ardvark71,

I have just put MX-16 on a 11 year old IBM T60 with 2GB of RAM and an Intel T5600 CPU (rated at 1023).

It runs very sweetly.

You cannot go far wrong with installing MX-16.

It has a very logical, well presented installation process.

1 members found this post helpful.

I agree. MX-16 is outstanding. I came from using Manjaro which I have experienced the worst support experience from the Manjaro team. I install MX-16 and everything works. I didn't have to use the terminal or hear lame excuses why something didn't work. It works. Even the printer/scanner worked without needed to be set up because MX-16 set it up already. I have it on my desktop and my laptop. I love it.

I first started using MEPIS way back when all I had was a Dell Dimension 4100 (2003). It ran fine. Around 2006 when antiX came out, I used it on the Dell and it ran well. I've had a few models of Dell Latitude D600 series - I've used the D600, D610 and D620, either owning or installing antiX software on them, and as they aged, they aged very gracefully with antiX.

My son has the D600 now, and even with a hinge minimally connected between the display and the keyboard, it's still usable and I was surprised to hear that my son occasionally uses it even now. It's only had a few distributions on it, but we've run antiX, mostly with IceWM, and PCLinuxOS - (probably had KDE originally but I think we put a lightweight WM, probably IceWM, in order to lighten the load a bit, and we've used Puppy straight from CD; I can attest that the Dimension and Latitude work well.

I've also had a couple of HP models (don't have 'em any more and I can't remember offhand what they were, but probably something in their 5000 line; they always work with Linux and with the MEPIS/antiX family.

Finally, I have a more recent Dell Inspiron 5558 and it works great with MX and antiX, as well as Debian - Stable, Testing, and Sid have worked well; I'm sure that I've used Woody on the older ones and Wheezy and Stretch, as well as Sid, on the newer ones. I rarely have issues of any kind; I think I've reported 2-3 minor defects over the years and they've been resolved in 24-72 hours at the very most, and perhaps as little as a couple of hours when I was able to work directly with someone; fantastic developers and forum members. Hostile comments on their forum are non-existent in my experience, something I can't claim in many other places, including Debian and Ubuntu forums, though most forums are "well watched" and issues are "cleaned up well".

In short, there are few limitations to these distributions. The only ones I can think of are the limitation of Intel and AMD hardware - Debian has a broader range of hardware supported. Otherwise MX and antiX simplify the default installation and configuration, but don't impede "doing things the Debian way". Even the antiX choice to omit systemd can be easily modified, so simplicity, speed, flexibility, and a great community summarize the many advantages of the antiX group of distributions.