LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
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 05-03-2015, 05:03 AM   #1
pucko1
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: May 2015
Location: Malmoe, SWEDEN
Distribution: Win7?
Posts: 1

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Question Which distro works best with 1024x600 netbook?


Hi,

Since most Win OS (after WinXP) have problems working with my MSI U100, 1024x600 display, I'd like to know if anybody has some advice on which Linux distros are likely to scale properly on a netbook like this.

The drivers for Win7, 8, 10 etc only permits 1024x768.

It seems I made a mistake when bought this kind of laptop five years ago, but on the other hand it's quite sturdy and really QUIET (big fan), so I'd like to keep it as long as possible.

Thank's!
 
Old 05-03-2015, 07:08 AM   #2
ardvark71
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Feb 2015
Location: Oregon, USA
Distribution: Lubuntu 14.04, Windows Vista
Posts: 5,185
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 694Reputation: 694Reputation: 694Reputation: 694Reputation: 694Reputation: 694
Hi...

Welcome to the forum

With a laptop that old, your other consideration is finding a distribution that will be light enough so as to not bring it to a crawl. I would guess that MSI had special graphics drivers to support the resolution you were used to.

While I'm not sure if their video drivers will support the resolution you desire, you can give either Debian or Zorin OS 9 Lite a try.

Let us know how it goes...

Regards...

Last edited by ardvark71; 05-03-2015 at 07:19 AM. Reason: Corrections and added information.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-03-2015, 09:16 AM   #3
allend
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Melbourne
Distribution: Slackware-current
Posts: 4,433

Rep: Reputation: 1353Reputation: 1353Reputation: 1353Reputation: 1353Reputation: 1353Reputation: 1353Reputation: 1353Reputation: 1353Reputation: 1353Reputation: 1353
I have an eMachines EM250 that has similar specs to your MSI U100 (N270 Atom CPU, 1GB RAM, 1024x600 pixel screen).
I am happily running Slackware-current, but any distribution should be OK. A lightweight window manager (I use WindowMaker) will provide much snappier performance. Using panning and scaling options to xrandr, I can navigate through larger screen resolutions.
Quote:
It seems I made a mistake when bought this kind of laptop five years ago
I do not think so. My EM250 services my e-mail and web surfing needs on my weekday commute, as well as allowing remote access to high resolution displays.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-03-2015, 09:32 AM   #4
maples
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2013
Location: IN, USA
Distribution: Arch, Debian Jessie
Posts: 810

Rep: Reputation: 264Reputation: 264Reputation: 264
From what I've found (mostly on Wikipedia), the MSI U100 was made in response to (and has similar specs) to Asus's Eee PCs.

I have a Eee PC 901 and use Arch on it. It's slow, but not unusable. Usually I just start a VNC connection to my desktop. I use a window manager (awesome) instead of a full desktop environment, which seems to help. Light-weight programs seem to run reasonably, as long as you have a little patience (mostly when you first open them).

As for drivers, the Arch Wiki page for the netbook indicates that you shouldn't run into any major issues.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-03-2015, 10:22 AM   #5
rokytnji
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Waaaaay out West Texas
Distribution: AntiX 15 , Slackel 14.1, ChromeOS
Posts: 4,707
Blog Entries: 19

Rep: Reputation: 1970Reputation: 1970Reputation: 1970Reputation: 1970Reputation: 1970Reputation: 1970Reputation: 1970Reputation: 1970Reputation: 1970Reputation: 1970Reputation: 1970
To add to the above posts

Code:
harry@antix1:~
$ inxi -G
Graphics:  Card: Intel Mobile 945GSE Express Integrated Graphics Controller
           Display Server: X.Org 1.16.4 drivers: intel (unloaded: fbdev,vesa)
           Resolution: 1024x600@60.00hz
           GLX Renderer: Mesa DRI Intel 945GME x86/MMX/SSE2
           GLX Version: 2.1 Mesa 10.3.2
harry@antix1:~
$ inxi -f
CPU:       Single core Intel Atom N270 (-HT-) cache: 512 KB 
           clock speeds: max: 1600 MHz 1: 1600 MHz 2: 1067 MHz
           CPU Flags: acpi aperfmperf apic arch_perfmon bts clflush cmov
           constant_tsc cx8 de ds_cpl dtes64 dtherm dts est fpu fxsr ht
           lahf_lm mca mce mmx monitor movbe msr mtrr nx pae pat pbe pdcm pebs
           pge pni sep ss sse sse2 ssse3 tm tm2 tsc vme xtpr
harry@antix1:~
$ cat /etc/lsb-release
DISTRIB_ID=antiX
DISTRIB_RELEASE=15
DISTRIB_CODENAME=Killah_P
DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="antiX 15"
harry@antix1:~
$ inxi -S
System:    Host: antix1 Kernel: 4.0.0-antix.1-486-smp i686 (32 bit)
           Desktop: IceWM 1.3.8+githubmod+20150412+960629d
           Distro: antiX-15-beta1-V_386-full Killah P 16 March 2015
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-03-2015, 05:01 PM   #6
taylorkh
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: North Carolina
Distribution: CentOS 6, CentOS 7 (with Mate), Ubuntu 16.04 Mate
Posts: 1,397

Rep: Reputation: 101Reputation: 101
I have an old Dell Latitude 2100. Atom processor, 2 GB RAM and a 60 GB SSD. It came with Ubuntu 9.04 which worked great. I upgraded to Ubuntu 10.04 when support for 9.04 ended and am currently running Ubuntu 12.04 with the Gnome 3 interface so it looks like a computer and not a smart phone. If I were going to update it I would probably go to Ubuntu Mate 14.04 which uses the Mate desktop which looks like the old Gnome 2 interface (sort of like XP). I like simple.

It works great and I have found that Ubuntu is smart enough to change the resolution automagically if I connect an external monitor. I plugged in my 22" monitor and it switched to 1680 x 1050. Certainly amazed me

Ken
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-03-2015, 05:37 PM   #7
273
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Distribution: Debian Sid AMD64, Raspbian Wheezy, various VMs
Posts: 6,017

Rep: Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622
I would suggest researching, just a little, the difference between a Linux distribution and a desktop environment. Then I'd suggest Lubuntu, Xubuntu or Linux Mint with XFCE or LXDE and expect you to know what I mean by that.
Apologies for coming across like a smart-alec teacher but research really does help with the enjoyment of Linux.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-04-2015, 02:21 AM   #8
ardvark71
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Feb 2015
Location: Oregon, USA
Distribution: Lubuntu 14.04, Windows Vista
Posts: 5,185
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 694Reputation: 694Reputation: 694Reputation: 694Reputation: 694Reputation: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by 273 View Post
I would suggest researching, just a little, the difference between a Linux distribution and a desktop environment.
Hi...

I'm not sure most new users of Linux would find installing a new windows manager (or desktop environment) easy in all cases. I didn't suggest Lubuntu in this case because I feel it needs more than 1GB of memory for satisfactory usage in its default state.

Regards...

Last edited by ardvark71; 05-04-2015 at 02:23 AM. Reason: Added information.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-04-2015, 06:01 AM   #9
273
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Distribution: Debian Sid AMD64, Raspbian Wheezy, various VMs
Posts: 6,017

Rep: Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardvark71 View Post
Hi...

I'm not sure most new users of Linux would find installing a new windows manager (or desktop environment) easy in all cases. I didn't suggest Lubuntu in this case because I feel it needs more than 1GB of memory for satisfactory usage in its default state.

