My mother got a free laptop earlier this week. It used to run Win 98, kind of. So I tried to install Ubuntu 7.10 but got some errors (can't remember what they are) but in short this is what I'm working with:

1999 built IBM Thinkpad
128mb ram
CD Rom drive
10 gb hdd
Pentium 2 processor (somewhere around 800mb I think, maybe less)

The only thing this laptop needs to do is some word processing/spreadsheets (open office), some occasional web browsing (firefox preferred), and the ability to use a pin drive. Being for my mother, need a recommendation for something intuitive like Ubuntu.

An old laptop does not want a heavy desktop distro. Look at:

Absolute linux - slackware based with icewm desktop. Very nice - light fast and friendly- but (last I looked) does not include GUI login manager.

PCLinuxOS Minime - build your own minimalist distro. Minime provides the framework and you install what you need. Comes with cut-back KDE but lighter desktops can be installed

Archlinux - Some linux experience required to set it up, but arch really rocks! Fast flexible, build-your-own style distro.

PuppyLinux - very nice but only runs as root, which I am not comfortable with.

Avoid those which use a Xfxe desktop and claim to be 'light' but are not really, such as Xubuntu and Vector

And keep away from the heavyweights: Suse Mandriva Fedora Debian and Ubuntu

Thanks! I have used Linux for many years now, but I am by no means a guru, nor am I distro savvy.

If you want to try something Linux Based I would try the following
1. Damn Small Linux http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/
2. SliTaz http://www.slitaz.org/en/
If you want something Solaris Based then I would try
1. Milax http://www.milax.org/
Then if want to try something BSD based I would try the following
These OS's requires a lot more techinal knoweldge to use but is generally a lot smaller than some of the equivlant Linux OS's. There is a lot of online documentation on how to do this. FreeBSD and Netbsd(I think) uses something called ports which installes software from source. Compiling software from source takes a long time on most modern hardware so compiling software on a older laptop could take hours if not days.
1 FreeBSD http://www.freebsd.org/
2 NetBSD http://www.netbsd.org/



Out of all of the following Distros I have had the most Luck out of Damn Small Linux and FreeBSD. Also it doesn't matter what Distro you use,what matters is the window manager when I say that I mean chaning the window manager and finding less memory hungry apps . the following is rather small in memory
1. Fluxbox http://fluxbox.sourceforge.net/
2. JVM http://joewing.net/programs/jwm/
3. Afterstep http://www.afterstep.org/


Hope that helps
John

Ragnarok Warrior: the above is simply an opinion, not fact. Suse, Mandriva, Fedora, Debian, and Ubuntu are all good systems, especially due to a large amount of support.

Xfce desktop environments do cut down on size and increase speed, as far as a resource-hog goes, be weary of KDE as it does consume more than Gnome or Xfce.

The window manager may speed things up, but it is not fully responsible for your computer's speed, or lack thereof. Distributions such as Ubuntu and Freespire are known to be "bloated" and slow. Ubuntu's default environment is Gnome, Freespire's is KDE. However, Slackware is known to be quite fast and uses KDE as a default desktop. So yes, the system itself makes the most difference.

It doesn't matter if you put the engine of a golf cart engine into a Mustang body, the golf cart engine is still the same size, and too slow.

Agreed. All very good in their own way. I would just not want to use them on an old Thinkpad.
Yes, relative to Gnome and KDE. Not enough, in my opinion, for such an elderly laptop. I write from experience.

I use Ubuntu (currently 7.10) in both my laptop and my desktop, but they can handle them well and I am very pleased. The Thinkpad however, can't.

That is mostly the point. What I am trying to do is keep the golf cart engine in said golf cart.

The biggest problem is, however, that I am competent in Linux. While I may not be able to operate entirely from the command line, I've got a pretty good handle on it. My mother (read: not a clue what Linux even is) on the other hand, needs something intuitive to use, like Ubuntu.

I have used DSL and FreeBSD before, but being in a rather small shell of distros, I just wanted a few more options to try. I have never used anything Solaris based before, is it easy to use/setup?

Simplymepis antix

http://www.mepis.org/docs/en/index.p...m_Requirements
http://www.cheeplinux.com/product_in...roducts_id=584
http://www.linux.com/feature/115203
http://www.reviewlinux.com/?m=show&id=6903
http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8031025874.html

128 MB RAM are not enough for almost all standard desktop distributions.
DSL and puppy will run probably - as well as similar small ones.
I recently built a Gentoo system for a Thinkpad with PIII ~500 MHz and 192 MB RAM.
I used Xfce and a few Gnome dependencies (not the full Gnome) - it is running great and quite fast.
free says about 130 MB are used just after startup
Had this one only 128 MB like yours - it would probably not be much fun to work with.
So: DSL, puppy and the likes are the only real options.

dynebolic, dreamlinux....

have puppy installed on a compaq with same specs as yours,not to slow and is easy to use

I agree with you mostly here, but I wanted to add that I have an old Thinkpad running Debian and it is as quick as it was running Arch. I don't think Debian can be listed as a heavyweight or slow distrobution. Especially if you install your desktop manually - it can really fly.

However ...... running with 128MB it really would have to be DSL or Puppy IMHO

1 members found this post helpful.