Will VL run on my system? [Solved] [Answer = Yes]

[GrannyGeek]

XP does run on 128MB ram.........I am using it to post now....

May I ask WHY you're running XP on that computer? Do you like to suffer?<g>

XP really needs 512 megs to run tolerably, and more is better.

128 megs is not much for XFce with VL Standard, and is not enough for KDE.
--GrannyGeek

[The Midnight Coder]

XP runs quite well on 128 mb. If you were to try it you would see but that is not why I am here.

So since the standard ed wont work the light ed will work correct?

[Tommy599]

I have the VL-Light Beta2 and RC1 running on an old laptop with 500Mhz and 128 RAM. With fluxbox, and a terminal open, I have about 90-100 MB RAM free. So Light should work on your machine.

[hata_ph]

XP runs quite well on 128 mb. If you were to try it you would see but that is not why I am here.

So since the standard ed wont work the light ed will work correct?

If XP can run on 128MB RAM then sure VL59 STD can do it.......

[wcs]

So since the standard ed wont work the light ed will work correct?

If XP can run on 128MB RAM then sure VL59 STD can do it.......

I haven't tried it, but I suppose it's not that the standard ed "won't work".
If you don't use Firefox or other memory-heavy stuff (like Caitlyn said), don't use xfce applets or running daemons, don't load heavy kde stuff, reduce the number of virtual terminals, etc., etc.,  I suppose you would have a comfortable experience.
If on top of that you install fluxbox from the repos and use that instead of xfce (perhaps also replacing thunar by another file manager), it should be great.

It's not so much the editions, but the applications and window manager that you will run.

XP can run with 128MB, but if you load Firefox, you'll start going out of memory as well.

[The Midnight Coder]

So since the standard ed wont work the light ed will work correct?

If XP can run on 128MB RAM then sure VL59 STD can do it.......

I haven't tried it, but I suppose it's not that the standard ed "won't work".
If you don't use Firefox or other memory-heavy stuff (like Caitlyn said), don't use xfce applets or running daemons, don't load heavy kde stuff, reduce the number of virtual terminals, etc., etc.,  I suppose you would have a comfortable experience.
If on top of that you install fluxbox from the repos and use that instead of xfce (perhaps also replacing thunar by another file manager), it should be great.

It's not so much the editions, but the applications and window manager that you will run.

XP can run with 128MB, but if you load Firefox, you'll start going out of memory as well.

True. Opera is better when it comes to memory requirments.

So I think I will try the light editio first and use fluxbox. Then maybe I will give the standerd edition a shot and run lighter alternatives to the stuff installed by default.

[wcs]

So I think I will try the light editio first and use fluxbox. Then maybe I will give the standerd edition a shot and run lighter alternatives to the stuff installed by default.

Hope you enjoy it!

[GrannyGeek]

XP runs quite well on 128 mb. If you were to try it you would see but that is not why I am here.

Not to get sidetracked onto XP, but just for information's sake, I HAVE run XP on 256 megs. It was *not* a pleasant experience. When I bought a new computer 2-1/2 years ago it came with 256 megs and XP Home. I immediately ordered an additional 1.25 gigs and while I was waiting several days for the RAM to arrive, I was using XP with 256 megs. I load the absolute minimum in the background and have a light-on-the-system antivirus, but even at that XP on 256 megs was short of being tolerable.

I suspect it's what someone's used to. When I start tapping my fingers waiting for things to happen, I know that upgrade time is not far off.
--GrannyGeek

[The Midnight Coder]

Works fine for me on 128