On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, M. Kirchhoff wrote: > Quoting "Jamin W. Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 03:21:39PM -0700, John Sunderhaus wrote: > > > > > But your point is well taken; you can productively run X on an > > > underpowered machine - but I'll bet you aren't happy. > > > > I'd bet quite the contrary. Chances are they use it because they *are* > > happy with it. I much prefer my Blackbox based X configuration to > > anything else available for Windows, Mac, or Linux. Why? Because it's > > what *I* chose. Not what someone else decided I should use. Does it > > have all the latest eye candy? Hell *no*. That's one of the main > > reasons I use it. I don't want all that extra overhead (and yes, my > > system has more than enough processor power to spare). The point is, > > it's all about choice. > > > Ditto. My PII-366 ThinkPad with 128MB RAM runs Fluxbox on X like a champ. So > does my Athlon 1.2Ghz desktop with 768MB RAM; I don't feel the need to run a > bloated desktop environment simply because my hardware can handle it. > > M. Kirchhoff >
My feelings exactly. I have a Duron 800 with 512 megs or ram, and I run Window Maker. I can't stand KDE and GNOME. Too many resources and for what? I like GNOME's applications, but hate the interface. -- Arthur H. Johnson II, [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: bytor4232 YIM: arthurjohnson IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
