• Re: What's the best low-end supported Linux to use in a very old? 2008

    From Robert Heller@21:1/5 to Roger Blake on Wed Jun 15 18:48:58 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    At Wed, 15 Jun 2022 23:16:33 -0000 (UTC) Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> wrote:


    On 2022-06-15, Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote:
    Hello.

    I have a 14 years old old MacBook Pro (15" A1260 model, unibody; 2.4 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2 GB (667 MHz) of DDR2 SDRAM, 200 GB HDD, NVIDIA
    GeForce 8600M GT (256 MB of VRAM), & Mac OS X (El Capitan v10.11.6))
    from early 2008. Its software are too old, unsupported, and too slow.

    I'm thinking about replacing them with Linux, but which one would be suitable for it? I still want basic GUI like web browsing. I remember trying doing the same for an old PowerBook G4, but I couldn't get its
    wifi to work with various Linux installations. I hope this won't happen again with it.

    I'm writing this on a 2004-vintage Acer laptop of similar specifications,
    a Centrino-based system with 2GB memory and an old OCZ "Vertex" 30GB
    SSD I had laying around. I'm running Lubuntu 18.04 on it and performance
    is not bad. I expect though if I had left the original slow mechanical
    drive in this thing it would be a lot more sluggish.

    It can even play youtube videos, albeit in SD. The problem is that 18.04
    was the last version to support 32-bit CPUs. I think your Core 2 Duo is 64-bit internally but with a 32-bit data bus. It can run 64-bit software
    but with reduced performance compared to a full 64-bit CPU.

    I think even newer versions support 32-bit CPUs, but 16.04 is the last version with a 32-bit installer. One can install 16.04, and then do do-release-upgrade to get to the more recent releases -- do-release-upgrade will go from 16.04 to 18.04, then doing it again will go to 20.04, then again to 22.04, and in a couple of years, you should be able to go to 24.04...

    If it can run 64-bit software it is in fact a 64-bit CPU. I don't think the
    OS is going to care about the size of the *physical* data bus, so long as the instruction set is 64-bit.



    --
    Robert Heller -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364
    Deepwoods Software -- Custom Software Services
    http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services
    heller@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roger Blake@21:1/5 to Robert Heller on Thu Jun 16 02:52:19 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    On 2022-06-15, Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> wrote:
    If it can run 64-bit software it is in fact a 64-bit CPU. I don't think the OS is going to care about the size of the *physical* data bus, so long as the instruction set is 64-bit.

    Yes, it's a performance issue, not a software compatibility issue.
    Reminiscent of the original IBM PC which had an 8088 CPU, a 16-bit
    CPU with an 8-bit data bus.

    -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    18 Reasons I won't be vaccinated -- https://tinyurl.com/ebty2dx3
    Covid vaccines: experimental biology -- https://tinyurl.com/57mncfm5
    The fraud of "Climate Change" -- https://RealClimateScience.com
    There is no "climate crisis" -- https://climatedepot.com
    Don't talk to cops! -- https://DontTalkToCops.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Andreas Kohlbach@21:1/5 to Roger Blake on Thu Jun 16 16:29:15 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    On Thu, 16 Jun 2022 02:52:19 -0000 (UTC), Roger Blake wrote:

    On 2022-06-15, Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> wrote:
    If it can run 64-bit software it is in fact a 64-bit CPU. I don't think the >> OS is going to care about the size of the *physical* data bus, so long as the
    instruction set is 64-bit.

    Yes, it's a performance issue, not a software compatibility issue. Reminiscent of the original IBM PC which had an 8088 CPU, a 16-bit
    CPU with an 8-bit data bus.

    8086 actually (yes, the original IBM PC has a 8088).

    Yes, performance issue, because of the 2 GB RAM. The desktop manager is
    the "problem". Forget eye-candy and other "convenient" things with this
    old machine. Install something coming with Xfce or similar lightweight <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xfce>.

