Thinking of using on an old 1998 laptop PC that presently has a
Pentium II, with a built in generic Dell modem, USB mouse, 512k RAM
(!), DVD/CD, running Windows XP fine now (very slow), some distro of
Linux.

In another thread I got into a debate about what's the best distro for
a simple new Acer machine ($300) that uses the Atom uP from Intel.
But in this thread I just want to know if *any* Linux distro will work
on such *old* hardware.

The target user's needs are VERY minimal. Very very very. Here is
what she needs:

dial-up modem for internet access. Mouse. Maybe a printer (maybe
not). Support at *any* resolution for the Dell graphics card (forget
the name--it's pretty generic though). No need for an email client--
she keeps all her emails at Yahoo, all her docs at Google apps, etc.
Everything online. No need for sound. The machine has USB but this
girl does not even know what a memory stick is. So only the USB mouse
matters.

Anybody think I can use Linux on this old setup, and, if which one?
Not even a 'best' OS --just one that will last five years or so and
allow surfing the net and maybe printing a document on a printer
locally?

RL

On 02/06/2010 14:36, RayLopez99 wrote:
> Thinking of using on an old 1998 laptop PC that presently has a
> Pentium II, with a built in generic Dell modem, USB mouse, 512k RAM
> (!), DVD/CD, running Windows XP fine now (very slow), some distro of
> Linux.
>

I take it you mean 512 MB ram? Otherwise the machine could barely run
DOS...

> In another thread I got into a debate about what's the best distro for
> a simple new Acer machine ($300) that uses the Atom uP from Intel.
> But in this thread I just want to know if *any* Linux distro will work
> on such *old* hardware.
>
> The target user's needs are VERY minimal. Very very very. Here is
> what she needs:
>
> dial-up modem for internet access. Mouse. Maybe a printer (maybe
> not). Support at *any* resolution for the Dell graphics card (forget
> the name--it's pretty generic though). No need for an email client--
> she keeps all her emails at Yahoo, all her docs at Google apps, etc.
> Everything online. No need for sound. The machine has USB but this
> girl does not even know what a memory stick is. So only the USB mouse
> matters.
>
> Anybody think I can use Linux on this old setup, and, if which one?
> Not even a 'best' OS --just one that will last five years or so and
> allow surfing the net and maybe printing a document on a printer
> locally?
>

Have you looked at www.distrowatch.org? They have lists of distros in
various categories, including those for small systems. Personally, I'd
install a minimal Debian system, add a lightweight desktop (lxde seems
popular) and just the applications I need. But for a more ready-to-run
system you could try lubuntu (Ubuntu with lxde).

It was not long ago that I installed Debian on a Pentium 90 MHz with 64
MB ram. It was a server, so no X or gui, but it runs fine on that hardware.

RayLopez99 wrote:
> Thinking of using on an old 1998 laptop PC that presently has a
> Pentium II, with a built in generic Dell modem, USB mouse, 512k RAM
> (!), DVD/CD, running Windows XP fine now (very slow), some distro of
> Linux.
>

Do you mean 512kbyte or 512Mbtye?
I honestly dont think I have run X on less that 4Mbytes successfully,
and that wasn't Linux.


I cant remember the ast time I saw a PeeCee with under 640K RAM.

But it was an 80286, not a Pentium

If its 512Mbyte, its totally adequate and just about any distro will
suit the machine.



> In another thread I got into a debate about what's the best distro for
> a simple new Acer machine ($300) that uses the Atom uP from Intel.
> But in this thread I just want to know if *any* Linux distro will work
> on such *old* hardware.
>
> The target user's needs are VERY minimal. Very very very. Here is
> what she needs:
>
> dial-up modem for internet access. Mouse. Maybe a printer (maybe
> not). Support at *any* resolution for the Dell graphics card (forget
> the name--it's pretty generic though).

If its using an LCD screen you need the card to drive at the LCD
resolution ONLY.


> No need for an email client--
> she keeps all her emails at Yahoo, all her docs at Google apps, etc.
> Everything online. No need for sound. The machine has USB but this
> girl does not even know what a memory stick is. So only the USB mouse
> matters.
>
> Anybody think I can use Linux on this old setup, and, if which one?
> Not even a 'best' OS --just one that will last five years or so and
> allow surfing the net and maybe printing a document on a printer
> locally?
>

Mint/debian/ubuntu etc etc.

