PDA

View Full Version : Can you reccomend...



Frak
February 9th, 2007, 01:55 PM
Can you reccomend a Linux Distro that runs good on computers designed to run WIN95, I have a friend that has a WIN95 computer that he's sick with, and I wanted to give it a second chance at life. Thanks for the response.


:popcorn:

AndyCooll
February 9th, 2007, 01:57 PM
There are plenty of "lighter" Linux distros. Damn Small Linux and Puppy spring to mind. Even Ubuntu will run on older pc's.

What spec is the pc?

:cool:

Frak
February 9th, 2007, 02:00 PM
There are plenty of "lighter" Linux distros. Damn Small Linux and Puppy spring to mind. Even Ubuntu will run on older pc's.

What spec is the pc?

:cool:
I don't know, I'd say like around what Windows 95 computers ran in the day, I seriously don't know, but I can ask.

AndyCooll
February 9th, 2007, 02:07 PM
I ask, because depending just what the spec is will make the difference as to what we recommend. Pentium II's and early Pentium III's with less than 192mb RAM and you're likely to require something like DSL, whereas something like my Toshiba Pentium III 700, 192mb RAM laptop which is quite old (and originally had Win95) is slow but runs Ubuntu quite nicely thankyou.

You might also want to have a look in this section of our forums for ideas: Other OS Talk (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=147)

:cool:

Jussi Kukkonen
February 9th, 2007, 03:12 PM
Windows 95 was (unfortunately) a long-lived OS, so this info doesn't tell very much about the computer... Is uggest you find out the system specs (especially amount of memory), and ask again here before wasting time trying distros blindly.

maxamillion
February 9th, 2007, 03:23 PM
debian etch base install, add packages as needed .... the ubuntu-base seems to be a tad on the heavy side for some older machines

laidback
February 9th, 2007, 04:37 PM
I run Ubuntu on older machines using AMD processors. I find that RAM, or lack of it, has been the main isue. I now have 768Mb on a socket A Athlon XP running at 1533MHZ and am extremely pleased with it. I upped the RAM by 512Mb, much better than before, and reset the CPU speed from within the BIOS. I'm certain that the previous owner had never had it running at full capacity.
I've tried a few older pc's that have been cast adrift as unfit, they've all run Ubuntu. Jusy give it a try, as long as you have disc space it must be worth a go. The oldest I have has a K6 processor, but it does work.

Good luck

Frak
February 9th, 2007, 11:22 PM
OK asked today, it was originally made to run MS-DOS in 1991 when it was manufacturered as a "Gaming Machine" at the time (I guess DOOM and Wolfenstien 3D counts as major gaming of the time...)

Brunellus
February 9th, 2007, 11:24 PM
some more specific hardware specs would be helpful.

You will be looking at a very cut-down distro: DamnSmallLinux would be a good candidate. I doubt the CD-ROM is going to be bootable, so you might need a boot floppy.

Frak
February 9th, 2007, 11:26 PM
some more specific hardware specs would be helpful.

You will be looking at a very cut-down distro: DamnSmallLinux would be a good candidate. I doubt the CD-ROM is going to be bootable, so you might need a boot floppy.
I tried DSL and Puppy on it today and they both booted, but I was looking for something I could install onto it.

Brunellus
February 9th, 2007, 11:28 PM
you will want to follow the directions on the LowMemorySystems page on the wiki. Know your hardware limits, and adjust your expectations down accordingly.

~LoKe
February 9th, 2007, 11:29 PM
You can't even tell us the specs? :( They're always listed somewhere in an operating system.

Load up the BIOS and look around for how much ram you have. That's what's really important.

Frak
February 9th, 2007, 11:30 PM
You can't even tell us the specs? :( They're always listed somewhere in an operating system.

Load up the BIOS and look around for how much ram you have. That's what's really important.
64MB of RAM, this guy really wants Linux on it, but also wants me to put my hands on it as little as possible...

Brunellus
February 9th, 2007, 11:36 PM
64MB of RAM, this guy really wants Linux on it, but also wants me to put my hands on it as little as possible...
DSL is installable. Please explain, patiently, to your friend that while "Linux" is installable on the computer, he'll have to live within the limits of his hardware. Linux is usable on old hardware, but it does not magically create more memory or processor ability.

So Fluxbox + Firefox ? just about doable.

KDE + KOffice? nope.

jimrz
February 9th, 2007, 11:41 PM
ubuntu runs fine on my old TP 600x - PIII 500 + 384 ram

Frak
February 9th, 2007, 11:47 PM
DSL is installable. Please explain, patiently, to your friend that while "Linux" is installable on the computer, he'll have to live within the limits of his hardware. Linux is usable on old hardware, but it does not magically create more memory or processor ability.

So Fluxbox + Firefox ? just about doable.

KDE + KOffice? nope.
OK I didn't know DSL could be installed, I'll use that, and tie my friend to a chair so he doesn't stop me from trying to make his computer a nuke, as he thinks I'm doing...:lolflag:

Brunellus
February 9th, 2007, 11:50 PM
OK I didn't know DSL could be installed, I'll use that, and tie my friend to a chair so he doesn't stop me from trying to make his computer a nuke, as he thinks I'm doing...:lolflag:
fluxbox/openbox/windowmaker make you look so much more hardcore it's not even funny. Non-Linux users tremble in fear.

~LoKe
February 10th, 2007, 12:10 AM
DSL will work fine. I suggest he go out and spend, like, maximum of $20-30 and get more ram. 384 seems to be the sweet spot for a functioning Ubuntu.

jeffc313
February 10th, 2007, 12:12 AM
I would do a debian base then apt-get icewm or openbox