I'm not really sure what the point of using a PC that old/slow is, I regularly see first-gen dual-core PCs in the 2-GHz range getting junked. At that range, they'll probably be light on the RAM, but you can easily get a PC of that age and stick in 4GB RAM for well under $100.
The Linux Thread
- Thread starter Strider
- Start date
Just to say, i haven't had some time to try anything since the last post, had to do some RL stuff instead.
I think there's recently been a trend to change some distros to LCFE...LFX...er...whatever, some other window manager (i'm not a linux person), which doesn't use that much memory.
But yeah, the memory is a problem. Just checked, my FF3 here already uses 100 MB ram, that doesn't look too promising.
Maybe some mobile version will do it.
I think i saw that too, bu the download of the image scares me a bit.
Will have to check the HDD size of that old computer (and the computer i'm currently sitting on
).
I'm currently a student and probably in 2 months unemployed for i-have-no-idea-how-long, so spending money for something which is not really needed is not an option.
Besides that, that PC is not really meant to be used for something productive.
I just want to have some backup in case any of the other computers here has some problems, and maybe something to play around a bit with. Thought i might take some deeper views into linux...at least to deal a bit more with it. It's a bit embarrassing to be a computer scientist and having no real clue about linux
.
I might also want to change system at which i'm currently sitting (P3 866 Mhz, 256 MB RAM, 8 GB hardrive; no, NOT my gaming machine) to something else besides WinXP (yes, it's slow as hell), but not unless i have something else with which i can access the internet (...without getting in conflict with any of my family members, i mean; working machines are enough here, but they are not necessarily free).
If i wanted to have some real pain, i'd use the P133 behind me instead.
I think there's recently been a trend to change some distros to LCFE...LFX...er...whatever, some other window manager (i'm not a linux person), which doesn't use that much memory.
But yeah, the memory is a problem. Just checked, my FF3 here already uses 100 MB ram, that doesn't look too promising.
Maybe some mobile version will do it.
I think i saw that too, bu the download of the image scares me a bit.
Will have to check the HDD size of that old computer (and the computer i'm currently sitting on
).I'm currently a student and probably in 2 months unemployed for i-have-no-idea-how-long, so spending money for something which is not really needed is not an option.
Besides that, that PC is not really meant to be used for something productive.
I just want to have some backup in case any of the other computers here has some problems, and maybe something to play around a bit with. Thought i might take some deeper views into linux...at least to deal a bit more with it. It's a bit embarrassing to be a computer scientist and having no real clue about linux
.I might also want to change system at which i'm currently sitting (P3 866 Mhz, 256 MB RAM, 8 GB hardrive; no, NOT my gaming machine) to something else besides WinXP (yes, it's slow as hell), but not unless i have something else with which i can access the internet (...without getting in conflict with any of my family members, i mean
; working machines are enough here, but they are not necessarily free).If i wanted to have some real pain, i'd use the P133 behind me instead
.
'LXDE' - the Lightweight X11 Desktop Environment
It might do it for you. Lubuntu is one version, PCLinuxOS also has a version. I am sure there are others.
It might do it for you. Lubuntu is one version, PCLinuxOS also has a version. I am sure there are others.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,374
I've tried it on an old P3 and it was an absolute disaster once one tried to actually do something! It's sad but the bloat in the graphic environments and applications in Linux has increased so much in the last few years that Windows XP is actually a better option on old hardware! To make things worse the notion of "support" in Linux is "upgrade to the latest version", regardless of the suitability of that version, usually much changed. Stable long term support is one thing where Microsoft beats just about every other OS* hands down.
Well, there are the linuxes aimed at mobile computers, smartphones and other specialized applications. But even there the bloat is growing, and many are not even compiled and ready to use for x86. I guess we really are supposed to junk all old hardware. Among free systems I can only get the modern BSDs to run usable on that kind of hardware.
*except mainframes, proprietary Unixes, and old openVMS...
On the one hand, I can't blame Linux DE developers for writing apps and libraries that utilize the power of newer machines. After all, for a DE, the main thrust is that it can replace Windows on your desktop. If they don't offer similar functionality, they won't gain any new users, and might even lose what they have.
Still, Linux has always boasted of its ability to run on hardware that current versions of Windows chokes on. While that is still very much true (you can run LXDE, or XFCE, on a machine that won't even start Win7), the ultra-small, lightweight distros seem to have dropped by the wayside. I guess it's a symptom of the fact that the old, slow hardware is disappearing.
