Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 26th May 2008 10:58 UTC, submitted by i386DX
Abandoned Zone reviewed several lightweight Linux distributions, and concluded: "First of all it has to be clear that there's a difference between 'lightweight' and 'lightweight'. Especially Damn Small Linux is very lightweight, but also it's not really usable on 'more recent' systems. It think DSL is perfect for 486 or Pentium 1-based systems but nothing more. At the other side there are Zenwalk and Xubuntu which are pretty heavy lightweight distributions. I think the use of Xfce has something to do with that. All the others are floating between those two extremes."
Permalink for comment 315621
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-11-18
Never tried Draco though, but I'm eager to test it, as it's philosophy is similiar to Arch's.
It's easy to find that that you do not even know the difference between OSS and ALSA
Look at all that mess:
http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/linuxaudio.png
While in FreeBSD and Draco Linux you pass everything to OSS and EVERYTHING is mixed in kernel real time.
What Linux uses for audio? ALSA + GStreamer + ARTS + Esound + Pulseaudio and then finally touch sound card.
What does FreeBSD (and 4Front OSS) do here? APPLICATION --> OSS --> sound card, no unneded layers that create additional overhead and compatibility problems.
OSS is well documented (including API) while ALSA is one big mess without documentation.
Also let Ubuntu serve as an example here, which uses ALSA + PulseAudio, start Rythmobox and then start Wine, Wine does not have sound, start Wine at the beginning, Rythmobox does not have sound, because of what? Befause of ALSA.
I am sick and tired of all these sick ideas about ALSA, PulseAudio or any other shit that do not work.
I also do not understand why people jerk off so much about ALSA while not knowing its technical and functional disadvantages comparing to OSS.
OSS is also open source, it is avialable on GPL, BSD and even CDDL license if you use Solaris.
OSS is cross platform and works on all major UNIXes and Linux, while ALSA works ONLY on Linux.
ALSA is shit, but people just get used to that shit and are scared to hell to try something new, taht is a lot better and polished, but that is their problem.