In the end, they differ more in how bleeding edge and unstable they are.
You don't need any of that. So pick something boring and stable, like
'Debian stable'

End users won't notice much difference once set up, if any. Theres more
difference user wise between KDE and Gnome desktops, than the distros
underneath.

I've not set up a dial-up modem on Linux to date.

Well I sort of did, but it was a 3G dongle. That's the nastiest part.
The rest is bog standard.

You will need about 20Gigs of disk at most for all this.

If at all possible set it up where you have a broadband connection
initially, so it can update itself.

There may be issues in that you may need to REMOVE a bunch of stuff that
relies on te internet, like ntp etc.

None of this is distro specific though. Juts pick one, and tune it till
it works, hand it over, and forget about it for 5 years.

A friend did juts that when his daughter left for Uni. Old 256M Ram
laptop. It got SUSE linux on it. never faltered. When it died she wanted
another one just like the old one....

> RL

On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 05:36:54 -0700, RayLopez99 typed this message:

> Thinking of using on an old 1998 laptop PC that presently has a Pentium
> II, with a built in generic Dell modem, USB mouse, 512k RAM (!), DVD/CD,
> running Windows XP fine now (very slow), some distro of Linux.
>
> In another thread I got into a debate about what's the best distro for a
> simple new Acer machine ($300) that uses the Atom uP from Intel. But in
> this thread I just want to know if *any* Linux distro will work on such
> *old* hardware.
>
> The target user's needs are VERY minimal. Very very very. Here is what
> she needs:
>
> dial-up modem for internet access. Mouse. Maybe a printer (maybe not).
> Support at *any* resolution for the Dell graphics card (forget the
> name--it's pretty generic though). No need for an email client-- she
> keeps all her emails at Yahoo, all her docs at Google apps, etc.
> Everything online. No need for sound. The machine has USB but this
> girl does not even know what a memory stick is. So only the USB mouse
> matters.
>
> Anybody think I can use Linux on this old setup, and, if which one? Not
> even a 'best' OS --just one that will last five years or so and allow
> surfing the net and maybe printing a document on a printer locally?
>
> RL

Since you're running WinXp most distros should run on that laptop but
check the requirements, start at www.distrowatch.org as suggested. I've
been impressed with LinuxMint, it contains most of the applications you
need to replace an WinXp machine, ie, video player, folder.sharing, web
browser, etc.





--
(E-Mail Removed)

On 06/02/2010 05:36 AM, RayLopez99 wrote:
> Thinking of using on an old 1998 laptop PC that presently has a
> Pentium II, with a built in generic Dell modem, USB mouse, 512k RAM
> (!), DVD/CD, running Windows XP fine now (very slow), some distro of
> Linux.
>
If you are correct in saying 512 KiB or half a megabyte
I doubt you could run much.

If you have 512 MiB though you might run quite well
with a number of distros. SliTaz 1.0 is very small and requires
a net connection to get the packages someone might want
to run.


> In another thread I got into a debate about what's the best distro for
> a simple new Acer machine ($300) that uses the Atom uP from Intel.
> But in this thread I just want to know if *any* Linux distro will work
> on such *old* hardware.
>
> The target user's needs are VERY minimal. Very very very. Here is
> what she needs:
>
> dial-up modem for internet access. Mouse. Maybe a printer (maybe
> not). Support at *any* resolution for the Dell graphics card (forget
> the name--it's pretty generic though). No need for an email client--
> she keeps all her emails at Yahoo, all her docs at Google apps, etc.
> Everything online. No need for sound. The machine has USB but this
> girl does not even know what a memory stick is. So only the USB mouse
> matters.

Try Knoppix 6.1 or 6.2 if you have that 512 megabytes of
memory. You will have to read some documentation so that
you can invoke the install-script at boot of the CD when it
comes up with the terminal interface.
If you had enough memory you could run in memory
and save preferences to a file on the hard disk.

