Linux Could Prevent Use of 4,200,000,000 kg of Fossil Fuels a Year

Status
Not open for further replies.
freebird

freebird

Debian Rocks!
There's been a lot of talk in the last couple weeks about the significant negative impact that Windows Vista will have on the environment. Almost 100% of this negative impact is the waste that it will generate by making millions of machines obsolete. The question becomes...would machines go obsolete as quickly if software people weren't coming out with fancy, but largely similar, operating systems all the time? The answer has been given to us by Linux: Yes...but not nearly as quickly.
It turns out that machines that use Linux go obsolete roughly half as fast as Windows machines. And when they do go obsolete, it's because of hardware, not software (the switch from floppy drives to CD-Rs being a prime cause.) Thus, a world using Linux would be a world with half the computer waste (and, admittedly, halved sales for Dell and the rest.)

A widespread switch to Linux could prevent literally hundreds of thousands of tons of waste from going into landfills every year. Every computer not needed would prevent the use of 240 kg of fossil fuels. Spread that out over the 17.5 million computers that wouldn't be going obsolete every year and Linux could deliver the world a much more sustainable future.
The good news is, the world looks like it's ready to upgrade from Windows. Most of Asia has switched, as least in part, to Open Source Software (OSS); some countries, such as Indonesia, also think that Linux changes scofflaws into legit users. Cuba has reported a 500 percent increase in Linux installation in two years; of course, they can't really get Windows due to export restrictions. Big Blue is giving a specific tutorial to switch from Windows to Linux, and two out of three Dell customers are now demanding that The Bird be pre-installed.
Click to expand...
read full article:
*www.ecogeek.org/content/view/459/
 
techtronic

techtronic

I Always Prefer 1080p
In that case, its the mobile phones which produce more junk than the
PC or Servers :)

And yeah its true that Windows Vista requires more resources, but nobody would completely revamp their PCs for an OS

Just add RAM and a graphics card if you really want to have a glimpse of Aero
Else stick with Windows XP SP 2
 
anandk

anandk

Distinguished Member
hmmm...a case of stretching logic too (no three) far ... *smilies.sofrayt.com/fsc/pensive.gif
 
eddie

eddie

El mooooo
techtronic said:
And yeah its true that Windows Vista requires more resources, but nobody would completely revamp their PCs for an OS

Just add RAM and a graphics card if you really want to have a glimpse of Aero
Else stick with Windows XP SP 2
Click to expand...
...and if my mobo doesn't have a AGP/PCIe slot...then? Then I'll need to change my mobo...and if I buy some new mobo with a new socket then I'll have to buy a new CPU. Result? You decide :p
 
praka123

praka123

left this forum longback
Wow,A Strange reason to choose Linux- A reason to save ur Lil old Computers!
yes.but true.
It's something Like PA stands with PETA for boycotting leather goods to save
ANimals!:D aka PC's.
 
chesss

chesss

mera kutch nahi ho sakta
errr on my PIII, all distros that I have tried crawl ( even after tweaking them to the max), infact even a light browser like Opera simply fails to impress. They are usable allright, but very very slow. On the otherhand simply xp flies!!
and btw xp is supported from 2001-2009 atleast which means you can use the same hardware for 9 years (considering OS only)
 
techtronic

techtronic

I Always Prefer 1080p
eddie said:
...and if my mobo doesn't have a AGP/PCIe slot...then? Then I'll need to change my mobo...and if I buy some new mobo with a new socket then I'll have to buy a new CPU. Result? You decide :p
Click to expand...

I changed my Motherboard, Processor and RAM
Simple reason a new SMPS was not available for my old Celeron 433

What I meant was not to simply upgrade for the fun of upgrading but for a genuine or specific purpose
 
V

VexByte

Norms Buster
But the transition from Floppies --> CD --> DVD is not due to any Micro$oft OS. It's solely because of the need.

But I would strongly disagree to some point mentioned in the article (after being a Linux user for the last 6 years); that the hardware requirements for running KDE/GNOME or any other graphical environments is pretty big almost same as that of a comparable Windoze installation.
 
OP
freebird

freebird

Debian Rocks!
^^ I too am a Linux user for more than 8 yrs now starting @98.
things have changed a lot.GNOME and other DE's do the memory mangement very efficiently compared to the old Black and White Desktop era.YOu can customize the DE acc to your need.though i cant gurantee with kde,which still wants the user to install helluva lotta programs..at any time the hardware req of Linux DE are much much smaller than windows vista or may be windows xp too.
 
unni

unni

In the zone
chesss said:
errr on my PIII, all distros that I have tried crawl ( even after tweaking them to the max), infact even a light browser like Opera simply fails to impress. They are usable allright, but very very slow. On the otherhand simply xp flies!!
and btw xp is supported from 2001-2009 atleast which means you can use the same hardware for 9 years (considering OS only)
Click to expand...

Won't it be a bit too unfair to compare XP released on 2001 with distros released on 2006?;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom