This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
No-one commenting seems to have read the article. They are raising the recommended specs due to desktop software and web sites being more resource intensive.
Edit: to add, I would not recommend 6GB RAM for desktop use to anyone. I would say the very minimum is 8GB nowadays.
Agreed. It's an uphill optimization battle. We're now in a world where you need 6GB RAM to chat on Discord while scrolling Facebook.
Ubuntu and its apps (particularly Firefox) are incredibly efficient and respects your hardware resources. I can write a web page with a 5MB RAM footprint. It's when you open the New York Times that your swapfile gets face-slapped.
Funnily enough, an Ubuntu server will run on a half-eaten potato. I've got 16GB in mine, and I'm running servers for LAMP (Nextcloud and Wordpress), NTP, Samba, Mail, Jellyfin, tor, XMPP, CUPS and a few other things. It typically uses around 2GB at idle.
How big could a websit… oh. Oh my.
I would say the very minimum is 8GB nowadays.
I had to check. I do have 8GB, wohoo!
Depends on what you're doing. If you're okay with very limited Web use, even 2GB is viable (or was about a year ago when I retired that machine). More normal levels of Web use, you're going to need more RAM. Not sure about GPU-constrained loads like 3D modeling, as I never tried them on that machine. But other than those and some games, nothing on Linux should require even 8GB. Server systems can make do with even less.
Agreed.
I have an idea of how they could reduce the fish requirements.
How about using shared libraries instead of bundling everything in every snap all the times?
Amazingly it reduces RAM usage as well.
What is a reasonable number of fish though?
3.5 lbs.
Six-seven
You mean you don't like having three screens worth of saquashfs entries flash past when you try to run mount?
Can we start calling Bloatbuntu like we call it Microslop
snapuntu
Ubloatu
Ubundows
Slopbuntu.
Thats when the person to your right hands you a slobbery spliff during puff-puff-pass.
True. Have an upvote!
No, sorry, I got the spelling wrong. It slobluntu. My mistake. A portmanteau of slobbery blunt to you.
I’m not up on the flavours of Ubuntu, but I assume the LTS version is more server oriented and what in the name of whatever you hold holy is there that needs 6 GB to boot an OS? Have they ported bash to electron?
The server version requires 1.5 GB of RAM. That's still rather bloated considering Debian only requires 512 MB.
Well, that’s a lot more sensible but still rather fat. Good reminder not to install Ubuntu then.
I guess it was inevitable (for multiple reasons). Fortunately, there are lighter flavors of Ubuntu. For the more experienced unwilling to spend their resources this way, there are always other distros.
