3 ms·
The original DSL had a similar redundancies in its available applications. Even more so for DSL-N, which was free to break the "under 50MB" rule but still stay
by yellowapple 3y ago
The original DSL had a similar redundancies in its available applications. Even more so for DSL-N, which was free to break the "under 50MB" rule but still stayed remarkably tiny and efficient. That was one of the things that made DSL so cool: "I can get multiple browsers, a full office suite, multimedia tools, and even games on a bootable disk that fits in my wallet? Hell yeah!".
Program sizes have ballooned by an order of magnitude or more, so unfortunately so must DSL's target size if it expects to retain feature-parity, but it's still a lot of bang for one's disk-space buck by the looks of it.