Off-Topic > Off-Topic - Tiny Core Lounge
On year 1999 hardware, would a 1996 distro be faster than TC?
Ulysses_:
I've got an ancient set of redhat CD's from 1996, some 3 of them. Also considering other distros to install.
It's for a hardware from 1999 (celeron 400 MHz, 384 MB ram).
1. Would any of the distros of that era be faster than TC?
2. Would the security be better in an obscure distro of days gone by, than one of today's well-known distros that all decent hackers have exploits for?
ACRizona:
Absolutely none are faster than TinyCore.
( source: My stack of old CDs is taller than yours ! )
"Decent hacker" ???
If you're a decent bank-robber, I doubt it would matter. ;)
The problem is that new application software is horribly bloated to the point that it is useless on a celeron400.
But, I'm sooo stubborn,,, I recently found this gem in a forum somewhere;
" The fastest web browser for a old PC is Opera 5 ".
Just for grins, I tried it on my rusty Pent266. He's right ! :)
Guy:
You will probably find that Tiny Core is more secure, particularly if you use the firewall. Although the old versions of Linux are probably not targeted.
An internet browser from 1996 is probably not compatible with much of the modern internet content.
curaga:
Older software will run faster, usually. But then very few older distros ran in RAM, and the speed difference of RAM<>HD was much bigger back then. Since there's quite enough ram to run TC comfortably, and TC nests fine, install both ;)
Security? Well, while the older one is more obscure, all it takes is a trip to the CVE archives for version X of component Y, and there you have working exploits.
curaga:
I should mention that 2.6 kernels, while bigger and more bloated, tend to have much improved algorithms over 2.4 and much more so over 2.2 kernels.
CPU, IO schedulers; networking is a big one too. On the same hardware, a 2.6 kernel firewall could handle near double the traffic compared to 2.4 IIRC.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version