On a Pentium 3 at 700 MHz and 384 MiB of ram I got
Mandriva 2008.1 running nicely with a simple reduction in the
number of virtual desktops to one (1). This was a Dell Inspiron
4000 with only 8 megabytes of video ram which had
Windoze XP installed and I forget the fixed disk size but it
had enough to do a split and setup a dual boot.
Before the Mandriva I ran a old Knoppix on it.


> Anybody think I can use Linux on this old setup, and, if which one?
> Not even a 'best' OS --just one that will last five years or so and
> allow surfing the net and maybe printing a document on a printer
> locally?

At that age the problem is with the physical components and the
5 year limit.

>
> RL


Later
bliss

On 6/2/2010 7:36 AM, RayLopez99 wrote:
> Thinking of using on an old 1998 laptop PC that presently has a
> Pentium II, with a built in generic Dell modem, USB mouse, 512k RAM
> (!), DVD/CD, running Windows XP fine now (very slow), some distro of
> Linux.
>
> In another thread I got into a debate about what's the best distro for
> a simple new Acer machine ($300) that uses the Atom uP from Intel.
> But in this thread I just want to know if *any* Linux distro will work
> on such *old* hardware.
>
> The target user's needs are VERY minimal. Very very very. Here is
> what she needs:
>
> dial-up modem for internet access. Mouse. Maybe a printer (maybe
> not). Support at *any* resolution for the Dell graphics card (forget
> the name--it's pretty generic though). No need for an email client--
> she keeps all her emails at Yahoo, all her docs at Google apps, etc.
> Everything online. No need for sound. The machine has USB but this
> girl does not even know what a memory stick is. So only the USB mouse
> matters.
>
> Anybody think I can use Linux on this old setup, and, if which one?
> Not even a 'best' OS --just one that will last five years or so and
> allow surfing the net and maybe printing a document on a printer
> locally?
>
> RL
You might want to check out the list of ISO images available at
http://www.livecdlist.com/ .

Burn a couple to disk that look promising and give them a run directly
from the CD or DVD and check them out. Most should work just fine with
just about any hardware capable of running XP. Find what you like and
then you can install it to the hard drive.

I'd start with a download of the Puppy Linux. It's small, easy to
download and will run from a CD which you burn, don't waste a DVD as it
is a really small download. I also have a copy of it running from a
flash drive with no problems, on computers that support booting from
USB. Great for troubleshooting computers that have a suspected CD/DVD
problem. The user interface is easy to learn which helps when trying to
train someone who barely knows the difference between a computer mouse
and the fuzzy kind...

UNetbootin is a really easy way to load many distributions onto flash
drives should someone wish to do so.

http://unetbootin.sourceforge.net/

It really makes it easy to download the ISO directly to the flash drive
from the internet or from an ISO you have already downloaded. When used
properly it makes the ISO bootable directly from the flash drive.

Burning a distribution to flash saves on CD/DVD's until you find one
that you like. Then you can burn a CD\DVD version if you need one.

Is there a Linux distro that is particularly good
for media player use - DVD, .FLV, MP3 etc?

On Jun 2, 4:32*pm, David Brown <da...@westcontrol.removethisbit.com>
wrote:
> On 02/06/2010 14:36, RayLopez99 wrote:
>
> > Thinking of using on an old 1998 laptop PC that presently has a
> > Pentium II, with a built in generic Dell modem, USB mouse, 512k RAM
> > (!), DVD/CD, running Windows XP fine now (very slow), some distro of
> > Linux.
>
> I take it you mean 512 MB ram? *Otherwise the machine could barely run
> DOS...
>

Yes, it was 512 MB ram. Or it may be 256 MB. In any event, it's
enough to run Windows XP, which is pretty demanding, so Linux should
(I hope) run fine...but which distro?

BTW it has a 100 GB hard drive.

> Have you looked atwww.distrowatch.org?*They have lists of distros in
> various categories, including those for small systems.

Where? I looked at the home page. Can you point me to where I can
find a search engine there to enter parameters such as HD, RAM, etc?


RL

On Jun 2, 5:02*pm, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid>
wrote:
> Do you mean 512kbyte or 512Mbtye?

MB, sorry.

> If its 512Mbyte, its totally adequate and just about any distro will
> suit the machine.

But which one?

