hardware requirements wiki

If you have any suggestions or ideas about improving Salix, here's the place to post them.
User avatar
thenktor
Salix Wizard
Posts: 2426
Joined: 6. Jun 2009, 14:47
Location: Franconia
Contact:

Re: hardware requirements wiki

Post by thenktor » 22. Jun 2012, 13:02

Adys wrote:@thenktor,

Not all of us have the luck / luxury of high bandwidth, limitless hardware resources and throwing out "old" computers.
Long story short: if it does not run Salix/Slack you won't find any modern OS that runs well. You can only try to use super light weight apps without gtk & Qt, but these are hard to find.
Image
burnCDDA (burns audio CDs)
geBIERt (German beer blog)

User avatar
deja69
Posts: 89
Joined: 23. Apr 2012, 00:20

Re: hardware requirements wiki

Post by deja69 » 22. Jun 2012, 15:44

JRD wrote:Just to correct some things:
with Gentoo and Arch you also have total control of your OS. They just use a different paradigm.
Granted :)

It is just my perception that the Slackware ability to customise scripts to a given situation offers a very slight advantage (although i have yet to fully explore this hypothesis-'one day at a time' :) )
Stampede >>> Gentoo and Crux >>> Arch unashamedly admit to having being inspired by Slackware,and while there are some excellent 'cover bands' out there with some wonderful expressions,there is nothing like the real thing ;)

It is the flexibility that i was trying to denote as relevant with regards to Adys original post,as Thenktor has just pointed out,you could reduce most of your apps to Perl and Tcl/Tk,but the results might not be as spectacularly multimedia as you might expect.Configure and script is an individual thing.
It is all mathematics,so anything is possible if you have the will,passion and patience to see a desire though....if only i took my own advice! :lol:

Adys suggestion is quite reasonable ..for an average user,with average equipment,with average objectives..but then ..what is average?
For that reason,i understand the Salix devs reticence...you can guarantee whatever advice they 'set in stone', somebody somewhere will post 'your wiki is wrong' :shock:

Anyway,enough said..i am sure something will be resolved...we certainly have the most flexible operating system to answer these questions ;)

Adys
Posts: 156
Joined: 3. Apr 2012, 04:17

Re: hardware requirements wiki

Post by Adys » 22. Jun 2012, 16:14

Going forward...

To show some examples of general guidance for system requirements:

For Puppy Linux:

Code: Select all

-hXXp://www.puppylinuxfaq.org/first-steps-in-puppy-linux/9-installing-puppy-linux-installing-puppy-linux/21-minimum-hardware.html
(note the "-hXXp")

There are many more pages about it, with more explanations about which actions / tasks a user could effectively do according to the hardware available.

For Slitaz, not only there are specific minimum requirements, but also a special com32 syslinux module that automatically selects which Live features (not) to load up if the system doesn't meet the minimum requirements for such more-demanding features.

For PartedMagic, according to the available RAM, the user would select a different boot menu option. This is not what we are talking about here, but it is an example of how, in certain situations, having some general guidance about hardware requirements beforehand may be important for the user.

For Mandrive 2011.0 :

Code: Select all

-hXXp://wiki.mandriva.com/en/2011.0_Notes#System_requirements


For pclinuxos LXDE: (down the page to "Hardware requirements")

Code: Select all

-hXXp://www.pclinuxos.com/?page_id=188


For pclinuxos 2012.2 Xfce: (down the page to "Hardware requirements")

Code: Select all

-hXXp://www.pclinuxos.com/?page_id=213



I realize that some of those examples are specially relevant when the OS is particularly publishing the support for old computers, and the respective page format is not the same as I suggested here. The above examples are only just that, examples, and possibly not the most adequate way to present them. And of course that additional comments like the ones presented here in this topic are VERY relevant, so they should be taken into consideration too.

Some of those pages mix the OS "features" with the download links with the hardware requirements with screenshots with... I'd suggest not mixing all together, but instead adding links to a "hardware requirements" wiki page where relevant (for example, in the download pages, but let's not jump ahead).

User avatar
Akuna
Salix Wizard
Posts: 1038
Joined: 14. Jun 2009, 12:25

Re: hardware requirements wiki

Post by Akuna » 24. Jun 2012, 08:17

I also think it would be a good idea to have such a page especially if general specifications are balanced with some of the comments from this thread. So that the reader realizes they are only general guidelines but depend greatly on specific usage.

It would still be useful for newcomers.

A couple days ago, I installed Salix on a friend's older box with a 2.6 ghz processor but only 750 mb memory. I would say it was very usable, especially when compared with the original XP version that was on it and where everything was working literally at crawling speed.

Adys, please go ahead with it, the wiki is community powered. You are more than welcome to improve on it. If you don't already have one and need a wiki editing account send a pm to thenktor who will provide you with one (that step was implemented for spam protection). Thanks. :)
Image
What really matters is where you are going, not where you come from.

User avatar
deja69
Posts: 89
Joined: 23. Apr 2012, 00:20

Re: hardware requirements wiki

Post by deja69 » 24. Jun 2012, 17:27

Good luck Adys :)
Getting an overview of chipsets/processors as common knowledge into the Linux collective mind has to be a good thing.

More science and less opinion...because you tend to find yourself (myself :oops: ) repeating the same nonsense...,much of the blame goes to the mainstream technology press..but as the musician Frank Zappa said 'Most rock journalism is done by people who can't write,interviewing people who can't speak,for people who can't read'...and the tech press is just as guilty...sadly though,it tends to put the community in a bad light and confuses potential adherents.

There IS NO bad OS! Only one that is relevant to the users purpose.

I think SalixOS is a comprehensive package with enough options and versatility for people to curl and stretch...it is not totally unique in this aspect,but definitely a contender...well presented specifications can only help others make 'informed' decisions :)

PS...(to Salix devs) I was wondering,a cornerstone of SalixOS is backwards compatibility as a respectful reciprocity to a development heritage..was the choice of a Bonsai Tree as mascot,a nod of recognition to the first Live CD,Yggdrasil,(tree of life) as the Salix SaLT scripts are quite integral to the distro ? (does that make sense? :? )

Shador
Posts: 1295
Joined: 11. Jun 2009, 14:04
Location: Bavaria

Re: hardware requirements wiki

Post by Shador » 24. Jun 2012, 18:21

deja69 wrote:PS...(to Salix devs) I was wondering,a cornerstone of SalixOS is backwards compatibility as a respectful reciprocity to a development heritage..was the choice of a Bonsai Tree as mascot,a nod of recognition to the first Live CD,Yggdrasil,(tree of life) as the Salix SaLT scripts are quite integral to the distro ? (does that make sense? :? )
We're getting a bit off-topic here but that's the history:
http://www.salixos.org/forum/viewtopic. ... p=487#p487
http://www.salixos.org/forum/viewtopic. ... 4&start=60

It just sounded good and seemed to fit well. The one or other meaning was added with time. SaLT cam much, much later and the initial release of Salix was not a LiveCD.
Image

Post Reply