Where are the goals of XFCE.
grantmasterflash at gmail.com
Tue Jul 15 00:07:29 CEST 2008
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Richard Querin <rfquerin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 3:52 PM, Ambrose Li <ambrose.li at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I obviously cannot speak for other parts of the world. But we are using
>> computers from 13 years ago here and from what I can gather it will
>> be another 5 years (if not more) before they will be "discarded", and
>> on these boxes running Windows (even NT5) is actually quicker than
>> running XFCE (an almost-5-year-old XFCE, not the current one).
> How would running something like PuppyLinux compare to running NT4 on a
> system like that? When you say 13 year old PC's what does that mean in terms
> of processor and memory.
> I recently listened to a podcast where a guy took a pc that was about 10
> years old (P3) and he said Puppylinux really worked well on it. But 13 years
> old (plus another 5 years).. I'm not so sure. I'd be interested to know
Here's another dynamic. We have an onslaught of new mini notebook computers
(eeepc, hp mini-note etc) that don't really come with a lot of guts. XFCE
will definately run better on them then the two big dogs. It's just not the
10 year old computers that I'm concerned with. If you were to compare the
speed of a 667 mhz Via CPU you'd probably find it in the range of a 13 year
old Pentium II computer. If XFCE want's to move "up-market" then it can
because that's how open source works but there will still need to be
something that fills it's shoes because I believe the market is there.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Xfce