LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 02-28-2005, 05:34 AM   #16
amosf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Distribution: Mandriva/Slack - KDE
Posts: 1,672

Rep: Reputation: 46

Yep. Linux is great on the old machines. As I say, I have a nice desktop box here that is just a P188MMX with 64meg ram. Runs quite okay... The swapping slows it down at times, but 128 would be a big help.
 
Old 02-28-2005, 09:56 AM   #17
DeusExLinux
Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Tampa, Fl
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 648

Rep: Reputation: 30
as others have said, I agree.. It will run.

But, I wouldn't put mandy on there. I have a 2.8 ghz system and Mandrake ran a bit slower than windows while loading programs (Open Office took about twenty seconds to load!!!!!!! As opposed to word at about 3 in Windows).

I switched to simplyMepis, which is a Debian based wonder, good for newbs (or people who don't want to configure everything all the time). It comes with good support for most hardware. If you like Gnome, you might also want to take a look at Ubuntu, it's rock solid, and pretty quick.

Vector is designed for older computers, so you could def. want to take a look into that.

Ultimately, I would recommend Debian, or Gentoo (although Gentoo's installer is quite a pain, it optimizes the system for YOU, gives you an infinate amount of choice, bit is a pain to install....and it would take quite a few hours for you to complile the needed programs, like X and whatever windowmanager you decided to use ..... XFCE...... )
 
Old 02-28-2005, 10:40 AM   #18
Basslord1124
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Ashland, KY
Distribution: Debian, Puppy/Slacko
Posts: 351

Rep: Reputation: 31
Yeah I forgot to mention...don't expect to run Tux Racer on that machine. My friend ran it on his which was almost the same specs as yours and it was choppy as hell. I run Fedora on a 1.5GHz AMD Athlon w/ 256MB RAM with a 32MB Video card....it handles Tux Racer fine but I think my CPU usages stays 100% all the time if I play it. But for basic word processing, net surfing you should be fine.
 
Old 02-28-2005, 12:19 PM   #19
Motown
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2003
Location: land of oz
Distribution: centos
Posts: 104

Rep: Reputation: 15
I preffer abiword over oo or koffice. Much lighter, and simple.
 
Old 02-28-2005, 03:44 PM   #20
amosf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Distribution: Mandriva/Slack - KDE
Posts: 1,672

Rep: Reputation: 46
Quote:
Originally posted by DeusExLinux

But, I wouldn't put mandy on there. I have a 2.8 ghz system and Mandrake ran a bit slower than windows while loading programs (Open Office took about twenty seconds to load!!!!!!! As opposed to word at about 3 in Windows).
Actually I've put Mandrak/KDEe on boxes right down to P150's and it runs fine with some gui tweaks to reduce load. Up til a few years ago my main desktop was a P120

But you are comparing apples and artichokes here. OOo is known to be slow to load, so how can you possibly compare loading OOo in linux to loading MSO in windows??? How about comparing loading OOo in both...

Also, as I have said many times, It is likely the linux desktop is doing a LOT more - services, gui enhancements, virtual desktops etc. And also likely that the linux desktop you are using is a CURRENT OS while the windows desktop is 4 YEARS OLD.

Comparisons like this are meaningless.
 
Old 02-28-2005, 08:23 PM   #21
DeusExLinux
Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Tampa, Fl
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 648

Rep: Reputation: 30
So how about this one:
Same machine
Linux, same kernel version (with a few mods here and there)
Same version of Open Office
Different distro
12 seconds for Mepis, 20 for Mandrake.

yes, I am aware that there a lot of serivces and whatnot running in Mandy, and that you really can't compare one OS to another, but when using a comparable program, it's nice to know the loadtimes.
 
Old 02-28-2005, 08:31 PM   #22
amosf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Distribution: Mandriva/Slack - KDE
Posts: 1,672

Rep: Reputation: 46
That's fine, as long as you are comparing apples to apples... Even if they are different varieties of apples... ie which is better. Granny smith or pink lady?

