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 » 21. Jun 2012, 08:49

gapan wrote:Stating hardware requirements makes no sense because everyone is going to use his computer in different ways.
I agree. It totally depends on the use case, e.g. I would not run Firefox with 256 MB RAM but it's totally OK for running mpd on a headleass box. So the absolut minimum for reaching a console login prompt would be a i486 CPU and 16 MB RAM or something :geek: :mrgreen:

EDIT: And if you want to decide which distribution to try with your hardware I say: Firefox needs a lot of RAM on each distribution, Openbox needs much less RAM than KDE on each distribution. It depends more on the apps you are using than on your distribution. Also recommendations are subjective. I like fast UI responses and load times, so I'd recommend a dual core with at least 2 GB RAM for every Salix flavour. Others a re less sophisticated than me, they may recommend a 1.6 GHz Atom with 1 GB RAM (this is what I'm using in my netbook but IMHO for every day work it should be faster).
Image
burnCDDA (burns audio CDs)
geBIERt (German beer blog)

macondo
Posts: 90
Joined: 16. Jun 2011, 02:08

Re: hardware requirements wiki

Post by macondo » 21. Jun 2012, 20:12

I donated a PIII with 128 MB RAM and Salix 1337 Fluxbox (they thought fb was too weird) to the local church, installed IceWM (they liked it, looks like Windows98) got rid of all the hog packages, no screensavers, no gdm, imagemagick (you get the idea) down here everybody thinks i'm a rich guy because i gave away a computer that works. They are writing papers and letters in Leafpad and saving everything in .txt. :lol:

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

Re: hardware requirements wiki

Post by Adys » 22. Jun 2012, 06:02

thenktor wrote:
gapan wrote:Stating hardware requirements makes no sense because everyone is going to use his computer in different ways.
I agree. It totally depends on the use case, e.g. I would not run Firefox with 256 MB RAM but it's totally OK for running mpd on a headleass box. So the absolut minimum for reaching a console login prompt would be a i486 CPU and 16 MB RAM or something :geek: :mrgreen:

EDIT: And if you want to decide which distribution to try with your hardware I say: Firefox needs a lot of RAM on each distribution, Openbox needs much less RAM than KDE on each distribution. It depends more on the apps you are using than on your distribution. Also recommendations are subjective. I like fast UI responses and load times, so I'd recommend a dual core with at least 2 GB RAM for every Salix flavour. Others a re less sophisticated than me, they may recommend a 1.6 GHz Atom with 1 GB RAM (this is what I'm using in my netbook but IMHO for every day work it should be faster).
So let's put a guidance in a wiki, including any additional comments / suggestions / ideas / opinions...

I want to be clear: I'm not asking to receive suggestions here in this topic (but of course they are VERY welcome anyway so keep posting them; hoping they could be useful for other readers too). A (subjective) guidance with relevant comments and basic tables for hardware requirements are much better than just saying "buy as much RAM as you can" or "HDDs are cheap now" (and that's not valid for everyone anyway). And such wiki page would be also better than saying "just download whichever Salix ISO and try". It is also possible that some potential users, doubting whether their systems are capable of effectively running some edition of Salix, are not even taking the time (and relatively little resources) "just to try it".

For the Salix Team it's kind of evident. But the suggested wiki tables (with additional comments such as the ones expressed here) are for other (less knowledgeable / experienced) users.

Some of the relevant info is already posted here in the forum and in some wiki pages already published. My suggestion is about gathering the scattered info and publishing it in a “find-able” and readable manner.

User avatar
mimosa
Salix Warrior
Posts: 3119
Joined: 25. May 2010, 17:02
Contact:

Re: hardware requirements wiki

Post by mimosa » 22. Jun 2012, 06:38

But the upshot of the discussion is the answer is "it depends" or "how long is a piece of string". Such information won't fit in a table which gives a misleading impression the question is black and white. Users with any experience can tell just by looking at the Salix website that it is a relatively lightweight distro but not barebones. Very inexperienced users need to distro-hop a bit and learn by trial and error.

Concretely, if I only have 512 MB RAM, it would be a shame if I didn't even try Salix because of some table telling me my hardware was insufficient. If you have weak hardware you make a personal choice about how much slowness and other poor performance you are willing to put up with, versus the level of functionality you need to get stuff done. That was my situation for a long time and though the hardware I then had might not be "recommended" for Salix, for such a user, it looks the other way round - which distro works best with your hardware - and the question is a personal one.

I think Thenktor's paragraph puts it quite well though. The distribution you choose isn't the only or even the main factor determining responsiveness. Much more important is the browser or the office applications or whatever software you need for your tasks. Salix has many virtues apart from speed, such as reliability, good visual design, intelligent choice of applications, wide range of available environments, helpful forums ...

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, 06:54

Well, I'm installing Salix/Slackware on every kind of computer: PC, netbook, ARM based boards... either it is fast enough for it or I put the machine into trash :twisted:
Image
burnCDDA (burns audio CDs)
geBIERt (German beer blog)

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

Re: hardware requirements wiki

Post by Adys » 22. Jun 2012, 08:03

@mimosa,

To get to such conclusions, you are using knowledge that a less experienced user doesn't have beforehand.

If no guidance is (at all) useful, than no software at all would mention it, ever. Mentioning that about 4GB (possibly a little less would be fine too) is the minimum partition size for "/" for Full Install of Salix Xfce x32 (as it is installed from the ISO, with no additional packages, updates, data) is not _that_ useless IMO. Writing a table with general guidance, with all the additional remarks as the ones posted in this topic is not completely useless for a less experienced user. And we all are/were less experienced some time.


@thenktor,

Not all of us have the luck / luxury of high bandwidth, limitless hardware resources and throwing out "old" computers.


@Salix Team,

I can't force you. I am convinced this type of guidance is useful (and not only for Salix's case), hence my suggestion. Whether because lack of time or willingness, or just because you think that no guidance at all is better, now it's up to you to consider the suggestion and implement it or not.

Thank you all for the replies.

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

Re: hardware requirements wiki

Post by Shador » 22. Jun 2012, 09:11

Oh, come on, just because such a page doesn't pop out from one moment to another, you're complaining that there is no will to implement it. I don't think that's what has been generally indicated by the team.
Don't expect FOSS communities to accept your ideas as they are. There are always going to be discussions, ideas get changed and once a consensus is found the result is often better than with commercial software. Because there's input from different persons and short-term solutions are usually dropped in favour of long-term ones.
In the end I wanted to give and receive new input and with that thought I would be willing to start such a page just not from one moment to another.
Image

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

Re: hardware requirements wiki

Post by Adys » 22. Jun 2012, 10:01

@Shador,

I was very surprised by your reply. I was not complaining, and if it sounded like it, please receive my apologies.

Several replies in this topic were about how useless such guidance would be (in their opinion). I was only saying that I presented my suggestion and my argumentation and that's it. Even if it is not implemented (for whichever reason), I had not much to add about it.

If it is implemented, I'll try to help with it. If it is not, that's just a pity IMHO, but not the end of the world :). I can accept discussions and respectful opinions. If for whichever reason I gave a different impression, please know that wasn't my intention.

Finally, I wasn't expecting to see such wiki page immediately. As i said, I just presented the idea, hoping it could be useful, with no specific timeline. If there are more things to comment about it, or more potential improvements to it, by all means, I'm open to it.

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

Re: hardware requirements wiki

Post by deja69 » 22. Jun 2012, 11:59

Just adding my semi-n00b thoughts to this thread,*if it is not perceived as relevant please delete*.

It is worth remembering,most of the equipment Linux migrators use,was set up for Windows and their assorted crapware,even though Microsoft,have been notoriously bad at optimising resources for its preinstalled packages.
So as Linux users,we are trying to fit our requirements around a criteria that was not properly implemented in the first place!

I try to get most of my insights from reading,people 'who know what they are talking about' - and that usually means a Unix/Linux administrator that has been day in/day out for at least 10 years...and enough of them nod in confident agreement towards Slackware/Salix for me to make a commitment.

Indeed Gentoo,Sourcerer or Arch will do their best to fit around your components,but with regards to dependency and resource management,their programmers are still taking a mean average guesstimate of the capabilities of your machine.And the results will be just as mixed.
With Slackware,you have TOTAL control ..you have the potential to fill all the corners and tick all the i's.....this i understand to be one of Salix's main objectives.to meet people halfway and take away some the more mundane compatibility tweaking..theres a few more aspects to SalixOS which i am not coherent enough to explain.... but SalixOS is pretty NEAT!!! :)

The only other suggestion to make life easier for Linux users,is buy Linux preinstalled machines at least there will be some semblance of agreeability between installed components and the operating system sat atop it.
And overclock to your hearts content!
Or..taking it to its most pedantic conclusion ..get the electronics manuals out ..buy a soldering gun and stack of circuit boards ..and work on the the latest Linux kernel.....and potential is unlimited.

A diesel powered Fiat does not do 0-100 in 2.5 seconds,it does not matter how many flames you paint down the side of it ;)

Take care ,have fun ....keep learning :D

User avatar
JRD
Salix Warrior
Posts: 949
Joined: 7. Jun 2009, 22:52
Location: Lyon, France

Re: hardware requirements wiki

Post by JRD » 22. Jun 2012, 12:37

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

Post Reply