Re: [MLUG] winpoison, Mandrake 8.1, and OpenOffice

["Igor Izyumin Jr." <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

> On that note, anyone have good/bad luck with OpenOffice?
> As soon as I get my old 166 emptied of useful files, I intend to try it
> under Mandrake (assuming this d/l of 8.1 ever finnishes).  Anybody know
> of problems with Mandrake and Compaq Presario's or of any reason I
> shouldn't use 8.1 on a 166 with 32 mb and 2gb hd? 
Yes; it will be very slow if you install KDE2 (it is about as 
resource-intensive as Win2k) or Gnome.  I would not even bother installing 
anything other than their libraries, since they will NOT run well on that 
machine.  Blackbox/icewm/other lightweight WMs will run fairly well as long 
as you don't run anything too major. If you can, upgrade the RAM to 128 megs. 
 It will make a BIG difference.  However, I wouldn't expect to get much out 
of that box if you run X.  Now, console is a different story - you might get 
a nice firewall/webserver/Quake server with it as long as it is not heavily 
accessed.  But, the system will run like Win95 on a P-60.
> As I understand, it
> has the surprisingly high requirement of 32mb min, which does bother me,
> but I've never seen a 586 box Linux didn't run well under.
Dude, I would NOT want to run X on a 166 Mhz box with that much ram.  I have 
an i-opener with 128 megs of ram and a Winchip 200Mhz proc (granted, it's 
probably like a p-133) and it is fairly sluggish.  I am running icewm.  When 
I had 32 megs of ram in there, the system could only be said to be "usable".  
It was SLOW.  And if you run 8.1 (which has KDE2 as the default), OpenOffice 
will run like Office XP on a P-100.  I would try some lightweight distro 
instead.  Linux with KDE2 runs slower than Win98 on similar hardware.
-- 
-- Igor
--
To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php

Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/