It comes down to what you want and need. With PC's as huge as they are now, more resources can be and are used for extra features, which is fine by me. The beauty of linux is you can use those resources as you wish. If you have limitted resources you can trim down the features or even use a totally different distro.
 
Old 02-28-2005, 08:41 PM   #23
chris318
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2005
Distribution: Slack
Posts: 122

Rep: Reputation: 18
I have a 2.8 ghz system and Mandrake ran a bit slower than windows while loading programs (Open Office took about twenty seconds to load!!!!!!! As opposed to word at about 3 in Windows).

Yeah Mandrake is definetely not a fast distro for sure. However, Comparing Open Office loading to Word is completely unfair. You see microsoft cheats. When windows boots it preloads a lot of the dll's and .exe in memory, along with word. Which is why it takes so long to boot and why it chews up your memory, that could be better used for things that you are actually doing.

For instance, it loads explorer and all it's dll into memory at boot. If you use opera or firefox, windows still will load explorer and all it's dll's at every boot weather you like it or not. That memory is basically just lost because windows will never give it back. Then eventually when you run out of memory, which doesn't take long in windows it starts to cache out that stuff to disk( which is why you hear the disk chugging all the time in windows). Then when you close that big app you were using windows caches it back in. All in the name of getting explorer, which one may never use to load fast. Linux on the other hand does not do that shi*&. If you wanted too, you could tell. Then you can compare the two.
 
Old 02-28-2005, 08:53 PM   #24
amosf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Distribution: Mandriva/Slack - KDE
Posts: 1,672

Rep: Reputation: 46
When comparing any distro it is also worth remembering that they both probably use the same kernel, the same libs and the same software. The only way for a distro to be slower than another, or use more ram or whatever, is for it to be doing more, running more stuff or have extra eyecandy or features... They are otherwise too much alike...
 
Old 02-28-2005, 08:57 PM   #25
DeusExLinux
Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Tampa, Fl
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 648

Rep: Reputation: 30
How does one cache a program in Linux? wasn't aware one could do that.. sounds pretty cool.

And also, amosf, you are 100% correct. it isn't fair to compare the two. Didn't mean to come across as a jerk or anything. I also didn't mean to come across as saying that Mandy sucks, beleive me, it doesn't. It's a great distro, with wonderful support. Utimately, I felt I like a Debian (based) system better, but, that's me. Linux is all about choice, why else would there be enough distro's where you could try one everyday for the next 2 years and never try the same one twice.

When it comes down to it, I use Linux because of A. The community (which is great), and B. The choices!!!. The stability is great, adn the security is a good thing too, but I really enjoy tinkering with my system, and streamlining it to the best of my ability (always reading and looking up new things).

So, once again, sorry if I came across as short.
 
Old 02-28-2005, 09:31 PM   #26
amosf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Distribution: Mandriva/Slack - KDE
Posts: 1,672

Rep: Reputation: 46
I don't mind the comparison. The good thing is that we have the various distros and some are heavily loaded with features and slower while others are leaner and faster. I was just clarifying. I don't deny mandrake is on the slow side, but I use it as it has a lot of features and nice easy gui tools - even tho I don't mind CLI. I also compile generic kernels with mandrake as the mdk ones can be unstable on some hardware. Each distro has it's good and bad side and I only stick with mandrake due to being used to it after many years...

As you say, it's the CHOICE that's the important thing!
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Which Linux flavour suits best for AS/400 IBM server ?? itsjvivek Linux - General 1 07-10-2006 08:48 AM
Linux AS/400 rcainc Linux - Hardware 1 08-24-2005 07:18 AM
pentium 2 - 400 mhz piva.francesco Linux - Hardware 2 04-16-2005 06:34 AM
best video card and distro for old dual Pentium Pro/II 400 bshiro Linux - Hardware 3 09-04-2004 10:21 AM
AS/400 shares on Linux Chris Gelijkens Linux - Networking 0 10-01-2003 11:14 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:09 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration