• R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Compared to what? And based on what advancement of technology and software? What should it take? Cause we can strip features all day long until we get there.

      • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Cause we can strip features all day long until we get there.

        Good? Okay? We need more minimalism

        • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          That’s an opinion, your OS can have whatever you want with however much bloat you want your hardware to have to handle.

          • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            your OS can have whatever you want with however much bloat you want

            No, it can’t, because you can’t remove the bloat, dummy, that’s the entire point of the problem. People wouldn’t care if they could just remove the bullshit.

            • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              You want a Linux install to take up less RAM? Install a lightweight distro like Endeavor or regular Arch and go with an absolutely minimal build.

              You want that with Windows? There are ISO’s that have Cortana and other preinstalled bloatware already removed, etc. Or you can do the same with PowerShell post-install.

              The more I hear Linux purists talk the more it’s clear their knowledge of windows is either incredibly basic with no attempt to actually learn or fifteen years out of date. Usually both.