> If its using an LCD screen you need the card to drive at the LCD
> resolution ONLY.

Uh-oh. This is going to be interesting...the Dell graphics card--it's
an Inspiron series from Dell if memory serves...might be hard to
replicate? But Windows XP recognized it...no problem.


> > Anybody think I can use Linux on this old setup, and, if which one?
> > Not even a 'best' OS --just one that will last five years or so and
> > allow surfing the net and maybe printing a document on a printer
> > locally?
>
> Mint/debian/ubuntu etc etc.

No etc etc please. Pick one. Point me (please) to a link. Do you want
to win a die hard Windows fan to Linux or not? Etc etc my ass. Hey no
offense, but I code and I've found that if I say "etc etc" it may be
obvious to me, but to a newbie it is confusing. Why not "Damn Small
Linux" then? Boot from the CD? I did that once on a desktop Pentium a
couple of years ago, and the damn DSL did not recognize my hardware...

>
> In the end, they differ more in how bleeding edge and unstable they are.
> You don't need any of that. So pick something boring and stable, like
> 'Debian stable'

OK...let me go to Distrowatch and enter these key words...hold on
please...OK, back. No hits. Googled it, and got a bunch of stuff
about how "stable" Debian was...no help there.

>
> End users won't notice much difference once set up, if any. Theres more
> difference user wise between KDE and Gnome desktops, than the distros
> underneath.
>
> I've not set up a dial-up modem on Linux to date.
>
> Well I sort of did, but it was a 3G dongle. That's the nastiest part.
> The rest is bog standard.

Nasty is a dialup? Another reason I fear Linux, since Windows XP is
recognizing the Dell built-in internal modem no problem. Why trash
WIndows for Linux if Windows is working? This is playing in my mind
now...


>
> You will need about 20Gigs of disk at most for all this.

Got that. It's got a 100GB internal HD.

>
> If at all possible set it up where you have a broadband connection
> initially, so it can update itself.
>
> There may be issues in that you may need to REMOVE a bunch of stuff that
> relies on te internet, like ntp etc.

Interesting....more hassles.

>
> None of this is distro specific though. Juts pick one, and tune it till
> it works, hand it over, and forget about it for 5 years.

Right. And if you have a multi-stage rocket, fuel it, man it, and fly
it to the moon. Check out the cool moon rocks there...don't forget to
take pictures and bring some moon dust back with you. Etc etc.

>
> A friend did juts that when his daughter left for Uni. Old 256M Ram
> laptop. It got SUSE linux on it. never faltered. When it died she wanted
> another one just like the old one....

Sounds good...in theory.

This Linux idea (it's the third time I've toyed with Linux--once in
the 1990s I actually had NT dual booted with RHAT Linux!) is starting
to scare me...maybe I should back off, unless I get more and better
info.

RL

On Jun 2, 7:52*pm, noi ance <n...@siam.com> wrote:
> Since you're running WinXp most distros should run on that laptop but
> check the requirements, start atwww.distrowatch.orgas suggested. * I've
> been impressed with LinuxMint, it contains most of the applications you
> need to replace an WinXp machine, ie, video player, folder.sharing, web
> browser, etc.

This is not looking too good for me...I think I have 512 MB, but might
have as little as 256MB RAM, but in either event KDE is too slow in
LinuxMint says their forum. Maybe your hardware was better?

One poster* suggests "Freespire" for low RAM systems--ever heard of
it?

RL

http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=628

3. How little memory is need to run Linux Mint?
It works fine on my machine with 512MB RAM.

well im not much help but i can say on 450mhz amd k6-2 with 393MB ram
gnome is really slow.

i seem to have plenty of ram... i average about 150MB of used ram
without anything but the distro running. with firefox gaim and the
distro i use about 250MB ram.

the funny thing it seems is i recently tried freespire which uses KDE
as the desktop and it seems as fast to me as ubuntu edgy with xfce4
desktop.

my overall opinion with a 450MHz k6-2 is that its too slow for decent
daily use using gnome. using xfce4 its decent and runs well.

//
* Freespire 2.0 begins with Ubuntu (Version 7.04) as its baseline and
then adds software from six broad categories, further expanding
Freespire's capabilities: