Need a good OS for oldish laptop!

Hey guys!
Im new to this site, but im an old guy on brighthand and forums have helped me alot when it comes to PDA's so im sure you will provide me with some brilliant answers!

I have a Compaq Armada 1700 - old i know, but it runs XP pretty well!
It is pentium 2 (according to the Dxdiag) and has 228mb Ram.

Basically i want an OS that is stable, but also fast! If its free, thats another bonus!
I tried Ubuntu but i think i tried an older version that didnt work too well!

Can anyone give me any guidence when it comes to a stable OS that will work well with my machine?!
Thanks guys and dolls!
Heavy

 

Fluxbuntu is really worth a shot, its super lightweight, may require more linux and general computer knowledge though.
Linux Mint with Fluxbox might be good as well.

 

There's Xubuntu which uses a less intensive interface then Ubuntu (GNOME) or Kubuntu (KDE). There's Damn Small Linux, which is extremely low in terms of using system resources.

But, my recommendation would be Windows 2000 Pro if you want to stick with a Windows OS. It's rock solid stable and uses very little ram. A stripped down XP install wouldn't be too bad either.

I have a Pentium II 350Mhz "Deschutes" with 128MB of ram, and to be honest after messing with various Linux distros I ended up just installing Windows XP and stripping out all the crap in it. I got it down to using just 60MB of ram.

 

DSL. Low as hell requirements and runs smoothly on antique hardware. Don't expect it to do anything too fancy though. It's a pretty barebones distro.

 

To the OP: If you are going to consider a Windows OS, then you should ask a mod to move this to the Windows forum.
(Prevents Windows Bashing)

You should consider nliteing an XP or 2k disc, you can get 2k down to about 60MBs, and XP down to about 130.

 

I'd put Windows on a boat anchor....Linux deserves the good stuff Fluxbuntu would be my choice

 

I would suggest Fluxbuntu also, Xubuntu might be a little too heavy for it but if you feel fine with it after giving it a shot then go for it.

 

If you are a real man, you will just run the CLI on it. Haha, sorry I am just used to running linux on servers :/

 

Fluxbuntu should run well. Then Xubuntu. Both should run better than windows.

 

Thanks for all the info people!
I am trying Fluxbuntu so its downloading now!
I will let you know if its good or not!
Thanks!
Heavy

 

Good luck.
I installed debian on an old laptop with 128MB ram, and put on fluxbox on top of it (so something like fluxbuntu) and it runs well
For browsing, I'd recommend opera. Firefox seems a bit heavy on ram.

EDIT: Anyone know why a 8.04 version has not been released for fluxbuntu ?

 

hehe. well, I have one thing to say.
I have nlited an 2000 disk, and it runs on 16MBs RAM
But of course, its a little dated

Nice, I'd love to hear your thought .

 

They're working on the next 8.04 but I'm not exactly sure, probably just slow development.

 

Puppy Linux is also an option.

 

TinyMe would be good too.

 

Actually, that's not a bad idea. Back when I was getting started with Linux I had nothing but an 8 year old desktop. I really had trouble finding a balance I was happy with, either it was too slow, or it didn't have the level of integration I wanted.

I kind of stumbled upon it, but in deciding to roll my own environment using Arch, I spent a bit of time on the CLI. Then I decided to spend a month on the CLI exclusively, to teach myself more about the underpinnings and file manipulation and such.

In the end, I was much happier with a lower level of GUI integration because I was able to accomplish much more by hand than with the graphical tools.

 

I also think that Arch is the best. While all the lightweight windowing might help with RAM, compiling with Arch will help with the slow CPU.

 

Why would compiling help?

 

Makes it faster, thats why Gentoo's so fast.

 

Look out for the graphic installer on Fluxbuntu. I'd say go with the text installer. And keep in mind that Fluxbuntu hasn't been updated in a while.

I'd say install Xubuntu 8.04 and see how that runs. If it is still sluggish then install fluxbox desktop on it.

Anti-X, which is based on Mepis, is another good choice. Also you might have success with Wolvix 1.1 which is based on Slackware. It gives you the option of installing xcfe or flux I think.

Arch has been mentioned but you can also try Vector.

One of the big advantages with a more modern distro is increased support for wireless hardware.

 

The impression I got from my research was that compiling everything would just lead to a barely noticeable increase in performance.

If you want noticeable increase, then tweak the install to reduce the number of processes, run a lightweight window manger etc.

Sweet !! I would not have thought that possible. Just 16 MB huh ?


