[Sderby] Re: Printers

[James Gibbon]

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:39:56 -0000 (GMT)
"David Bottrill" <david at bottrill.org> wrote:

> 
> I've been running SuSE for years and can't say I've ever considered it to
> be slow, even on my old PII 400 laptop. The biggest killer of performance
> is insufficient RAM, with KDE and Gnome, Linux systems are now as memory
> hungry as window$ and 256MB of RAM should be considered a minimum.
> 

I agree about RAM in genreal , but my old Compaq supports Slackware
10 + KDE with 96MB of RAM quite happily with most applications, that's my
point.  It won't tolerate SuSE 9.2 + KDE, however.

> There have been a couple of bad SuSE versions over the years 8.1 and 9.0
> come to mind, but there is no comparison between 9.2 and FC3, and Mandrake
> 10 was extremely buggy on the Athlon XP machine I tested it on.
> 

I haven't tried FC3 yet, but at least on my hardware, there's no comparison between
FC2 and SuSE 9.1 - I found the latter more or less unusable due to the screen refresh
problem, and its appetite for memory.

Mandrake 10.0 was a bit of a shocker, but Mandrake 10.1 is fine.

James