Most all modern processors are i686 so Meerkat excluding <686 won't matter much

[cariboo]

Merged two threads on essentially the same subject.

[Bachstelze]

EDIT: Apparently the Geode LX800 is only i586.

I even have an i486!

http://www.amd.com/epd/processors/4....m/24.lansc520/

(Yes, despite its name, the AMD 5x86 series of CPUs is actually 486.)

[squilookle]

I believe Arch is aimed at i686, so looking at how Arch users get on would potentially be a good measure of whether the switch would be a problem.

My 5 year old Toshiba laptop ran Arch absolutely fine. It struggled with the default Ubuntu install for quite some time due to the amount of memory it needed, regardless of the Arch. (When I say struggled: I mean it wasnt the fastest. By many peoples standards it probably would have been fine... but there you go)

[Bachstelze]

firas@elise:~$ cat /etc/issue
Ubuntu 10.04 LTS \n \l

firas@elise:~$ cat /proc/cpuinfo 
processor       : 0
vendor_id       : Geode by NSC
cpu family      : 5
model           : 9
model name      : Unknown
stepping        : 1
cpu MHz         : 233.299
fdiv_bug        : no
hlt_bug         : no
f00f_bug        : no
coma_bug        : no
fpu             : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level     : 2
wp              : yes
flags           : fpu tsc msr cx8 cmov mmx cxmmx
bogomips        : 466.59
clflush size    : 32

Oh, well... Elise will lose her "Powered by Ubuntu" sticker.

[sidzen]

Slackware, here I come!

[K.Mandla]

When I saw this article I was worried that I wouldn't be able to help my friends w/ older <686 machines run Ubuntu. ...

I was only the least bit concerned when I read that. Anyone who has an original 586 machine, meaning one from 10 years ago, probably doesn't really consider Ubuntu to be a strong solution for using it.

There are other, better ultralight operating systems for hardware of that age. Ubuntu isn't the best thing for everybody or everything.

I believe Arch is aimed at i686, so looking at how Arch users get on would potentially be a good measure of whether the switch would be a problem. ...

On the other hand, there is an Arch project for i586s, which gets some attention. So it may be that ferocious 586-fans take their own approach to the Ubuntu machine.

[Dragonbite]

Hey, as lont as my PIIIs (servers) and up (P4, Centrino, etc.) are supported I won't notice a difference.

Now if they also fix the Intel 855 GPU issue, then I'll be ecstatic! (the patch is good, but not perfect)

[doorknob60]

Fine with me. My only i586 PC is a Laptop from 1999 running Debian, barely. Ubuntu would be an awful idea on that old thing, probably wouldn't even fit on the HD. And the CD drive is busted (and I don't think I can boot from USB lol), so I wouldn't be able to install it anyway. I do wish Arch would work though (I know about Arch spinoffs for i586, but it's not worth the trouble, especially without a CD drive. And I got a new laptop too )

[Shining Arcanine]

Major distributions can support different versions of x86 as separate platforms like they support different versions of ARM as separate platforms. There is no need to lump the i686 people into the i386 group or eliminate the i386 group for the sake of the i686 group.

[Bachstelze]

I was only the least bit concerned when I read that. Anyone who has an original 586 machine, meaning one from 10 years ago, probably doesn't really consider Ubuntu to be a strong solution for using it.

1) As said previously, i586 processors are still produced today for embedded devices.

2) Ubuntu is just as good for this as any other distro. I think it's a shame, I like Ubuntu, the machine works perfectly with it, but I'm going to have to switch it eventually. I wonder what benefit they indend to gain from that... i686 "optimizations"? Come on now, the handful of applications that would really benefit from that are those doing some heavy computations, no one probably uses 32-bit machines anymore for that.