Regards...
With even the tiniest amount of research installing a new window manager is trivially easy. It's about as easy as installing iTunes in Windows. You're seriously suggesting that doing a google search for "install LXDE Ubuntu" then opening a terminal and typing a line is that difficult?
If installing a different desktop manager is difficult to you then I suggest carrying out the research I mentioned in my earlier post.
Why do you insist upon trying to make Linux seem more difficult to install and use than it is? There are many reasons why people can find Linux difficult to install and use but installing a desktop manager is not one of them.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-04-2015, 05:50 PM   #10
ardvark71
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Feb 2015
Location: Oregon, USA
Distribution: Lubuntu 14.04, Windows Vista
Posts: 5,185
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 694Reputation: 694Reputation: 694Reputation: 694Reputation: 694Reputation: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by 273 View Post
With even the tiniest amount of research installing a new window manager is trivially easy. It's about as easy as installing iTunes in Windows. You're seriously suggesting that doing a google search for "install LXDE Ubuntu" then opening a terminal and typing a line is that difficult?
For you and I and perhaps the OP it would be easy but I've worked with people who would have no clue what we're talking about. Years ago, I did install another desktop on a copy of Ubuntu 5.10, however bringing it up and getting it to work was not as straightforward or simple.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 273 View Post
Why do you insist upon trying to make Linux seem more difficult to install and use than it is? There are many reasons why people can find Linux difficult to install and use but installing a desktop manager is not one of them.
That's not my intention but I do try and be upfront and honest about the difficulties new users may face. In some ways, working with Linux is more difficult than Windows, especially when things go wrong. I feel Linux distributions could do more to make things user friendly.

Regards...
 
Old 05-05-2015, 03:50 PM   #11
273
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Distribution: Debian Sid AMD64, Raspbian Wheezy, various VMs
Posts: 6,017

Rep: Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622Reputation: 1622
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardvark71 View Post
For you and I and perhaps the OP it would be easy but I've worked with people who would have no clue what we're talking about. Years ago, I did install another desktop on a copy of Ubuntu 5.10, however bringing it up and getting it to work was not as straightforward or simple.
For those people simply installing anything on an OS would be difficult though -- I mentioned iTunes on Windows because almost everyone installs something like it at some point. To install a new DE is as simple as google, click, type, click, click.
For comparison as a child my mother used to type in BASIC programs for me as she could touch-type -- I didn't have all that much idea of what was going on yet my mother who knew less about computers than I did managed very well typing in those programs.
If reading and repeating is difficult to one then, as I've mentioned before, just pay somebody to do things for one or in other words, why waste time reading about things at all when Apple, for example, will do things for you.

Last edited by 273; 05-05-2015 at 03:51 PM.
 
Old 05-06-2015, 05:28 PM   #12
ondoho
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,176

Rep: Reputation: 837Reputation: 837Reputation: 837Reputation: 837Reputation: 837Reputation: 837Reputation: 837
Quote:
Originally Posted by pucko1 View Post
It seems I made a mistake when bought this kind of laptop five years ago
well i bought a similar machine just a week ago, and i feel it's not a mistake at all.

i took a little time to install arch linux and now i'm just uber-happy with it.
http://iki.fi/dt/minilaptop.html
 
Old 05-08-2015, 02:17 PM   #13
fatmac
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2011
Location: Surrey/Hants Border, UK
Distribution: BSD & Linux - As long as they are Lightweight
Posts: 1,500

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Another happy netbook user here.
The only problem I ever encountered was with a broadcom wifi, but that soon got solved.
I've run Antix, MX, SliTaz, TinyCore, PC-BSD, & OpenBSD on mine at various times, all with only 1Gb ram, screen resolution would sometimes come up as 800x600, but could be changed. (Distro was using VESA, not Xorg video drivers.)
 
  


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
Change resolution to 1024x600 totenparty Incognito 9 06-24-2009 12:59 PM
1024x600 on Portege 300CT coujeaux Linux - Laptop and Netbook 6 10-24-2003 04:08 PM
XFree86 4.2.0 at 1024x600? j0ker Linux - Software 16 10-14-2002 03:45 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:25 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
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
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration