Originally Posted by enorbet2 ping JackCY
_ You have made so many false and opinionated remarks about Linux now that I am beginning to doubt your sincerity at doing anything but reinforcing your choice to use Windows and vilify Linux. Stolen Unix? No nvidia drivers in 2007? Eclipse and Netbeans crashing? and much much more but the worst offense of all shows that either you don't know what you're talking about or you do and you choose to state obviously bad comparisons.
I'm talking about resource usage. Firstly, in 2017 you are actually concerned about RAM measured in MegaBytes?
More importantly if you know anything about even just Windows, you must know that the way Windows reports RAM usage is not as complete and honest as the way Linux reports RAM usage and I'm not even talking about unreported :just in case" preloading .
In Windows you cannot go by what is reported with Taskmanager. You simply must use perfmon or Resource Monitor and THEN. you have to factor in the convoluted manner in which MS employs all virtual memory, even committed memory, and including page file which MS recommends at a minimum be 3 times the amount of RAM
or 4GB whichever is larger. Since 16GB is common in 2017, that's 48 GigaBytes of page file. My entire OpSys isn't that big.
For a real world usage anecdote I have an ancient Sony Laptop with a PII 533 MHz CPU and 512MB ram that runs Slackware 13.37 with a KDE 3.5 GUI Desktop. Oh and BTW it has a 500 MB swap file. In truth it takes forever to boot but once it is up it is remarkably and usably fast, even today.. Incidentally while that version, 13.37 , came out in 2011, it was an upgrade from the previous install of version 12.0 which I installed in 2007 and BTW is still supported.and ran great but I suppose you think I'd have been better off with Windows Vista in 2007, eh?
Look... if you like and prefer Windows with all it's intrusive and deceptive mannerisms that's your choice and that's fine. However there is a reason Linux supports more platforms and owns the smartphone and supercomputer markets so it is a waste of your time to come into this "House of Linux" and defecate on the living room carpet. There is also a reason that Linux on the Desktop is a paltry few percent compared to Windows ~90 %. The majority of Desktop PC users don't want to know nuts and bolts. They don't need that level of control or security.. They want convenience and are willing to pay someone else to provide some semblance of that and that is a perfectly valid choice, for Users. Phones, Servers, SuperComputers and Admins prefer Linux. Deal with it.
On a 2GB machine yes I am concerned about MB of RAM used.
I never used Vista or Win7 on my machine, thanks no didn't want that bloat.
Good luck with Linux to you. I will move to something else if something else is made and better supported or Windows evolves to being a mix of two anyway. I don't care what the name is or who makes it, only what I get for the money as long as it supports what I need it to support while being stable without issues, lock ups or major slowdowns.
I use HWiNFO for monitoring on Windows, don't care what task manager shows and it's not off by a lot anyway. Preloading is a common thing to do not just on modern Windows. Look at Android.
Yes a simple desktop OS should fit within 2GB RAM no problem, without swap, page file on other storage. If it can't update itself without eating more than 2GB RAM, then there is something wrong with that OS or how it's made. The only thing having access to slow HDD storage will do is make it crawl while it bloats it's swap and page files.
Some distros work fine, some simply don't. Always been that way, still is as I test them and it will be as long as so many distros exist.
Originally Posted by thestraw0039
I'm not sure, I've never run Puppy but one of the advantages to Puppy is the speed because everything is on the RAMDisk making it very fast. I'm sure someone here more familiar with Puppy can answer that for you.
I will skip puppy most likely.
Mint and Manjaro, at best probably with XFCE looks most promising to be usable for this target machine and user. I'm downloading some older bigger distros as well although I will skip Debian and Gentoo etc. Just getting OpenSUSE, already have Ubuntu and getting Xubuntu. See which of these can be run or at least installed with fast GUI, XFCE or similar. The RAM usage of Mint can be a killer, sure with swap file it will run, but come on 2GB and it can't update GPU driver and CPU microcode without running out of RAM? That is nuts and something is borked with it. Other than the RAM it seems fine.
Originally Posted by Liranan
While there are many distro's they can be categorised as deb (Debian) or RPM (Red Hat) based. Before I started learning how to use Linux on my server I was of the same opinion, that there are too many distro's but I quickly learned that these are basically the two categories under which they fall. Even Slackware based distro's can install RPM so there is a lot of standardisation now.
