Psyc Geek (TAB) wrote:
> On Aug 21, 8:23 pm, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Linux: Low end capable does not mean inferior
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | One of the things that Microsoft has been silently beating Linux over the
>> | head with for the past couple of years is that, since Linux works so well
>> | on older, and lower end PC's, it is an inferior, obsolete, and outdated
>> | OS. I find FUD like this to be a bit annoying, as the inverse is true of
>> | Windows. An OS that is so bloated, resource hungry, and restrictive that
>> | it can only run on high end PC's does not mean it's a superior OS. In
>> | fact, I'd say that's quite the opposite.
>
> It has no bearing on who is superior. I
> But I am with ya. You go get your 80mhtz machine back out and tell
> the kids to run that.
> Don't forget the 13 inch monitor.
Let's try a *very* modern spec on you, TAB....
- RAM not to exceed 1GB
- CPU not to exceed 1GHz (but Intel ATOM excepted)
- Screen not to exceed 10.2" diagonal (but NO touch screen)
- Storage not to exceed 80GB
Your OS of choice would be........????
|
|
