Unfair/Incorrect Comparisons

Story: Four Lightweight Distros ComparedTotal Replies: 1
Author Content
smallboxadmin

Jun 24, 2012
8:05 PM EDT 		I didn't bother reading the article because the author is comparing distros both designed to run from USB/CD (e.g. Puppy) and full install distros (e.g. Lubuntu). Additionally, any article that uses a distribution that hasn't had any development since 2008, DSL, is not worth my time.
vainrveenr

Jun 24, 2012
9:23 PM EDT
Quoting:the author is comparing distros both designed to run from USB/CD (e.g. Puppy) and full install distros (e.g. Lubuntu). Additionally, any article that uses a distribution that hasn't had any development since 2008, DSL, is not worth my time.
Agreed.

The author writes:
Quoting:As lightweight distros, all four products provide excellent performance on any Pentium IV or better with at least 512M of memory. This makes them great candidates for reviving any old PC you may have lying around the house. Why not make use of that old laptop?

Even if you have only 256M, VectorLinux and Puppy run fine. Puppy runs entirely from memory by default on any computer with least 256M. It releases the CD/DVD for your use even if you booted from it. Damn Small Linux requires even less resources.


- Two recommendations devoted to Puppy Linux? Really???

- And why Lubuntu over lighter weight and native Debian-based distros?? Has the author ever heard of or actually tried using antiX or CrunchBang Linux, using the immensely light-resource Fluxbox/IceWM and Openbox desktops respectively??? CrunchBang Linux already has a 64-bit version.

- Since the author mentions Slackware-based VectorLinux, then why not also mention the equally lightweight Zenwalk, or even their up-to-date parent distro Slackware Linux???? Granted that Slackware may be much too complex to install and to use for beginning users, yet still, its barebones hardware requirements easily support the claim that the parent Slackware definitely belongs in the category of a 'Lightweight Distro'. As the Slackware Installation Help page succinctly writes:
Quoting:Slackware Linux doesn't require an extremely powerful system to run (though having one is quite nice :). It will run on systems as far back as the 486. Below is a list of minimum system requirements needed to install and run Slackware.

486 processor 64MB RAM (1GB+ suggested) About 5GB+ of hard disk space for a full install CD or DVD drive (if not bootable, then a bootable USB flash stick or PXE server/network card)

Additional hardware may be needed if you want to run the X Window System at a usable speed or if you want network capabilities.
While these quoted figures represent Slackware's minimal barebones system requirements, a fuller Slackware installation with a complete lightweight DE/WM and other desktop features STILL manages to run quite well on those systems with "at least 512M of memory".

Perhaps the author should go back and review other available "Lightweight Distros" to make it better worthwhile for his readers in the future.

Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]

Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!