Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #90548
| From | Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.misc |
| Subject | Re: Ancient History |
| Date | 2026-08-25 17:44 +0000 |
| Organization | none-at-all |
| Message-ID | <slrn118rl34.pgj.spamtrap42@one.localnet> (permalink) |
| References | <nf4koiF5rktU44@mid.individual.net> <116kbr5$3radh$1@dont-email.me> |
On 2026-08-25, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote: > On Tue, 8/25/2026 12:41 AM, rbowman wrote: >> In my OCD quest to rejuvenate old machines I finally dug out the tower >> buried under other junk out in the shed. Turns out it's a Compaq Presario >> 4550. It has a 233 MHz AMD K6 that was AMDs challenge to the Pentium II. >> It was pin compatible and could be used in a Socket 7 board. It has 48 MB >> of RAM (no, that's not a typo) and a 4 GB HDD. For your computing >> convenient, it has a 56K modem. There are 2 USB ports although I think it >> expects the mouse and keyboard to be plugged into the PS2 ports. >> >> Two distros that claim to run in 48 MB are Tiny Core and Slax. slax >> specifies text only unless you have more RAM. Tiny Core isn't very >> specific. >> >> I think I'll let that sleeping dog slumber on although I might see if it >> boots at all. >> >> Now for the real puzzle. I was a fairly decent machine in 1997 and came >> with Windows 95. Windows 95 claimed a minimum of 4 MB, recommended 8 MB, >> and if you had 16 MB or more didn't bother creating a swap file. What the >> flaming hell has happened to us? Even by Windows 98 24 MB was >> recommended. Now you can barely run a pared down Linux in 48 MB and I >> doubt it's a very appealing UX. >> > > https://www.vogons.org/viewtopic.php?t=50935 > > "I find working through all the "trouble" to be more rewarding than the result." > > A lot of software you could run on such a machine, would have an "SSE2 requirement", > so you may have to stick with software from the era. > > At one time, packed data structures were "quite popular". Today, you can have > an individual write an image utility, where instead of using 24 bits for > a pixel, "each color is represented by a 64 bit number" or "we're using a floating > point number for R, for G, and for B". Proud claims of piggish design :-) > The reason I note this, is one day, I attempted to open an image, > sure, the image was a large one, the machine returns "out of RAM". > And that's when I started checking for what exactly they were > doing inside. You do an eye roll. You're yelling "why would you do this?". > And so on :-) > > Paul What image [mis-]handling software was being that wasteful of RAM? ImageMagick also has a limit on the size of a "pixel cache" with a default of 2GiB. That limit can be exceeded when working with fairly high resolution scans of full-page paper documents. Fortunately, it is fairly easy to specify a larger limit in /etc/ImageMagick-7/policy.xml -- Robert Riches spamtrap42@jacob21819.net (Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)
Back to comp.os.linux.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 04:41 +0000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-25 03:15 -0400
Re: Ancient History John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-08-25 08:19 -0700
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 19:57 +0100
Re: Ancient History "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-25 11:41 +0200
Re: Ancient History Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 11:53 +0100
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:54 +0100
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 19:25 +0000
Re: Ancient History "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-25 14:23 +0200
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:31 +0100
Re: Ancient History Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-08-25 07:53 -0400
Re: Ancient History Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-25 18:26 +0000
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 19:37 +0000
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 19:16 +0000
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 20:21 +0100
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:30 +0100
Re: Ancient History "Mr. Chang Man-wai" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-08-25 20:07 +0800
Re: Ancient History Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-08-25 11:20 -0400
Re: Ancient History Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-08-25 17:44 +0000
Re: Ancient History Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-25 21:55 +0000
csiph-web