Are you sure of this? There is Lubuntu (LXDE) which might work on a system with such low RAM.
Today's Ubuntu is too heavy for such ultra-slim-resource machines, I agree. Lubuntu however *might* work and I suggest you look into that before saying "Sorry this just won't work." Unless you have some other basis for your argument that you aren't sharing? Also, the context of your statement is kinda lost... unless your intention was to simply state Ubuntu is too heavy, which is why we have several different variants of Ubuntu with other, sometimes lighter, desktop environments. (Note I haven't seen a 128MB machine since my basic hardware certification days, and in a lab environment, or in virtual servers, so the fact that someone has a 128MB RAM system that still works is to be applauded.) > On Jan 8, 2014, at 10:48, irlandes <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sorry, but it looks like they need to try an older version of Puppy for > that minimal machine. Ubuntu was never designed for ultra-minimal > machines. Puppy was. Sorry to bring up a competitive distro, but the > truth is always best. > > > -- > Ubuntu-quality mailing list > [email protected] > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