Still, Linux has always boasted of its ability to run on hardware that current versions of Windows chokes on. While that is still very much true (you can run LXDE, or XFCE, on a machine that won't even start Win7), the ultra-small, lightweight distros seem to have dropped by the wayside. I guess it's a symptom of the fact that the old, slow hardware is disappearing.
Yes, this is something that annoys me about Ubuntu. To some degree, it seems reasonably - if it's free, why not upgrade? But it is annoying when things change so much between version (e.g., going from Gnome to Unity, or a recent one that annoyed me was making it so that mounted Windows drives could no longer execute files). These aren't the kind of changes to make if you're only upgrading to get a bug fix. In some cases, fixes aren't released to the latest LTS version, which seems particularly odd.
Upgrading say from Windows XP to Vista/7 involves getting used to new things, but upgrades of that magnitude are done only once every several years. The various more frequent Windows updates are done without tinkering with the way things work.
I don't mind the "bloat" though. It's unclear whether this actually constitutes bloat in the first place. Taking advantage of modern hardware isn't bloat, and I would say a higher priority than supporting older systems (if there's demand, someone can always make a distribution targetted at older systems - maybe one exists already?)
The problem isn't really with the OS developers, more with the fanatics who ridicule Windows for being "bloated", whilst supporting something that also ends up with high system requirements. Apple fans were particularly guilty of this fallacy.
...in the meantime...
After going through the list, looking at different things and installing one, it seems that all the listed distros are rather OSes for embedded systems.
I have one on the machine now (...because other installs haven't worked yet...), but i guess surfing in the web will be a problem with an OS without GUI.
After going a bit around on the site, i think now their own search function is quite nice, it's also possible to sort the stuff out for old computers (click).
Tried Lubuntu first, since we talked about it, but it keeps freezing during the install
. Afterwards i wanted to install TinyMe, but the installer keeps saying "Can't deteced memory size", nothing else.
Maybe the HDD space is a problem...because i don't know how much there is. I eviscerated yesterday another old PC and i have now a HDD with 8 GB lying around, maybe i'll try this, after i tried my luck with some other of the menioned distros.
We'll see ...
After going through the list, looking at different things and installing one, it seems that all the listed distros are rather OSes for embedded systems.
I have one on the machine now (...because other installs haven't worked yet...), but i guess surfing in the web will be a problem with an OS without GUI.
After going a bit around on the site, i think now their own search function is quite nice, it's also possible to sort the stuff out for old computers (click).
Tried Lubuntu first, since we talked about it, but it keeps freezing during the install
. Afterwards i wanted to install TinyMe, but the installer keeps saying "Can't deteced memory size", nothing else.Maybe the HDD space is a problem...because i don't know how much there is. I eviscerated yesterday another old PC and i have now a HDD with 8 GB lying around, maybe i'll try this, after i tried my luck with some other of the menioned distros.
We'll see ...
Switched to Linux this August. Now running Ubuntu 11.10.
Some notes from a Linux newbie:
1) Linux is what you make of it. My experience of it has been that of rock-solid stability.
2) Some people run into issues and complain. Instead of complaining, read up on it and educate yourself on it. I don't see how anyone can expect anything without first being willing to invest time in learning something new.
3) I don't see myself going back to Windows.
However - I will say that Windows, Mac, and Linux ALL do GOOD WORK. There's really no reason to bash. Each has its issues. But overall my experience with Linux has been great.
Some notes from a Linux newbie:
1) Linux is what you make of it. My experience of it has been that of rock-solid stability.
2) Some people run into issues and complain. Instead of complaining, read up on it and educate yourself on it. I don't see how anyone can expect anything without first being willing to invest time in learning something new.
3) I don't see myself going back to Windows.
However - I will say that Windows, Mac, and Linux ALL do GOOD WORK. There's really no reason to bash. Each has its issues. But overall my experience with Linux has been great.
You're running Ubuntu 11.10, and your experience so far is great?!?
(I've heard nothing good about the Unity interface, or Gnome 3, for that matter. But then, I don't use Gnome anyway, so my perspective is admittedly skewed.)
You're running Ubuntu 11.10, and your experience so far is great?!?
(I've heard nothing good about the Unity interface, or Gnome 3, for that matter. But then, I don't use Gnome anyway, so my perspective is admittedly skewed.)