I just started Puppy in a VM and it's using 250MB RAM. As has been said, the more you install, the more RAM it takes up. If you want another really light distro try Mint XFCE. It's really light weight as XFCE isn't demanding in any way. The one problem with XFCE is that it's ugly (this is entirely subjective). Cinnamon is beautiful, Mate is nice too but XFCE is just horrid but it works and I use it on my server because I don't want to constantly stare at the command line, even though I actually rarely use the GUI and mostly use command line.
When it comes to servers the GUI is actually a hindrance as everything can be done quicker and more effectively with command line. Even Windows Servers give you the option to install CLI only as server management through point and clicking is just awful compared with a CLI. Desktop use is entirely different as desktops have different requirements but even in the days of DOS we used CLI only and it worked.
If you want a distro that is super easy to manage try OpenSUSE. You can choose between several different GUI's and you can even install a minimal X GUI that takes up even less resources than Puppy. It's not pretty but YAST is so sexy to use it's incredible. The reason I use Mint (Ubuntu/Debian based) is because I'm used to it and Mint (Ubuntu LTS) support their distro's for 5, whereas OpenSUSE only support their projects for 18 months at a time, due to changes being tested for SUSE itself. Linus himself runs OpenSUSE at home.
Manjaro is a rolling release akin to Win Spy so every year you will get a fully updated version, which isn't useful to me but many love it.
Yeah it's all based on same origins.
Mint XFCE I would try but no download for it, seems dead/removed. Only Cinnamon and Mate available. Not sure any of these can be switched over to XFCE during install. For me it's a GUI and they all come with various themes and customizations, speed and RAM is what matters to me, all else can be tweaked.
I don't mind CLI but GUIs are way faster for settings things up unless you all you do is run premade batches to make the config for you in that case making those batches and searching what each option does has to be counted into the time spent configuring and then CLI is slower, not that poorly made GUIs are fast.
Works, just not for a desktop much and absolutely not for average users.
OpenSUSE downloaded. Exactly, an older stable distro, options to select GUI etc. much like Debian and Gentoo and other bigger distros should have.
I would much rather have weekly automatically updated OS than once a year "user gets confused with what is it some update popped up, or has been done and now the whole thing is borked, where are my files, or no update at all done automatically and it sits outdated for 5 years with vulnerabilities unpatched". So do the LTS versions of Ubuntu etc. update automatically to stay secure and up to date applications wise at least reasonably? Or will it run for 5 years the same Firefox and after 1 year it will not be compatible with this or that on web for example? What about the nonLTS Ubuntus?
I'm not really worried or bothered if the machine gets no updates just curious as to how it works for long term use for many years, with Windows it's a non issue, constantly updated automatically and apps have their own auto updates or is left to user to do when they want to.
Will try some more tomorrow, gotta do other stuff too.
Almost Heathen: yeah live version isn't helping as some distros cannot fit into 2GB RAM and the USB is snail, their space on it sometimes configured by the distros too small for them to use and having a snail HDD after install won't magically resolve low RAM amount issues. So live is sufficient test for me to see if it can fit into 2GB RAM or not.
I don't know what thesavage is about if he's angry at Windows or Linux. I don't care what's the name, I just have some needs for this machine which are vastly different from my own personal needs and as such I'm exploring options, particularly Linux options, I've installed Win10 on it for now only to test the machine works fine and to see if Win10 will work on it at all since the hardware doesn't officially support Win10 but it seems to work fine, slowish because RAM and HDD but fine.
In the end what is the difference for user between various GUIs? Visual appearance, structure of menus etc. and of course speed and resource usage. I bet most GUIs could be custom reconfigured to look and feel the very same or very close at least. Yes some are more than just a GUI and may come with other apps and such which is not something I need for this machine.
I've used Linux before even with very minimal or no GUI, I think it was one of custom Gentoo installs I tried, it ran fast, that's for sure. Basic look but fast.
I find the Manjaro XFCE and Mint Cinnamon quite similar from a user point of view.Edited by JackCY - 12/13/17 at 9:32pm