NetBSD: An alternative to Xubuntu and Ubuntu Lite for machines with low specs.
I know a number of people who advocate the use of Xubuntu on resource-constrained desktop systems. But there has recently been talk about how the resource usage of Xubuntu is growing at a rapid pace. Along these lines, today I read an article that considers the use of Ubuntu Lite as an alternative to Xubuntu for those with low spec computers. I haven’t used Ubuntu Lite myself, but I would like to make a recommendation of an open source UNIX-like system for low-end desktop computers: NetBSD.
A quote from the NetBSD project’s home page really makes clear what it is, and what its goals are: NetBSD is a free, secure, and highly portable Unix-like Open Source operating system available for many platforms, from 64-bit Opteron machines and desktop systems to handheld and embedded devices. Its clean design and advanced features make it excellent in both production and research environments, and it is user-supported with complete source. Many applications are easily available through pkgsrc, the NetBSD Packages Collection.
The goals of the NetBSD project result in NetBSD being a very high-quality system. The support for low-end platforms means that care must be taken to ensure that the kernel and userland tools and libraries use a minimal amount of system resources. Furthermore, the focus on supporting modern platforms means that NetBSD offers the capabilities one would expect from a modern UNIX-like system. That’s why I think it can be used as an alternative to systems like Xubunt and Ubuntu Lite.
And when we consider its long history, dating back to when PCs were a mere fraction of the power of PCs from even a decade ago, we can see why it’d make a good choice. Compared to a 386 system, even a 300 MHz AMD K6-2 system is a powerhorse. A system like NetBSD, that even today runs suitably on a 386 or 486, is very usable on a more powerful computer. And with people considering a 1 GHz system to be “low-end” today, NetBSD makes an excellent workstation OS for such a computer.
A major feature of Debian and Ubuntu-derived Linux distributions is the extensive and friendly package management. NetBSD is quite comparable in this field. Its packages collection, pkgsrc, is very capable, complete, and up-to-date. It offers virtually all of the open source software one would expect or ever want. Support is included for all of the major open source desktops, including GNOME, KDE and XFCE.
Furthermore, i386 NetBSD offers excellent binary emulation support. This means that if you have a Linux application that is only available in binary form, you likely will be able to run it on NetBSD. In addition, NetBSD also can run binaries from a number of other systems, including x86 FreeBSD and x86 Solaris.
NetBSD is a truly remarkable and versatile system. And for many people, I think it would make a great alternative to lightweight Linux distributions like Xubuntu and Ubuntu Lite. The very philosophy of the project, that being widespread portability, will no doubt go a long way towards ensuring it remains a modern system that consumes minimal resources. If you’re currently a user of a minimalistic Linux distribution that you think is beginning to get bloated, maybe you should give NetBSD a try. It may just be exactly what you’re looking for.
January 12th, 2007 at 3:25 am
yeah, recommend BSD then get a sh*t load complaints in the mailing lists when it doesn’t detect your hardware correctly. good one.
January 12th, 2007 at 4:24 am
[…] (more…) […]
January 31st, 2007 at 10:14 pm
With respect to using older hardware, there’s really no quantitative difference between using a BSD or Linux (using 2.4.x kernel because 2.6 drops a lot of legacy support) distro. All a user with limited hardware resources wants is a base build anyway. Beyond the kernel-level, file system, and licensing, Linux and BSD will use nearly the same packages better suited (and many that aren’t) for older machines.
Ubuntu and all of its derivatives are specialized distros stemming out of Debian, so one could do a Debian net install and add in IceWM, Xfce, etc., and a host of applications just as easily as NetBSD. Easier, IMHO. I think Debian has much better hardware detection than NetBSD. Maybe it’s just been my bad experience trying to get the BSDs to detect things like USB keyboards and mice during install phases that leaves me believing that.
I also just read your blog on the bloat found in many Linux desktop distros. You’re right. Many of them are very mature (stable) in what is only now getting started in the BSD universe by projects like FreeSBIE, Dragonfly, and FreeBSD. They’re bloated because they try to be all things to lots of people. They’ve also spawned off a lot of specialty projects. Several of them, like Knoppix and Morphix, are modular and easy enough to remaster that people use them to make their own distros. Among the bloat-free distros available are Slax (several Slackware-based mini-distros), Damn Small Linux, Feather Linux, and Deli Linux (which is especially aimed at older machines light on resources). DSL and Feather are also quite suited for older machines, can be installed on thumb drives (so can Slax and Morphix), can be remastered so the user adds whatever he wants, etc. I use a Knoppix remaster on my primary (400 mhz) computer. It has a very goofy configuration but the older version of Knoppix detected everything properly right off the bat.
In fairness, Debian and Slackware offer the same base build options you applaud the BSDs for having. Gentoo and other source-based distros (Source Mage, Lunar) take that even further but they’re geared for hackers and not the crowd drawn to the “automagic” ease, ample-ness, convenience, and eye-candy appeal of something like Ubuntu.
Simplicity isn’t something I associate with a BSD install. I’ve done many installs of various Linux distros with nary a problem — maybe tweaking X settings for mice with Slackware. Hardware detection is what will distinguish BSD and Linux in the future if more people do migrate away from Windows.
And at the end of the day, more people are going to be drawn to the simplicity of something as “bloated” as Ubuntu because it means having everything they want (and more), ready to go, or very nearly so, from installation. It’s not bloat to them, it’s function and convenience. They don’t want to have to go looking through pkgsrc or use apt-get, much less ./configure && make && make install their own systems. So bloat does have its place in the world, just not on my computers.
February 4th, 2007 at 6:19 pm
[…] NetBSD can be a fast alternative to a regular SuSE or Mandriva installation on low spec hardware. At least someone called “pinderkent” thinks so. The problem i see: most people are too weak to use NetBSD, they don’t know how to handle it. Not everyone is born to drive a Ferrari, sometimes it is better to stick with a Volkswagen ;). […]
February 9th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
I’m doing a buildup of a NetBSD desktop for myself at this time.
No web access, because I only have one running PC.
Australian mirrors don’t have 3.1 (only 3.0!), which sucks.
If you’re Australian and can host, please do so!
I wonder if the pkgsrc repo is available in torrent, hrm……………………………
March 6th, 2007 at 12:52 am
[…] Aqui el Articulo […]
October 15th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
>With respect to using older hardware, there’s really no quantitative difference between
Of course there is, because it’s very easy to outperform any 2.4 Linux kernel.
>yeah, recommend BSD then get a sh*t load complaints in the mailing lists when it doesn’t detect your hardware correctly.
So what? Using Ubuntu and feed a forum with ‘billions’ of problems because of instable drivers, applications crashing and so on. Don’t compare hype with a real UNIX derivative.