Which version should I run? (iMac G3

[0011235813]

You can't seriously tell me that you want to install Ubuntu on a 14 year old computer?!! I agree completely with the other poster, you need to buy a new PC (or Mac) . Because quite frankly, you're computer is unusable. The only thing that could work on a computer with 250 megs of RAM and s sub 1GHz processor is Puppy Linux, and even so I wouldn't try it. The minimum requirements for Ubuntu 32-bit are as follows;

minimum 512MB of RAM (fail)
1GHz+ unicore processor (fail)

Even with an installation like Lubuntu you still need at least 312MB of RAM and a 500MHz plus CPU. Even modern day smartphones have more resources than that.

EDIT: You can buy some affordable Linux PCs from the following:
https://www.system76.com
https://www.zareason.com
https://www.thinkpenguin.com
https://www.ohava.com

[Paddy Landau]

You can't seriously tell me that you want to install Ubuntu on a 14 year old computer?!!

Or you could try Bodhi. System requirements: 300MHz (pass), 128Mb RAM (pass).

[0011235813]

Or you could try Bodhi. System requirements: 300MHz (pass), 128Mb RAM (pass).

And when you open a light browser like Epiphany or Rekonq the system crashes. Very funny. I've tested Lubuntu 64-bit on my laptop and it'll suck about 350MB of RAM. Now, a 32-bit version would probably take up about 250MB. Since I have some applets like cryptkeeper and weather indicator, we can shave another 30MB off. That's still 220MB, and that still won't let you do much beside open a terminal. Now, oomphing up the swap to something like 90 will lower it to maybe 200MB, and even so you could have maximum one application running, and certainly no add-ons.

Frankly, the only OS that will run that thing is Android, or maybe W7P. Or maybe a BB, you get the picture.

Why not just spend 350 quid on a desktop unit that will give you at least usable performance? You could get a PC with 4GB of RAM, an atom and a 320GB HDD (7200rpm too).

[Paddy Landau]

Frankly, the only OS that will run that thing is Android...

Not a bad idea!
How to install Android.

Why not just spend 350 quid on a desktop unit...

Not everyone lives in a country where that can be considered cheap, and frankly these days many people can't afford it anyway.

[Lars Noodén]

Frankly, the only OS that will run that thing is Android

It's not an ARM, it's got a different processor, a G3, so unless he goes through the project of porting Android, it will have to be Ubuntu or Debian. The PPC's were very good. I guess they just couldn't be produced in large enough volumes for the new sales levels.

Tiny Core and Puppy seem not to support non-x86.

http://distrowatch.com/search.php?os...&status=Active

Debian or Lubuntu should work. OpenBSD is also an option.

Again, videos might not work but simple browsing and lean text processors should work just fine.

[0011235813]

It's not an ARM, it's got a different processor, a G3, so unless he goes through the project of porting Android, it will have to be Ubuntu or Debian. The PPC's were very good. I guess they just couldn't be produced in large enough volumes for the new sales levels.

Tiny Core and Puppy seem not to support non-x86.

http://distrowatch.com/search.php?os...&status=Active

Debian or Lubuntu should work. OpenBSD is also an option.

Again, videos might not work but simple browsing and lean text processors should work just fine.

I thought Android supports x86 and amd64 architectures? Ever heard of an "Ultrathin"?

But anyway, I think that with such low resources and with PCs now a days selling for as little as 200 pounds, it's really not worth trying to resurrect the dead.

PS: Debian supports i:386 architectures, so you could technically run it on an ARM.

[Lars Noodén]

I thought Android supports x86 and amd64 architectures? Ever heard of an "Ultrathin"?

But anyway, I think that with such low resources and with PCs now a days selling for as little as 200 pounds, it's really not worth trying to resurrect the dead.

PS: Debian supports i:386 architectures, so you could technically run it on an ARM.

It's a G3 which is of the PowerPC family. No x86 or ARM involved in any point in this thread. The following distros would work:

http://distrowatch.com/search.php?architecture=powerpc

I wish they still make PowerPC based desktop machines and notebooks.

[0011235813]

It's a G3 which is of the PowerPC family. No x86 or ARM involved in any point in this thread. The following distros would work:

http://distrowatch.com/search.php?architecture=powerpc

I wish they still make PowerPC based desktop machines and notebooks.

An architecture older than x86? And x86 has been around for quite a while... Wow!

But anyways, why is a PowerPC better than x86 or amd64?

[Lars Noodén]

I can't tell if you're pulling my leg. It's newer not older than x86. It uses less power and is faster. It's also hard to find information about it any more since the desktop (where all the attention is) is now about x86. x86 is not used because it's good, its used because it's cheap and ubiquitous (self-fulfilling there)

[0011235813]

I can't tell if you're pulling my leg. It's newer not older than x86. It uses less power and is faster. It's also hard to find information about it any more since the desktop (where all the attention is) is now about x86. x86 is not used because it's good, its used because it's cheap and ubiquitous (self-fulfilling there)

But is an application designed to run on x86 going to run on PowerPC? I think that's the main problem of any new computer architecture; programmers.