<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p><font face="Liberation Sans">I<font face="Liberation Sans">f I
recall correctly, he just<font face="Liberation Sans">
suggested the following:</font></font></font></p>
<p><font face="Liberation Sans"><font face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font face="Liberation Sans">$ top
<enter><br>
</font></font></font></font></p>
<p><font face="Liberation Sans"><font face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans">:-)</font></font></font></font></font></p>
<p><font face="Liberation Sans"><font face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font face="Liberation Sans">It's
display-o<font face="Liberation Sans">nly <font
face="Liberation Sans">(for the most par<font
face="Liberation Sans">t) unless you decide to
de<font face="Liberation Sans">lve into the man
page and learn how to kill processes, etc. I<font
face="Liberation Sans"> see no reason to <font
face="Liberation Sans">waste system <font
face="Liberation Sans">resources even
when they're c<font face="Liberation
Sans">heap (re<font face="Liberation
Sans">latively). Not that I run a
bare-bones s<font face="Liberation
Sans">ystem<font face="Liberation
Sans">... if I did I wou<font
face="Liberation Sans">ldn't
be on this l<font
face="Liberation Sans">is<font
face="Liberation Sans">t.
But <font
face="Liberation Sans">lea<font
face="Liberation Sans">rning
how to identify an<font
face="Liberation
Sans">d may<font
face="Liberation
Sans">be clean up
<font
face="Liberation
Sans">one's<font
face="Liberation Sans"> s<font face="Liberation Sans">ystem a bit is an
excellent <font
face="Liberation Sans">suggestion</font>, IMO. <br>
</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></p>
<p><font face="Liberation Sans"><font face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font face="Liberation
Sans"><font face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation Sans"><font
face="Liberation
Sans"><font
face="Liberation
Sans"><font
face="Liberation
Sans"><font
face="Liberation
Sans"><font
face="Liberation
Sans"><font
face="Liberation
Sans">Learning
</font>is
never a bad
thing. If
they've never
seen a command
line before,
then there's
another good
reason to get
them to dip
their toe in
the pond. P<font
face="Liberation Sans">l<font face="Liberation Sans">us, for virtually
100% <font
face="Liberation
Sans">of the f<font
face="Liberation Sans">olks<font face="Liberation Sans"> I<font
face="Liberation
Sans">'ve
encountered
who had a fear
of t<font
face="Liberation
Sans">he
command line<font
face="Liberation Sans">, it was unfounded. <font face="Liberation Sans">CLI
<font
face="Liberation
Sans">and GUI
both have
their place -
Just us<font
face="Liberation
Sans">e the
right tool for
the job. Even
M<font
face="Liberation
Sans">S has <font
face="Liberation Sans">admitted the CLI <font face="Liberation Sans">can
be more
efficient for
some<font
face="Liberation
Sans"> things
(i.e.,<font
face="Liberation
Sans"> Server
Core,
PowerShell,
etc.).</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-signature"> <br>
<font color="#601717"><b>Len Philpot</b></font><br>
<font size="-1"><a href="mailto:lphilpot01@gmail.com">lphilpot01@gmail.com</a></font><br>
<font color="#5C29A3" size="-1"><i>Sent from Thunderbird on
Xubuntu Linux</i></font> </div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 01/21/2017 05:20 PM, JMZ wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:91e4c604-7dc9-cd57-7a95-23467c1d9e58@gmail.com"
type="cite">I agree Peter that even for people running ubuntu
flavors on super-fast gamer boxes, it's good to try to economize
on applications. However, suggesting that new users use the
command line interface (cli) as an economization measure might not
often be wise. Many people, especially "millennials", may never
have seen a command prompt before. Many linux users take cli for
granted, given our familiarity with past computing systems
completely run by text command. New users often need gui
front-ends to compensate. Who can blame many new users given their
sole experience with highly graphical environments?
<br>
<br>
This is why I'd say it's better for a new ubuntu user to
over-equip their systems with RAM. gui counterparts of commands
should be as easy and quick as possible.
<br>
<br>
Jordan
<br>
<br>
As in ham radio morse, 73 SK CL (out of this discussion for good)
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 01/21/2017 05:28 PM, Peter Flynn wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><snip>
<br>
There are things you can do to lessen the demands on memory --
one is to
<br>
run Xubuntu so that you use xfce as your interface instead of
Unity
<br>
(Unity sucks all your memory into a black hole). Use lighter
software:
<br>
eg Claws-Mail instead of Thunderbird. Use AbiWord instead of
<br>
LibreOffice. Use command-line utilities instead of graphical
ones.
<br>
Unfortunately on the web browser front, they all seem to be
memory-hogs.
<br>
<br>
///Peter
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>