30 MB is pretty impressive... (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-10-03 22:45 (#2T2W) Considering that a simple base "A" set of software from Slackware runs about 100 mb, and that's before even throwing an X server in there.Damn Small Linux is a full 20 mb more.It is kind of sad that we got here though. Back in 2000, I had Floppix, which ran on 2 3.5" 1.44 MB floppies. Don't expect to see this any time soon again though; the kernel has gotten a bit obese in the last 14 years. Still waiting on the microkernel revolution to come and save us from this madness. Re: 30 MB is pretty impressive... (Score: 0) by hairyfeet@pipedot.org on 2014-10-04 03:32 (#2T30) Why EXACTLY is that impressive? Are you dumpster diving hardware from 1993? Even the cheapest POS tower I have in the corner of the shop so I have something at every price point including below $100 has a 160GB HDD in it so frankly stripping an OS down that small to brag about seems not only stupid but a serious waste of time,especially when its supposed to be a desktop as opposed to an embedded platform. Re: 30 MB is pretty impressive... (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-10-04 17:06 (#2T37) A system that fits in less than 128MB could be very interesting practically, as it would fit entirely within the eDRAM cache on certain Haswell CPUs.Of course the 30MB is compressed data, which gets decompressed to RAM; the 256MB figure is more relevant, but still a factor of two high. But it's very conceivable that that some upcoming processor could keep this whole distro in cache, which should eke amazing responsiveness from even firefox.
Re: 30 MB is pretty impressive... (Score: 0) by hairyfeet@pipedot.org on 2014-10-04 03:32 (#2T30) Why EXACTLY is that impressive? Are you dumpster diving hardware from 1993? Even the cheapest POS tower I have in the corner of the shop so I have something at every price point including below $100 has a 160GB HDD in it so frankly stripping an OS down that small to brag about seems not only stupid but a serious waste of time,especially when its supposed to be a desktop as opposed to an embedded platform. Re: 30 MB is pretty impressive... (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-10-04 17:06 (#2T37) A system that fits in less than 128MB could be very interesting practically, as it would fit entirely within the eDRAM cache on certain Haswell CPUs.Of course the 30MB is compressed data, which gets decompressed to RAM; the 256MB figure is more relevant, but still a factor of two high. But it's very conceivable that that some upcoming processor could keep this whole distro in cache, which should eke amazing responsiveness from even firefox.
Re: 30 MB is pretty impressive... (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2014-10-04 17:06 (#2T37) A system that fits in less than 128MB could be very interesting practically, as it would fit entirely within the eDRAM cache on certain Haswell CPUs.Of course the 30MB is compressed data, which gets decompressed to RAM; the 256MB figure is more relevant, but still a factor of two high. But it's very conceivable that that some upcoming processor could keep this whole distro in cache, which should eke amazing responsiveness from even firefox.