View Full Version : bigger is not better, in this case at least.

June 14th, 2007, 04:23 AM
I hope ubuntu continues to be free for everybody.
I noticed that windows keep getting bulkier with every new edition. Maybe that is one of the reasons why windows users will have to buy more expensive pcs (with new processors, more RAM and hard disk) just to keep the same performance that with previous versions.
I hope ubuntu could keep uptodate, modern without getting fat, bulky and inefficient.

Tundro Walker
June 14th, 2007, 08:52 AM
The thing about Linux is that it scales well. So, folks who have old computers can use less-intensive applications (like XFCE or Fluxbox windows, with simple text editors and XMMS music program), which higher-scale machines can crank away with more intensive apps (Open Office, Beryl 3d desktop, Totem Movie player, etc).

As more and more powerful hardware comes out, folks will find ways to use it, even if it is for frivioulous things like 3d desktops that look cool, but don't add too much more functionality.

Microsoft basically tries to put an expiration date on hardware by constantly up'ing the hardware specs for each OS version they release. You can kinda tweak the OS some, but it's getting harder and harder to use it on old machines. EG: my old 800mhz ran Win98 pretty good, but was really fast after I tweaked the heck outta it. Then I got a copy of WinXP, and it didn't run so fast. I had to tweak it out to get it to be pretty good. I couldn't imagine loading Vista on it.

On the one hand, Microsoft has really accelerated the computer industry like a slingshot, though, because they forced computers to evolve quickly. We'd still be using 486's today if MS wasn't pushing the hardware companies so hard. So that's good. But, on the other hand, they take a business ideal about everything...once something is 2 years old, it's obsolete and no longer useful, even though it still works. PC owners, however, are not businesses. We want to use something until it doesn't work. So, Microsoft tried to force folks to get new systems by making the entrenched OS demand a more powerful system.

I'm reminded of Bill's quote about if he was helping to make cars, we'd all be driving $25 cars that got 1000 miles to the gallon. What interesting is that computer hardware is useless without software. In essensce, software is the fuel. But it's a scalable fuel, and Microsoft made the fuel so potent you needed to trade in your old Pinto for a Porche every couple years to keep up with how radically powerful the fuel was getting.

Sadly, the automotive industry doesn't have that kind of fire lit under its ***. They still create half-assed cars that break down too easily, suck too much gas, and pollute the environment too much (well, in US anyways...I hear they have some pretty good bio-diesel cars in Europe that get like 60-70 mpg and only emit CO2 and water...) Just think where cars would be today if they had an co-existing component like software that slingshot their demand for performance. We'd all be driving around hover-cars with SCRAM jets that got us to our locations in 2 seconds. Well, maybe just the $25 cars that got 1000 mpg. LOL!

June 14th, 2007, 11:45 AM
Many people are of the opinion that Ubuntu is getting fatter & slower.

June 14th, 2007, 12:09 PM
want to stay with your old computer.. stay with your old software.. windows 3.1 will run like a rocker compared to vista lol :)