Linux and GUI [was: Problem with Xconfigurator]

["N.A. Prakash" <prakash@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 25 Jun 1999, Anuj Gupta wrote:
> 
> If your card is in the list then specify it. Even then don't specify
> any clockchip setting. Also your card being a 2MB, run only 8 bit
> colour at 800x600, all other colour definitions should be not more than
> 640x480. Contrary to popular belief, running a GUI on UNIX (or its
> clones, ie. linux) is as heavy on system reosurces as Windows NT.
> 

That's the first time I've seen someone say it as plainly as that on this 
list.  I wonder why.  It always seemed to me a contradiction that we all 
touted Linux as an alternative desktop OS capable of running supremely 
stably on meagre (obsolete?) resources and yet we talk all the time of 
the latest video chipsets and gui's.  But yes, Atul Chitnis has also 
stated more than once very clearly that Linux != X (for gui).  Still, 
has anyone else come up against this contradiction (that's how it seemed 
to me): we Linuxers are also in a sense promoting a fashion of keeping up 
with the latest and hottest hardware.  Again, that's not a bad thing, 
because we all need to move forward, I suppose.  But if you considered 
that schools in India, say, received donated old hardware and were 
encouraged to use Linux and they had to deal with such a contradiction, 
...  Sorry, that's a bit fuzzy, but I plead a little inarticulateness.  
Don't misunderstand me.  I'm a Linux fan.

Posting this to both linux-india and linux-india-general.

- -- 
prakash, indian academy of sciences

- --------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information on Linux in India visit http://www.linux-india.org/

------------------------------