I've had a great experience so far with Ubuntu 11.10 server edition.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,374
I avoid Ubuntu server, in my experience they have more bugs in their packages and less care to patch old flaws than the debian people.
As for liking Unity...
I guess that it is conceivable that someone likes it - if they never tried other desktop environment!
As for liking Unity...
I guess that it is conceivable that someone likes it - if they never tried other desktop environment!
After a fair bit of distro and desktop hopping, I found something I'm happy with in FVWM on Arch Linux.
Arch gives one a minimal base system to build on, and I like the focus on simplicity and what I consider a practical compromise between convenience and control. The excellent documentation also helps.
FVWM is quite tweakable... just some things I would miss:
Buttons that act differently on any type of click I care to define. Context-sensitive mouse gestures. The ability to bind anything (including multiple actions) to anything. Thingies that swallow buttons, controls and whole applications while not forcing a particular form factor. Manual tiling. Easy interaction with simple scripts.
But the most important difference is the 'how', not the 'what'. I like the open-endedness of configuration; the question is less 'does it have feature x?' but 'how do I elegantly implement feature x?'.
I glad for the advances made in approachability for the average user... but I dislike the trend towards bloat and think light & flexible geek toys offer a better experience. We'd just need sensible and friendly defaults so people uninterested in tweaking can work or play in a pleasant environment straight away.
Arch gives one a minimal base system to build on, and I like the focus on simplicity and what I consider a practical compromise between convenience and control. The excellent documentation also helps.
FVWM is quite tweakable... just some things I would miss:
Buttons that act differently on any type of click I care to define. Context-sensitive mouse gestures. The ability to bind anything (including multiple actions) to anything. Thingies that swallow buttons, controls and whole applications while not forcing a particular form factor. Manual tiling. Easy interaction with simple scripts.
But the most important difference is the 'how', not the 'what'. I like the open-endedness of configuration; the question is less 'does it have feature x?' but 'how do I elegantly implement feature x?'.
I glad for the advances made in approachability for the average user... but I dislike the trend towards bloat and think light & flexible geek toys offer a better experience. We'd just need sensible and friendly defaults so people uninterested in tweaking can work or play in a pleasant environment straight away.
plarq
Crazy forever
I think Linux has a better market in the embedded devices, because they have better customization.
On my current PC, I run Debian 5.
On my current PC, I run Debian 5.
Till
Adventurer
I used to run AwesomeWM instead of GNOME2, but find myself liking Unity. Enough not to bother with setting up AwesomeWM again after upgrading to 11.10, at least.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 9,305
I've very much noticed that, too. In 2008 and early 2009 I could easily set up a KDE 3.5 system (KDE 3.5 being vintage last 2005) and get it working pretty much how I wanted it. By last year, however, it simply wasn't easily possible. The 3.5 distros disappeared, and using newer distros always came with a warning that things might break catastrophically. Whereas Windows 2000 was supported until last year, and XP will be until 2014. Even Windows ME had 6 years of support.
I'm still using my KDE 3.5 distro (PCLinuxOS MiniMe 2009.2 - you probably won't find it on the net since they pulled it after a few days), but have had no luck upgrading certain programs, including almost any music player. I would upgrade, but I rarely use it as is, and it does do everything I need it to, so it's easier for now to leave it as is than to set everything up anew.
You can always try Lynx for web surfing sans a GUI. It won't work for everything, but it's surprisingly capable considering.
From what I've seen, Arch is probably the best for getting a system that's pretty useable and still pretty light, but it also requires a lot of setup and knowledge. I tried it once but tried to skip some steps in the setup out of laziness and that was a mistake - it didn't work as smoothly as it should have because of that. Hence why I went with a light version of a regular distro - 8 GB of HDD space has been plenty for my VM, with an easy setup. But I also have a faster CPU and more RAM, so YMMV. Maybe Windows 2000?
Strider
In Retrospect
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2002
- Messages
- 8,984
You're running Ubuntu 11.10, and your experience so far is great?!?
(I've heard nothing good about the Unity interface, or Gnome 3, for that matter. But then, I don't use Gnome anyway, so my perspective is admittedly skewed.)
Ubuntu was a great introduction to linux. However the unity interface is pretty horrible. I had Ubuntu on my machine as a dual-boot until the first unity release. I have since dropped it entirely.
I currently run Mint as my primary and Fedora as a "work" distro.
Similar threads
