Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

If you're happy with OpenBSD, probably any computer is good enough

muezza.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 357 posts

Re: If you're happy with OpenBSD, probably any computer is good enough

#291

Post by anthk »

hulitu wrote: post #222
emodendroket wrote: post #212

What I found is that you can get an old computer to work great with an old OS right up until you open the Web browser and start visiting Web sites.

Not only an old OS. An older web browser has the same issues. I think we need to come back to gopher and ftp because http is a rolling target. But we are https (s comes from encription).

Windows 9x/2x/XP users have RetroZilla as a libre browser. Mac 8-9 users have Classilla.

Linux users can compile gcc 4.x and pkgsrc just fine on any > 2001 distro.

Re: If you're happy with OpenBSD, probably any computer is good enough

#292

Post by anthk »

amatecha wrote: post #86
abricot wrote: post #4

If you are happy not surfing most of the Web, any computer is good enough. It's usually browsers and web pages that brings these older PCs down.

We do have basically latest Firefox on OpenBSD. But yeah, to be fair, I have to restart Firefox frequently on my X230's running OpenBSD. It either just stops rendering altogether (literally even application UI fails to render) or eats up so much memory and CPU the cooling fan is just always running at a kinda high level. Otherwise, it's super solid and a great OS for older machines IMO.

Man login.conf .

Also, if you dare,

      sysctl hw.smt=1
Add hw.smt=1 to /etc/sysctl.conf if you waqnt that setting persistent.

Also, install and enable obsdfreqd and read the docs at /usr/local/share/doc/pkg-readmes/.

Re: If you're happy with OpenBSD, probably any computer is good enough

#294

Post by anthk »

bandrami wrote: post #196
zozbot234 wrote: post #55

There's not much that's specific to OpenBSD wrt. this post, or to the G4. The RAM use (61MiB) is roughly in line with a super lightweight Linux install for any 32 bit system (requirements for a modern 64 bit system tend to be higher). So any computer really is good enough if it fits your end use, otherwise it's no good.

Dealing with some hardware is a lot easier on OpenBSD, at least for me. I spent the better part of a day on Debian trying to get ofono and connman to play well together after network-manager and modemmanager (side note: really?) failed to get my LTE modem to connect. In OpenBSD it was just ifconfig umb0 apn hutch up

No dhclient :D?

Re: If you're happy with OpenBSD, probably any computer is good enough

#295

Post by JohnFen »

piva00 wrote: post #283
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #277

Kinda sad that the top comment is something about a web browser. There's much more to computers and the internet than web browsers. I use links text-only browser coupled with stunnel or haproxy for TLS. Unlike the "tech" company browsers, this software compiles quickly and easily, it's relatively small and it works great on older computers. Here is what no one is mentioning. Currently, 90% of the world's most advanac…

If something happens to TSMC there will be a global effort to lift all that knowledge back into stable, developed countries to continue production as fast as humanly possible. Just like the lifting of Nazi rocket scientists, it's a technology that is directly intertwined with the existence of contemporary advanced economies/societies, if TSMC ceases to exist there will be a concerted effort from major economies to re…

> 3-5 years until production restarts somewhere else.

If you're talking about production of modern chips here, it will take a lot longer than 3-5 years.

Re: If you're happy with OpenBSD, probably any computer is good enough

#296

Post by JohnFen »

emodendroket wrote: post #237
jamiek88 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or to condense it further, HN users are human. No matter how much we deny it! :D

That's true. But I think that many people here share such a similar perspective that they don't realize how fringe their priorities really are.

Maybe, although I suspect most people here understand that we're a fairly small subculture. I do, at least. The thing is, it doesn't matter if my opinions/needs/pain points are fringe. They're still real, and I still care about them and advocate about them. Just like most people.

Re: If you're happy with OpenBSD, probably any computer is good enough

#297

Post by JohnFen »

bandrami wrote: post #276
Gigachad wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which one of these would allow you to build the discord UI as it is, looking exactly the same on every OS and run in web browsers?

Why should an app look exactly the same on every OS? That seems like an awful idea.

Especially when that look & feel suffers because it's the least common denominator of all the supported systems.

Re: If you're happy with OpenBSD, probably any computer is good enough

#298

Post by JohnFen »

anthk wrote: post #263
Yuioup wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plus Qt isn't free, if I'm not mistaken.

Have you been under a coma since 1997? How's everything?

We use Qt where I work. It's insanely expensive if you're using it commercially.

Re: If you're happy with OpenBSD, probably any computer is good enough

#299

Post by bandrami »

anthk wrote: post #294
bandrami wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dealing with some hardware is a lot easier on OpenBSD, at least for me. I spent the better part of a day on Debian trying to get ofono and connman to play well together after network-manager and modemmanager (side note: really?) failed to get my LTE modem to connect. In OpenBSD it was just ifconfig umb0 apn hutch up

No dhclient :D?

Not for a 3G/LTE modem, no; the IP configuration is part of the carrier discipline.

Re: If you're happy with OpenBSD, probably any computer is good enough

#300

Post by JohnFen »

mjhay wrote: post #8
sourcecodeplz wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard there's quite the group here on HN that browse the web on CLI browsers.

It's not something that's remotely practical on most modern sites. I hate everything new as well, but at some point it's easier to just suck it up and face the hell that is the modern internet.

> I hate everything new as well

It's not about hating new things. It's about things making tradeoffs that don't make sense to some.

Post reply on HN