Will Xubuntu run on this?

[Dragonbite]

I just got a laptop.... MMX 233MHz and 64MB Ram. I cannot believe that even though it matches the MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS that anybody was actually USING Windows XP on it!! :shock: !

Anyway, I know there is Puppy and DSL for low-end machines but I am wondering if anybody has tried Xubuntu (or the Fluxbox one?) on something so low-spec?

I'm not overly keen on DSL and I haven't tried Puppy before but I want to make sure I have something "functional".

Is Arch and Vector a possibility?

[liquidfunk]

Try Elive.

Enlightenment is the shizz.

[az]

Xfce runs really slow on processors with no cache like the pentium I, Celeron or Via C3.

If it were actually a Pentium II 233, Xfce would run almost decently.

[Dragonbite]

Isn't there a Fluxbox-Ubuntu version?

I'm hoping to use this for web browsing and typing (maybe using Laytx?) but I want some GUI (I'm not a CLI-only person).

My "if all else fails" concept is to use it as a (wired) thin client that can either be tucked away somewhere when not in use, or can move it from room to room so long as I have a NIC line in the room (maybe run one out to the hammock.. as long as I'm careful when mowing the lawn ;) )

[santiagoward2000]

Xfce runs really slow on processors with no cache like the pentium I, Celeron or Via C3.

If it were actually a Pentium II 233, Xfce would run almost decently.

Actually I'm running Xubuntu Gusty on a 1.4Ghz Celeron and it runs great!

[fuscia]

puppy's pretty good and very fast. give it a try.

[K.Mandla]

I just got a laptop.... MMX 233MHz and 64MB Ram. I cannot believe that even though it matches the MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS that anybody was actually USING Windows XP on it!! :shock: !

Anyway, I know there is Puppy and DSL for low-end machines but I am wondering if anybody has tried Xubuntu (or the Fluxbox one?) on something so low-spec?

I'm not overly keen on DSL and I haven't tried Puppy before but I want to make sure I have something "functional".

Is Arch and Vector a possibility?
Arch will run on 686s and up; 586 and down don't have a real option under Arch-style distros. There is Lowarch (http://www.lowarch.org), but it has been abandoned.

I wouldn't put Xubuntu on it. I won't say any more than that; I complain too much sometimes.

Why not build up a minimal system with Ubuntu? Installation/LowMemorySystems

You'll get the best of both worlds and end up with a system that does what you want, how you want.

[HermanAB]

Even Puppy and DSL will have trouble running on that. It will make an awsome FreeDOS machine though...
;)

[-grubby]

Even Puppy and DSL will have trouble running on that. It will make an awsome FreeDOS machine though...
;)

it just so happens that I have a machine (laptop) just like that...and they fly!

[Sunflower1970]

Isn't there a Fluxbox-Ubuntu version?


Yes, but it's not quite out yet. Fluxbuntu...

[n3tfury]

Actually I'm running Xubuntu Gusty on a 1.4Mhz Celeron and it runs great!

and 64mb of RAM? prolly not.

[Dragonbite]

Why not build up a minimal system with Ubuntu? Installation/LowMemorySystems

You'll get the best of both worlds and end up with a system that does what you want, how you want.
Thanks! That's great information! It also brings up that I can try Debian minimal as well so at least there are 2 options to keep me away from compiling Gentoo!! (thank you thank you thank you...)


Yes, but it's not quite out yet. Fluxbuntu...
Fluxbuntu looks pretty darn good! Heck, didn't know about Claws but that looks pretty good too. Any idea when Fluxbuntu may become available?

[mikeypizano]

Actually I'm running Xubuntu Gusty on a 1.4Mhz Celeron and it runs great!

Wow I didn't know that Linux cound run on 1.4 MHZ!

:lolflag: I know you meant GHZ!

[Sunflower1970]

Fluxbuntu looks pretty darn good! Heck, didn't know about Claws but that looks pretty good too. Any idea when Fluxbuntu may become available?

