. In my experience,
> graphics card problems were not that rare when using Abiword.
> Lightweight software is not necessarily better programmed than bloated
> software.
> 
> Note, most of the new bloated software is written with 64 bit
> architecture, much RAM and reasonably current CPU features and CPU cores
> in mind.
> 
> Regards,
> Ralf
> 
> -- 
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users