So what happened to that laptop u wanted to buy ?

 

But it also depends on what your machine is. If your machine is brand spanking new, maybe you won't notice much. But an old hardware like his should show a noticable increase. The optimization still has to catch-up to the hardware tech, but is good enough for old hardware.

 

Yep hehe, BSoDed if I went lower
Saving $

 

On the other hand, there's not as much optimization to do on an older architecture, and it takes for ever to compile on it.

 

That's true. I mean, the part about it's taking forever to compile on it.

 

You'd spend forever compiling on that kind of a system, avoid that. For a full-blown install I'd either use debian or arch but there are a lot of baseline distros out there.

 

I wonder how rpath would fare... has anyone tried it at all?

 

That is correct. Recompiling software to make a system faster is usually a waste of time.

 

Sidux!! You will get a very fast debian system. Free, of course. It is a complete OS and you have the choice of multiple window managers. It is backed by a very knowledgeable forum. It comes with the users manual installed and it uses rolling updates that you control, so no need to reinstall. Check it out.

 

Why Sidux over Debian ?

 

Easier to use! Best of all worlds IMHO. And besides, Sidux is debian, without the install hassles.

 

Doesn't Sidux install a ton of cruft by default?

 

Can you elaborate more on the differences between sidux and debian, and sidux and ubuntu ?

 

@ ethyrial: in a word, no.

@qwearetheborg: understand me when I say Sidux is Debian. It is not a fork of Debian like ubuntu, it is Debian, but can be installed from a live CD like the majority of linux OS's. It does not have proprietary software, but you can add the repos from Debian and Debian multimedia maintainers to get what you need. A real difference between Sidux and ubuntu is the need for the command line. You will have to use it. Why, to keep from breaking the OS on down the line. Sidux uses rolling releases, and the kernal and software can be updated at user discretion. So the latest upgrades are always available, as opposed to the frozen repos of ubuntu (until next release of course). There is risk involved as Sidux is Sid, which is Debian unstable. Unstable means in constant development. Sidux allows for a stable OS from an unstable enviroment. Neat hey!. Sometimes things may not work, but they are usually repaired within days if not hours.

The best way to understand all this is to install it. It can be placed on a usb stick, if you want. It can install to a little as 15GB on your hard disk. Give it a try.

 

@grok: I liked Sidux very much when I tried it...but they scared me off by being too strict on restricted drivers...am I wrong here?

@OP: Fish. Fish would operate a computer like that, attached to a long rope, very well at the bottom of a lake. j/k

 

@the zoid: what are referring to when you say restricted drivers?

 

Restricted drivers are proprietary software.

 

If you are referring to your video card drivers, wifi drivers and such, there is noproblem that i have personally found. Wifi drivers supported by Sidux can be found in their wiki on the Sidux web site. Straight forward instructions are given for them. If you will have no internet without your wirless, then download the appropriate .deb driver (they will direct you to it in the wiki) and put it on a usb drive. Install the driver according to the wiki while using the live cd. Use Ceni, an app found in the internet applications (they use KDE desktop) to finish your setup. After install your wireless will still work. If you are using an usb antanna then you will of course install it through ndiswrapper. If you upgrade the kernal you will have to reinstall the module, but instructions are given for that. You will be using a program called smxi for upgrading. Simple to use.

As far as video cards, just about all are supported. Two ways to install the drivers. Easiest is the final step in smxi upgrade. follow the steps as displayed. The other is using an installer called sgfx. Much the same as the one in smxi but for perhaps more thorough. my experience is limited here in that I have a built in gp in my laptop so no driver required. My 8 year old gateway 500 uses an nvidia gforce 2. So it gets a legacy driver. But there is support for the others and the forums can answer your questions. there is also an rc line for one on one help for every thing.

 

Yes, that's it! It was my intel 4965 driver in reference to which they claimed it couldn't go in the distro for some reason. Problem from my point of view, is that an update can kick you off line, so I tend to go with something that supports my wifi OTB.

 

You guys are seriously spoilt
My current SLED bloated distro takes 7 GB excluding swap space.

I remember back when I had to dual boot with a 4GB hard drive, and it was so spacious

 

yeah, I remember when my 4 MB of ram, and 100 MB hd machine would last me forever (1989)....LOL

 

Uhhh....

Let me define 'cruft' for you

 

another barebones distro is Puppy; I booted this on an Acer 5100 laptop once and EVERYTHING worked out of the box