Linked by Howard Fosdick on Fri 23rd Nov 2012 06:50 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 543050
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-12-05
True... good thing that old ia32 hardware you mention is getting even older and rarer by the day, so that fact is becoming increasingly irrelevant...
That said, I'm glad DSL is back, though perhaps not as useful as it once was. The good thing is that it works well on newer hardware too, so I guess if you like DSL's interface and prefer it for whatever reason, it's there. Last I checked, Firefox was incredibly outdated... has that changed? Probably not, I'm guessing, because the program has blown up in size...
Personally, I liked the whole idea behind DSL-N, but it was short-lived. It was still small, but featured a more up-to-date kernel and an ISO size that IMO is much more reasonable these days than DSL's 50MB when it comes to what can be installed. I still remember Feather Linux, too... it was based on DSL but its target size was 128MB, maximum.
In my opinion, there's not enough "lightweight" desktop distros with specialty lighter variants of typical applications with a total ISO size in the 128-256MB range. And those distros are (were?) typically live CDs, without a "real" installer to do a "proper" (ie. non-frugal) install.