I installed antiX 16 (x86) while looking for the most usable OS on retro PCs we're refurbishing before selling them at a very, very low price, tested and ready-to-use for our neighbors that are impacted by the crisis.

antiX 16 manages to use < 50 MB and 0% cpu upon install and yeah, that's fully booted and upgraded. Guys, it's half of what Lubuntu 16.04 takes! It's also even less than the very light Slackware-based Porteus (which isn't as fully upgradable as is antiX). I think my Arch i3-wm x86 taxes no less that antiX 16. In fact I know only two GNU/Linux OSes that are even lighter upon boot --but they do not play in the same field as antiX does. Do some of you know about official Debian e.g. LXDE version?


========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://pic.al/ZGd.jpg"
linktext was:"screenshot"
====================================


Actually such a small resources footprint is a fantastic achievement these days! I still remember when the Mandriva team released their 2007 opus with ol' KDE3 desktop; the mere 50 MB RAM and 0-2% cpu it took were unequaled... nine years ago.

We have spent thousands of hours optimising antiX to work with as low a RAM footprint as possible without completely losing functionality. If one were to compare very early releases of antiX based on squeeze/wheezy you'll see that RAM usage is similar to what is on jessie. squeeze and wheezy are much lighter than jessie, but our antiX lightness was not as good as it is now (not that it was bad).
Just think of an antiX wheezy with all our new tools. Oh wait, we can have that as well with antiX-13.2

As someone who also uses Slackware and SalixOS, I can validate that antix is the"lightest" of the bunch. You guys continue to impress me with each release!