    For convenience, choose a distribution which has it as default. But I
    suppose any up to date distribution will run fine, as long a the
    desktop manager was chosen wisely.
    --
    Andreas

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Computer Nerd Kev@21:1/5 to Andreas Kohlbach on Fri Jun 17 08:17:29 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.setup

    In comp.os.linux.misc Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:

    Yes, performance issue, because of the 2 GB RAM. The desktop manager is
    the "problem". Forget eye-candy and other "convenient" things with this
    old machine. Install something coming with Xfce or similar lightweight <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xfce>.

    For convenience, choose a distribution which has it as default. But I
    suppose any up to date distribution will run fine, as long a the
    desktop manager was chosen wisely.

    JWM is my pick. Star Linux is a Devuan-based distro which comes
    with JWM as one of the options. It may not come with Mac drivers
    pre-installed though, I know nothing about running Linux on Macs.
    The 64-bit version runs very well on my Core 2 Duo laptop with 3GB
    RAM (actually 4GB, but the 32-bit addressing range of the 32/64bit-CPU-compatible chipset limits it to 3GB usable because
    other things have to squeeze into the address space as well). 2GB
    RAM would also be plenty for it, there's only around 130MB RAM used
    after booting up to the desktop.

    --
    __ __
    #_ < |\| |< _#

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Robert Heller@21:1/5 to ank@spamfence.net on Thu Jun 16 18:01:39 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    At Thu, 16 Jun 2022 16:29:15 -0400 Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:


    On Thu, 16 Jun 2022 02:52:19 -0000 (UTC), Roger Blake wrote:

    On 2022-06-15, Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> wrote:
    If it can run 64-bit software it is in fact a 64-bit CPU. I don't think the
    OS is going to care about the size of the *physical* data bus, so long as the
    instruction set is 64-bit.

    Yes, it's a performance issue, not a software compatibility issue. Reminiscent of the original IBM PC which had an 8088 CPU, a 16-bit
    CPU with an 8-bit data bus.

    8086 actually (yes, the original IBM PC has a 8088).

    Yes, performance issue, because of the 2 GB RAM. The desktop manager is
    the "problem". Forget eye-candy and other "convenient" things with this
    old machine. Install something coming with Xfce or similar lightweight <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xfce>.

    For a really lightweight GUI, use FVWM as the window manager and disable the file manager altogether. (I know, many people might find that "horrible".)


    For convenience, choose a distribution which has it as default. But I
    suppose any up to date distribution will run fine, as long a the
    desktop manager was chosen wisely.

    --
    Robert Heller -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364
    Deepwoods Software -- Custom Software Services
    http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services
    heller@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@21:1/5 to Andreas Kohlbach on Fri Jun 17 11:03:13 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    On 16/06/2022 21:29, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
    On Thu, 16 Jun 2022 02:52:19 -0000 (UTC), Roger Blake wrote:

    On 2022-06-15, Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> wrote:
    If it can run 64-bit software it is in fact a 64-bit CPU. I don't think the
    OS is going to care about the size of the *physical* data bus, so long as the
    instruction set is 64-bit.

    Yes, it's a performance issue, not a software compatibility issue.
    Reminiscent of the original IBM PC which had an 8088 CPU, a 16-bit
    CPU with an 8-bit data bus.

    8086 actually (yes, the original IBM PC has a 8088).

    Yes, performance issue, because of the 2 GB RAM. The desktop manager is
    the "problem". Forget eye-candy and other "convenient" things with this
    old machine. Install something coming with Xfce or similar lightweight <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xfce>.

    For convenience, choose a distribution which has it as default. But I
    suppose any up to date distribution will run fine, as long a the
    desktop manager was chosen wisely.

    It is utterly pointless to get a 'lightweight' distro when any browser invocation will immediately grab more than half the RAM.

    If you want to run modern software at all, you need really >3GB RAM OR
    an SSD swap disk. Or both,

    IRRESPECTIVE OF DISTRO.

    Fortunately this machine is upgradeable to both.

    It is a question of whether you want a usable tool or a curiosity.


    --
    "Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They
    always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them"

    Margaret Thatcher

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Computer Nerd Kev@21:1/5 to The Natural Philosopher on Fri Jun 17 21:58:20 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.setup

    In comp.os.linux.misc The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    On 16/06/2022 21:29, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:

    For convenience, choose a distribution which has it as default. But I
    suppose any up to date distribution will run fine, as long a the
    desktop manager was chosen wisely.

    It is utterly pointless to get a 'lightweight' distro when any browser invocation will immediately grab more than half the RAM.

    Firefox seems to always expand to half or more of the available
    RAM, but it doesn't seem to actually ruin performance to run it
    with only 2 or 3GB so I guess it's just some sort of caching.

    If you want to run modern software at all, you need really >3GB RAM OR
    an SSD swap disk. Or both,

    IRRESPECTIVE OF DISTRO.

    Not true, I do everything with neither. Fancy desktop environments
    chew up a stupid amount of system resources making everything seem
    slow. Compare default Fedora with AntiX or Star on a slow machine
    and you'll see for yourself.

    --
    __ __
    #_ < |\| |< _#

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@21:1/5 to Computer Nerd Kev on Fri Jun 17 16:32:41 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.setup

    On 17/06/2022 12:58, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
    In comp.os.linux.misc The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    On 16/06/2022 21:29, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:

    For convenience, choose a distribution which has it as default. But I
    suppose any up to date distribution will run fine, as long a the
    desktop manager was chosen wisely.

    It is utterly pointless to get a 'lightweight' distro when any browser
    invocation will immediately grab more than half the RAM.

    Firefox seems to always expand to half or more of the available
    RAM, but it doesn't seem to actually ruin performance to run it
    with only 2 or 3GB so I guess it's just some sort of caching.

    If you want to run modern software at all, you need really >3GB RAM OR
    an SSD swap disk. Or both,

    IRRESPECTIVE OF DISTRO.

    Not true, I do everything with neither. Fancy desktop environments
    chew up a stupid amount of system resources making everything seem
    slow. Compare default Fedora with AntiX or Star on a slow machine
    and you'll see for yourself.

    As I said, if you *dont* want to run modern software like firefox or thunderbird, all bets are off.

    Fancy desktop environments actually use surprisingly little memory over
    and above the X-windows abomination..


    --
    “People believe certain stories because everyone important tells them,
    and people tell those stories because everyone important believes them.
    Indeed, when a conventional wisdom is at its fullest strength, one’s agreement with that conventional wisdom becomes almost a litmus test of
    one’s suitability to be taken seriously.”

    Paul Krugman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@21:1/5 to Computer Nerd Kev on Fri Jun 17 16:33:46 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.setup

    On 17/06/2022 12:58, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
    In comp.os.linux.misc The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    On 16/06/2022 21:29, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:

    For convenience, choose a distribution which has it as default. But I
    suppose any up to date distribution will run fine, as long a the
    desktop manager was chosen wisely.

    It is utterly pointless to get a 'lightweight' distro when any browser
    invocation will immediately grab more than half the RAM.

    Firefox seems to always expand to half or more of the available
    RAM, but it doesn't seem to actually ruin performance to run it
    with only 2 or 3GB so I guess it's just some sort of caching.

    If you want to run modern software at all, you need really >3GB RAM OR
    an SSD swap disk. Or both,

    IRRESPECTIVE OF DISTRO.

    Not true, I do everything with neither. Fancy desktop environments
    chew up a stupid amount of system resources making everything seem
    slow. Compare default Fedora with AntiX or Star on a slow machine
    and you'll see for yourself.

    Even a 10 year old MAC OSX has to be better than openbox


    --
    If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
    ..I'd spend it on drink.

    Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roger Blake@21:1/5 to The Natural Philosopher on Fri Jun 17 17:35:28 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    On 2022-06-17, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    It is utterly pointless to get a 'lightweight' distro when any browser invocation will immediately grab more than half the RAM.

    I routinely run both Firefox and Chromium at the same time on my old
    2GB laptop with no problems. (2GB is the maximum this particular
    laptop can accept.)

    -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    18 Reasons I won't be vaccinated -- https://tinyurl.com/ebty2dx3
    Covid vaccines: experimental biology -- https://tinyurl.com/57mncfm5
    The fraud of "Climate Change" -- https://RealClimateScience.com
    There is no "climate crisis" -- https://climatedepot.com
    Don't talk to cops! -- https://DontTalkToCops.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Robert Heller@21:1/5 to Roger Blake on Fri Jun 17 13:35:44 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    At Fri, 17 Jun 2022 17:35:28 -0000 (UTC) Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> wrote:


    On 2022-06-17, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    It is utterly pointless to get a 'lightweight' distro when any browser invocation will immediately grab more than half the RAM.

    I routinely run both Firefox and Chromium at the same time on my old
    2GB laptop with no problems. (2GB is the maximum this particular
    laptop can accept.)

    As was I. Ubuntu 18.04 / Mate (disabled caja [file manager], replaced WM with FVWM). I even regularly ran KiCAD, Fritzing, and FreeCAD019 on it too. No real problems (*never* ran any sort of office productivity software).

    I current have a Banana Pi M64 (quad core Arm64 machine) with 2G of ram. Works well -- Armbian 22.02.1, Xfce (with no file manager, using fvwm as the window manager). Can run multiple Firefox windows, sometimes KiCAD.

    Hell, I occansionly run Chromium on a Pi 2 with 1 gig of RAM (but I'd like to upgrade this Pi 2 to a Pi 4, once Pi 4s become available again).



    --
    Robert Heller -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364
    Deepwoods Software -- Custom Software Services
    http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services
    heller@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roger Blake@21:1/5 to The Natural Philosopher on Fri Jun 17 20:27:37 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    On 2022-06-17, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    It is utterly pointless to get a 'lightweight' distro when any browser invocation will immediately grab more than half the RAM.

    Now looking at this with my 2GB 32-bit Centrino laptop from 2004.

    Chromium is open with 4 tabs (4 sites), one of which is playing a youtube video. Firefox is also open with 2 tabs on different sites. Also the
    terminal with a few tabs. The "htop" utility is showing about 1.14GB
    used out of an available 1.96GB. Swap is using about 92MB. The 2 CPU
    cores are fluctuating, of course, each between about 40% and 80%
    utilization.

    This is with Lubuntu 18.04 (LXDE desktop). Seems pretty reasonable to me
    for a laptop this old.

    It is a question of whether you want a usable tool or a curiosity.

    Works fine for puttering around and doing light tasks.

    -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    18 Reasons I won't be vaccinated -- https://tinyurl.com/ebty2dx3
    Covid vaccines: experimental biology -- https://tinyurl.com/57mncfm5
    The fraud of "Climate Change" -- https://RealClimateScience.com
    There is no "climate crisis" -- https://climatedepot.com
    Don't talk to cops! -- https://DontTalkToCops.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Computer Nerd Kev@21:1/5 to The Natural Philosopher on Sat Jun 18 10:28:00 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.setup

    In comp.os.linux.misc The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    On 17/06/2022 12:58, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
    In comp.os.linux.misc The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>> If you want to run modern software at all, you need really >3GB RAM OR
    an SSD swap disk. Or both,

    IRRESPECTIVE OF DISTRO.

    Not true, I do everything with neither. Fancy desktop environments
    chew up a stupid amount of system resources making everything seem
    slow. Compare default Fedora with AntiX or Star on a slow machine
    and you'll see for yourself.

    Even a 10 year old MAC OSX has to be better than openbox

    If that's your view then it just comes down to a matter of personal
    preference. Openbox works for me (though I usually use JWM, which
    is an installation option for AntiX and Star as well), and a lot of
    the extra "features" in more bloated WMs/DEs are things that I
    don't find helpful anyway. For that matter a lot of similar things
    that 10 year old Mac OSX did annoyed me as well, with the miniscule
    experience I had of it.

    So perhaps such old PCs wouldn't be usable the way _you_ like
    things set up, but for many other people there's no problem.

    --
    __ __
    #_ < |\| |< _#

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Robert Heller@21:1/5 to tnp@invalid.invalid on Sun Jun 19 09:25:34 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    At Sun, 19 Jun 2022 13:49:42 +0100 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:


    On 19/06/2022 12:31, Robert Heller wrote:
    At Sun, 19 Jun 2022 12:25:15 +0200 Piergiorgio Sartor? <piergiorgio.sartor.this.should.not.be.used@nexgo.REMOVETHIS.de> wrote:


    On 19/06/2022 02.33, Robert Heller wrote:
    [...]
    I have a 14 years old old MacBook Pro (15" A1260 model, unibody; 2.4 Ghz
    Intel Core 2 Duo, 2 GB (667 MHz) of DDR2 SDRAM, 200 GB HDD, NVIDIA >>>>> GeForce 8600M GT (256 MB of VRAM), & Mac OS X (El Capitan v10.11.6)) >>>>> from early 2008. Its software are too old, unsupported, and too slow. >>>>>
    I'm thinking about replacing them with Linux, but which one would be >>>>> suitable for it? I still want basic GUI like web browsing. I remember >>>>> trying doing the same for an old PowerBook G4, but I couldn't get its >>>>> wifi to work with various Linux installations. I hope this won't happen >>>>> again with it.

    Do you really believe that Linux, magically,
    will make things faster, better?

    A modern web browser alone will eat up all
    the available RAM in few tabs...

    I've run Firefox with with like 6-8 windows (maybe as many as 10-12 tabs >>> total) on a machine with only 2 Gig of RAM (still do [different machine]). I

    Oh, come on!

    Wasn't enough clear the example?

    12 tabs with what? All with heavy javascript,
    graphics, animations, videos?

    Generally not videos, maybe animated ads (depends on what E-bay might be up to). .


    And having also "libreoffice" with some large
    document(s) open?

    I don't use LibrOffice... OTOH, I did use FreeCAD, KiCaD, and Fritzing on the
    Lenovo with only 2G and these programs worked reasonably well, as did Gimp. And I did do medium sized C++ compiles and non-trivial LaTeX runs.


    And... And... And...

    The point is that the "desktop usage", or
    "web browsing" means nothing.

    If the system is slow with the current OS,
    does not mean that Linux will make it
    suddenly faster. By magic.


    I've only ever used Linux, so I have no clue as to how the machines(s) would
    work with other O/Ss.

    Clearly, one can strip down everything and
    browse the web with "lynx" or "links" or
    whatever is that.

    Is this what the OP wants?

    No clue. I was just describing my experience. OTOH, if he keeps he current O/S, he is stuck with out-dated and unsupported O/S, which is probably bad. He would be better (?) off with a modern up-to-date Linux system. Maybe not
    super fast, but usable for basic web-browsing and light e-Mail.

    The idea that one needs a zillion gig of RAM is as silly as the need for a car
    < 2 years old. Many people drive cars 10 (or more) years old. The "obsession" with getting a NEW computer every 2 years is insane. There are lots of older machines that are quite usable for most use cases. Not, not so
    good for heavy gaming or high end office work maybe, but certainly for use for
    lightweight use cases.


    The fact of the matter is that the only MINT installation that was
    barely useable was on a notebook with less than 1GB RAM.

    2GB is usable.

    BUT the cost of upgrading to an SSD and 4GB is probably less than
    $30...at which point its a totally new experience.

    It is uncertain that a *Mac*Book is (easily) upgradable -- Apple has been notorious for making it hard to upgrade -- *Apple* has a vested interest in selling new machines. 2GB is indeed usable, even with something like Ubuntu 18.04.

    Both Apple and M$ have a vested interest in people buying NEW computers on a regular basis -- Apple because they directly make money selling the computers and M$ indirectly through OEM License fees. Both companies stop support for older computers by EOL'ing their O/S versions and writing their new O/S versions not to work on older hardware. *Only Linux* continues to support
    older hardware with up-to-date OS versions. Yes, no one is doubting that older hardware is going to be slower, but for many use cases, it will perform well enough.


    So its a question of value for money. Resale value of existing kit approximately zero.

    so for an opportunity cost of $30, you can get performance and build
    quality that would cost $n00s




    bye,





    --
    Robert Heller -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364
    Deepwoods Software -- Custom Software Services
    http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services
    heller@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@21:1/5 to Robert Heller on Sun Jun 19 17:37:48 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    On 19/06/2022 15:25, Robert Heller wrote:
    At Sun, 19 Jun 2022 13:49:42 +0100 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:



    2GB is usable.

    BUT the cost of upgrading to an SSD and 4GB is probably less than
    $30...at which point its a totally new experience.

    It is uncertain that a *Mac*Book is (easily) upgradable -- Apple has been notorious for making it hard to upgrade -- *Apple* has a vested interest in selling new machines. 2GB is indeed usable, even with something like Ubuntu 18.04.

    Thats why I checked online for upgrade kits for that actual laptop
    before opening my mouth

    Apple does not use non standard RAM or SSDS.


    --
    “Some people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of
    a car with the cramped public exposure of 
an airplane.”

    Dennis Miller

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From 25.BX945@21:1/5 to Robert Heller on Tue Jun 21 00:48:28 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    On 6/19/22 10:25 AM, Robert Heller wrote:


    Both Apple and M$ have a vested interest in people buying NEW computers on a regular basis -- Apple because they directly make money selling the computers and M$ indirectly through OEM License fees. Both companies stop support for older computers by EOL'ing their O/S versions and writing their new O/S versions not to work on older hardware. *Only Linux* continues to support older hardware with up-to-date OS versions. Yes, no one is doubting that older
    hardware is going to be slower, but for many use case, it will perform well enough.

    Exactly. There's "well enough". If you want to play the
    newest games, want all the eye-candy and more, then your
    10-year-old box is NOT gonna manage that, even with Linux.

    But "generally usable for most stuff", then Linux WILL
    boost performance for free. The more you know how to
    "tune" Linux, the more you can squeeze out of it on
    old hardware.

    I have old hardware - from Core2-Quads to Atoms to an
    rPi-1-b (non+) and even a Core2-Duo - that, with Linux,
    are still serving useful purposes. Why throw away what
    WORKS ? Linux/BSD will let you stretch-out the lifetime
    of that hardware. Hell, with an old Atom or C2-duo you
    can run something like IPFire and have a wonderful
    fully-empowered router/firewall vastly better than
    any black box from WalMart. A C2-Duo is even strong
    enough to run something like Kerio mail-server for
    50+ biz users.

    And as for memory-gobbling browsers, I know you CAN tweak
    Firefox to make it far less greedy - yet still quite usable.
    Buffer sizes & numbers .. check about:config .....

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jun 21 11:11:19 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    On 21/06/2022 05:48, 25.BX945 wrote:
    I have old hardware - from Core2-Quads to Atoms to an
      rPi-1-b (non+) and even a Core2-Duo - that, with Linux,
      are still serving useful purposes. Why throw away what
      WORKS ? Linux/BSD will let you stretch-out the lifetime
      of that hardware. Hell, with an old Atom or C2-duo you
      can run something like IPFire and have a wonderful
      fully-empowered router/firewall vastly better than
      any black box from WalMart. A C2-Duo is even strong
      enough to run something like Kerio mail-server for
      50+ biz users.

    We used to relegate our oldest hardware to running dns servers back in
    the day, and once linux came along 386 Sxs ex desktop were repurposed accordingly
    lacing any x windows malarkey, they ran well enough on a couple of * MB
    * of RAM..

    --
    “when things get difficult you just have to lie”

    ― Jean Claud Jüncker

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From 25.BX945@21:1/5 to The Natural Philosopher on Wed Jun 22 00:48:44 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    On 6/21/22 6:11 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    On 21/06/2022 05:48, 25.BX945 wrote:
    I have old hardware - from Core2-Quads to Atoms to an
       rPi-1-b (non+) and even a Core2-Duo - that, with Linux,
       are still serving useful purposes. Why throw away what
       WORKS ? Linux/BSD will let you stretch-out the lifetime
       of that hardware. Hell, with an old Atom or C2-duo you
       can run something like IPFire and have a wonderful
       fully-empowered router/firewall vastly better than
       any black box from WalMart. A C2-Duo is even strong
       enough to run something like Kerio mail-server for
       50+ biz users.

    We used to relegate our oldest hardware to running dns servers back in
    the day, and once linux came along 386 Sxs ex desktop were repurposed accordingly
    lacing any x windows malarkey, they ran well enough on a couple of * MB
    * of RAM..


    Yep, Linux/BSD *can* work wonders ... within REASON
    of course. There ARE useful roles for 'obsolete'
    hardware. Why pay again ?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Charlie Gibbs@21:1/5 to 25BZ495@nada.net on Wed Jun 22 16:23:07 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    On 2022-06-22, 25.BX945 <25BZ495@nada.net> wrote:

    On 6/21/22 6:11 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    On 21/06/2022 05:48, 25.BX945 wrote:

    I have old hardware - from Core2-Quads to Atoms to an
       rPi-1-b (non+) and even a Core2-Duo - that, with Linux,
       are still serving useful purposes. Why throw away what
       WORKS ? Linux/BSD will let you stretch-out the lifetime
       of that hardware. Hell, with an old Atom or C2-duo you
       can run something like IPFire and have a wonderful
       fully-empowered router/firewall vastly better than
       any black box from WalMart. A C2-Duo is even strong
       enough to run something like Kerio mail-server for
       50+ biz users.

    We used to relegate our oldest hardware to running dns servers back in
    the day, and once linux came along 386 Sxs ex desktop were repurposed
    accordingly lacing any x windows malarkey, they ran well enough on a
    couple of * MB * of RAM..

    Yep, Linux/BSD *can* work wonders ... within REASON
    of course. There ARE useful roles for 'obsolete'
    hardware. Why pay again ?

    WARNING! You have committed blasphemy against The Economy.
    Please step away from the keyboard and make no sudden moves.
    A Consumer Re-Education squad will arrive shortly.

    --
    /~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
    \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
    X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
    / \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From 25.BX946@21:1/5 to Charlie Gibbs on Thu Jun 23 01:22:21 2022
    XPost: comp.os.linux.help, comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.questions
    XPost: comp.os.linux.setup

    On 6/22/22 12:23 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
    On 2022-06-22, 25.BX945 <25BZ495@nada.net> wrote:

    On 6/21/22 6:11 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    On 21/06/2022 05:48, 25.BX945 wrote:

    I have old hardware - from Core2-Quads to Atoms to an
       rPi-1-b (non+) and even a Core2-Duo - that, with Linux,
       are still serving useful purposes. Why throw away what
       WORKS ? Linux/BSD will let you stretch-out the lifetime
       of that hardware. Hell, with an old Atom or C2-duo you
       can run something like IPFire and have a wonderful
       fully-empowered router/firewall vastly better than
       any black box from WalMart. A C2-Duo is even strong
       enough to run something like Kerio mail-server for
       50+ biz users.

    We used to relegate our oldest hardware to running dns servers back in
    the day, and once linux came along 386 Sxs ex desktop were repurposed
    accordingly lacing any x windows malarkey, they ran well enough on a
    couple of * MB * of RAM..

    Yep, Linux/BSD *can* work wonders ... within REASON
    of course. There ARE useful roles for 'obsolete'
    hardware. Why pay again ?

    WARNING! You have committed blasphemy against The Economy.
    Please step away from the keyboard and make no sudden moves.
    A Consumer Re-Education squad will arrive shortly.

    Give Biden a chance and he WILL make it illegal to
    use hardware more than five years old. He and Hunter
    WILL get their kick-backs, of course ........

    They'll CLAIM the old hardware is "energy inefficient"
    and "insecure" and therefore MUST be replaced, often ...

    Note Win-11 REQUIRING Gen-8 minimum plus a TPM "security"
    chip. This on top of UEFI booting which stores who-knows-what
    in that special little partition .........

    And besides, the new hardware will have all the newest
    spyware built right in.

    Saw a news blurb today (UK I think, maybe BBC) that
    said The State would now be keeping EXACT track of
    almost ALL commercial transactions - "statistical
    obligations" ya know ..... "profiles" built .....

    When in question, When in Doubt, Follow the MONEY
    and YOU'LL FIND OUT. (-me, so far as I know)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)