Nope. People are on pins and needles for it to be out....Developers keep saying "when it's ready" I'm hoping it'll be out by the end of the week at least...

There's a thread around here somewhere talking about the excitement of having it out already...

[scrooge_74]

I just got a laptop.... MMX 233MHz and 64MB Ram. I cannot believe that even though it matches the MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS that anybody was actually USING Windows XP on it!! :shock: !

Anyway, I know there is Puppy and DSL for low-end machines but I am wondering if anybody has tried Xubuntu (or the Fluxbox one?) on something so low-spec?

I'm not overly keen on DSL and I haven't tried Puppy before but I want to make sure I have something "functional".

Is Arch and Vector a possibility?

Debian net install is another option

[perlluver]

On the Fluxbuntu site it says get and has this in the directory: CDImage-Archive-Sync-In-Progress. Not sure what that means but probably coming out soon?

[az]

Actually I'm running Xubuntu Gusty on a 1.4Mhz Celeron and it runs great!

Yeah. I meant a slow Celeron, like a 500Mhz. You wouldn't need to run a low-ressource desktop environment on a 1400 Mhz processor.

[santiagoward2000]

Wow I didn't know that Linux cound run on 1.4 MHZ!

:lolflag: I know you meant GHZ!

:oops: You're right!! I just edited it

[Dragonbite]

it just so happens that I have a machine (laptop) just like that...and they fly!
I tried DSL last night and wow, it was pretty good! I know once it has to access the chip it will slow down significantly but I wasn't grinding teeth waiting for something to happen.

Has anybody used Slackware, and what are your experiences on a low-spec machine?

It looks like it's orientated towards older machines (or more accepting?) with minimums i486 and 32MB Ram.

[wolfen69]

Even Puppy and DSL will have trouble running on that. It will make an awsome FreeDOS machine though...
;)

with 64ram, DSL will run good on it. i just installed it on a similar machine.

[apfsdsdu]

You could use it as an X terminal. Just install a minimal system with X and use a faster computer with XDMCP. If you can get it to boot from network, you won't have to install anything.

[eljoeb]

That computer is a little worse than one I tested xubuntu on... it didn't work. Try puppy.

[Dragonbite]

You could use it as an X terminal. Just install a minimal system with X and use a faster computer with XDMCP. If you can get it to boot from network, you won't have to install anything.
I'm still looking at being able to run it as a thin client so I don't even need ANY operating system working on it.

Then I'll still put an operating system on it for when I want to go unplugged, but when I need to do anything (that requires resources, like Gimp and OpenOffice) then I can go in as a thin client where the processing all goes on the server (2GHz P4) side instead.

Or I thought like you, with a simple kernel and X, and have it auto-connect to the Remote Desktop.

[Dragonbite]

Yes, but it's not quite out yet. Fluxbuntu...Argh.. don't know if it is still the case but I found this on the Fluxbuntu community forums (http://community.fluxbuntu.org/index.php?topic=102.0 (http://community.fluxbuntu.org/index.php?topic=102.0))


Presenting Fluxbuntu Linux nBuild1 Revision2 Desktop Edition (DE)



More Screenshots:
http://shots.fluxbuntu.org/nbuild1-rev2/

This is a Developmental Release!

Digg Story:
http://digg.com/linux_unix/Presenting_Fluxbuntu_Linux_nBuild1_Revision2_Deskt op_Edition_DE

Minimum (As Tested) Requirements:
CPU: Pentium II 233MHz
RAM: 96MB

Download (ISO: 309MB):

http://fluxbuntu.org/experience.php

Already Use Fluxbuntu? Be Counted:

http://ubuntucounter.geekosophical.net/
If this is hard and true, then it's more than what I've got (though not by much).

Also, I ran across this thread that talks about OSs for crappier computers:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=575456 (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=575456)