Page 1 of 3

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-18 04:53
by Bulkley
It's all about features and glitz; the more you have the more of a resource hog it becomes. You can streamline your system, use less bloated software and a window manager instead of desktop to lighten the load.

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-18 12:21
by Segfault
My system uses under 100 MB with fully loaded GUI. However, starting up Chromium and opening a modern website consumes 500 MB easy. And some noobs go crazy buying RAM, home desktop with 64 GB of RAM? Well, all I can say if you got money you do not need brains.

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-18 13:50
by n_hologram
I hear your concerns. I think it's important to remember that developers have always made a similar argument. It's the common consumer who drives the market, though, so companies and organizations will err towards profit.

The trick is to build on a minimal base. My project boots to 60-70mb of RAM, about 90-100 with a GUI (window manager) and about 125-160 with a light DE like xfce/lxde/lxqt. Lots of others do, too.

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-19 15:10
by Nili
Debian / Devuan (Jessie) NETINST is still at 20MB with little adjustment & efforts.

...But I understand the situation very much, Where the principle is transformed from KISS to put as much RAM in vain with pretexts every problem is fixed by having as much RAM as possible.

I do not like this situation, However, there are still room(s) to fix things by themselves.

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-19 17:34
by Bulkley
I didn't start this thread. What happened to the OP?

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-19 17:47
by GarryRicketson
It turned out it was a bot, and you were the first to have replied to it, so now it is your topic :mrgreen:
I guess, since there were a few replies, the admin decided to keep the posts that were replies.

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-19 17:57
by Bulkley
GarryRicketson wrote:It turned out it was a bot . . .


Fascinating. I suspect there is a lot of that around. How does one recognize a bot?

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-19 18:55
by GarryRicketson
Good question, but maybe a different off topic, the problem though I wouldn't /won't go into details on that on a public forum, Why ? because then the "bot creators", might get ideas, .... I will send you a PM
Well any way on this one, it might not have been a bot, I suppose I should have said spammer, but any way in this case it was the signature, and it was their first post, and actually only post.
I had my suspicions, when I looked at the signature, and the links in it. But essentially the post was ok, and there had been 2 replies, yours and Segfault .
So any way, then later we had another new member register, but still had not posted anything, how ever it was using the same signature, with 3 links in it I sent the info to the admin, and they agreed, and deleted both users that were promoting the site in their signature.

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-19 21:01
by bw123
since this is offtopic, let me add:
10 yrs ago, one machine I am using came with 2GB minimum ram, another with 1GB.

Describing something as "X-times less' is really a bad way of thinking. If your machine has 4gigs, then ten times that is 40, and 40gigs less than 4 is -36GB of RAM.

So, I respectfully agree, it was a bot, a really dumb bot.
http://timesless.com/

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-19 23:24
by oswaldkelso
My old Debian Desktop from 2007
opps better add one with the browser
https://b2aeaa58a57a200320db-8b65b95250 ... p_2007.png

https://b2aeaa58a57a200320db-8b65b95250 ... s_snap.png

My current desktop shows using PS_Mem. There are 40 channels in weechat that's why its looking fat

Code: Select all
  3.2 MiB + 898.5 KiB =   4.1 MiB   openbox
  5.0 MiB + 505.5 KiB =   5.5 MiB   bash (4)
  5.4 MiB + 661.0 KiB =   6.1 MiB   wicd
  6.9 MiB +   2.2 MiB =   9.1 MiB   notification-daemon
  6.9 MiB +   2.3 MiB =   9.2 MiB   lilyterm
 10.7 MiB +   9.3 MiB =  20.0 MiB   Xorg
 39.2 MiB + 259.5 KiB =  39.4 MiB   weechat-curses
216.9 MiB +  11.2 MiB = 228.0 MiB   seamonkey
---------------------------------
                        366.1 MiB
=================================
bash-4.2#


That said my D3 install shows 24MB-28MB to boot to the desktop and 7MB to the console. We don't have many packages built yet :lol:

Anyway the upshot is I'm still using similar applications, it's the DE & browsers that's getting fatter because I still surf the same basic way. In fact my desktop is now more refined I need less applications than I did back then because now each one is better setup. Most of my machine have 1-2GB of ram the best have 3-4GB If any of them get near using 1GB there is something seriously wrong. The one thing that gets fatter year on year is the browser. The slower browsing gets the more I revert to the likes of lynx, links -g (great usability) dillo with spoof ssl and netsurf. Even started using gopher!

As for DE's. I installed KDE5 on my netbook last month . I almost did a hard reset I thought it was frozen, nope just incredibly slow! I turned everything possible off and it was just about usable. Wiped it and went back to my custom icewm, openbox, and windowmaker.

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-20 06:45
by Head_on_a_Stick
oswaldkelso wrote:The one thing that gets fatter year on year is the browser.

^ This.

oswaldkelso wrote:The slower browsing gets the more I revert to the likes of lynx, links -g (great usability) dillo with spoof ssl and netsurf. Even started using gopher!

Have you tried links2?

It has an X mode with antialiasing and pictures:
Code: Select all
/usr/bin/xlinks2

I run the same (dwm) desktop on all my machines and systemd & glibc seem to be a relatively "heavy" combination in respect of resource usage — Alpine Linux manages half the RAM usage of Debian thanks to OpenRC & musl libc.

EDIT: awesome screenshots :cool:

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-20 12:45
by None1975
GarryRicketson wrote:It turned out it was a bot

Very interesting. Op (Bulkley) has written 5629 posts. If he is a bot, what is the forum administration doing? Or is it your fantasy fruit?

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-20 12:48
by Head_on_a_Stick
None1975 wrote:Op (Bulkley) has written 5629 posts. If he is a bot

I don't know for sure (I didn't crop the thread) but I think the original OP was moved to our "Spam" section and then deleted, presumably because it contained spam.

There is no suggestion that @Bulkley is a bot, how could a bot possibly be that awesome?

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-20 15:19
by Bulkley
None1975, rest assured, I'm not a bot. I'm also not the original poster to this thread. He/she/it has been removed.

Re: 10 years ago we did the same with 10x less RAM

PostPosted: 2018-10-20 15:49
by milomak
i see it was a bot post.

i thought i had an i7 920 with 4GB 10 years ago (i think i got this 6 months or so later)

but it would seem it was the computer before that. i can't really remember but i have to believe it had a 1GB.

my curent computer has 8GB, so can confirm the 10x is false.

edit - didn't realise my laptop has 16GB