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 |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
|
 |
|
12-31-2009, 07:34 AM
|
#1
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Dec 2009
Posts: 8
Rep:
|
Can someone recommend a version of Linux that would run nicely on a quite old PC ?
My mother's computer runs Windows 95 and it's quite old. I wouldn't bother you with my question except that i can't seem to find the answer anywhere online: is there a version of Linux which would run significantly better than Windows 95 on the said computer if i was to acquire it?
I can get some exact information on the system properties later if that would be helpful.
Thanks.
|
|
|
12-31-2009, 07:39 AM
|
#2
|
LQ 5k Club
Registered: May 2001
Location: Belgium
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 8,529
|
|
|
|
12-31-2009, 07:39 AM
|
#3
|
Senior Member
Registered: Jul 2008
Location: /dev/null
Posts: 1,173
Rep: 
|
Hi a little more details on the spec would be helpful. Like CPU, RAM, etc.
|
|
|
12-31-2009, 08:30 AM
|
#4
|
Moderator
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Central Florida 20 minutes from Disney World
Distribution: SlackwareŽ
Posts: 13,979
|
Hi,
I just installed Slackware 13.0 x86_32 on a HP Ominibook 4100. The install was trimmed to suit the old lady but works great and snappy with 'XFCE'. The laptop memory is maxed out. I'll probably trim more to get a minimal system but she works for a remote terminal for now. I've got power machines for development so using it for a convenient remote terminal is better than setting and gathering dust.

The above links and others can be found at ' Slackware-Links'. More than just SlackwareŽ links!
|
|
|
12-31-2009, 08:40 AM
|
#5
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Dec 2009
Posts: 8
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Thanks for providing advice so fast 
I'll take some time to consider these tomorrow, and will come back with the system spec.
|
|
|
01-01-2010, 01:58 PM
|
#6
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Dec 2009
Posts: 8
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Apparently it runs the second release of Windows 95 (B), and this is probably the original operating system. It's an ex-government computer so I wouldn't know what year it's from.
It has 32.0 MB RAM, a CD-ROM drive and a floppy disk drive (so now I'm not sure what method of installation will work).
I can give more specific information if needed.
|
|
|
01-01-2010, 07:25 PM
|
#7
|
Moderator
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Central Florida 20 minutes from Disney World
Distribution: SlackwareŽ
Posts: 13,979
|
Hi,
I would increase the RAM since more is better for a GNU/Linux. You may need to go for a older version of any distribution because of the legacy hardware.

|
|
|
01-02-2010, 11:50 AM
|
#8
|
LQ Veteran
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: London
Distribution: PCLinuxOS, Salix
Posts: 6,248
|
If you want a GUI you may need more memory. The most suitable distros are
Deli Linux — it may work in 32MB (go to their forum and ask!)
Damn Small Linux — 24MB OK, though 64MB preferred
Puppy Linux — needs 64MB.
I have not considered Slackware because you sound as if you are new to Linux, and that's not for beginners. It also requires 64MB at the very least.
Last edited by DavidMcCann; 01-02-2010 at 11:54 AM.
|
|
|
01-02-2010, 12:14 PM
|
#9
|
Member
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Boynton Beach, FL
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 821
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by owlfish
Apparently it runs the second release of Windows 95 (B), and this is probably the original operating system. It's an ex-government computer so I wouldn't know what year it's from.
It has 32.0 MB RAM, a CD-ROM drive and a floppy disk drive (so now I'm not sure what method of installation will work).
I can give more specific information if needed.
|
Except for something like Puppy or Damn Small Linux that computer probably won't run Linux very well. I've found with older machines Windows 95/98 or Windows NT work the best.
The main problem is RAM. You really need 256MB to 512MB in order to run a modern Linux distro. Older computers are usually limited in the amount of RAM that can be installed. The motherboard and the RAM modules are not designed for the kinds of large RAM chips used now. It is a good idea to add as much RAM as you can but you may find that the modules are hard to find and expensive.
Some older computers have limited CD-ROM boot support. They may only boot CDs that use an emulated floppy image, rather than the no-emulation boot images on modern discs. You will have to try booting some Linux CDs to find out if they work.
Does the computer have an Ethernet port? Many older computers have no built-in Ethernet. You may need a USB "dongle" or some other Ethernet device to use broadband. You can get wired Ethernet adapters for around $10 and wireless adapters for around $20. There's no point in using a really expensive adapter since the computer won't keep up with a high-speed link.
Modern web browsers and the add-ons tend to use more memory than the old versions of Internet Explorer (3.0 and 4.0). The computer might not be practical to use on the Internet because of the RAM limitations.
Post more about what you want to do with the computer and you will get better recommendations for distros and software.
|
|
|
01-02-2010, 12:23 PM
|
#10
|
LQ Guru
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Fargo, ND
Distribution: SuSE AMD64
Posts: 15,733
|
I would second the notion of increasing the amount of ram you use. Using a lighter weight desktop environment will allow you to use less ram and still have a usable system. The desktop environment you choose will make the most difference. Go to their web sites. They may indicate what they require for memory.
|
|
|
01-02-2010, 08:30 PM
|
#11
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Dec 2009
Posts: 8
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Thank you again for all your advice
My ideas for the computer are in offline use. I'd like a place to securely write and store documents without being hacked or virused (the computer itself seems to have lost the ability to connect to the net anyway). I don't need it to run any browsers or high-power programs, just a word processing suite, so I had decided maybe it would be a good chance to experiment with one of the smaller Linux distros while I have a spare computer to work with.
I'm under the impression that a Linux system would be more stable than Windows 95 for the same processes because they have been produced recently. Sorry if I've misunderstood something by the way.
|
|
|
01-02-2010, 08:57 PM
|
#12
|
Member
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Manorville, New York, USA
Distribution: siduction, openSUSE Tumbleweed
Posts: 379
Rep:
|
AntiX Linux (An offshoot of Mepis) is a good lightweight linux made for older computers. I had it running successfully on an old IBM Thinkpad i1413 with minimal memory (256k) and HD space (4GB). This older laptop originally came with Windows 95. If all you need is a place to write and store documents, google "AntiX Mepis" and take a look.
|
|
|
01-03-2010, 04:53 PM
|
#13
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Dec 2009
Posts: 8
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Thanks 
AntiX sounds good; I'll look into that some more.
|
|
|
01-03-2010, 05:05 PM
|
#14
|
LQ Guru
Registered: Oct 2004
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 5,426
|
|
|
|
01-03-2010, 06:40 PM
|
#15
|
Member
Registered: Feb 2009
Location: central Michigan
Distribution: Puppy/Debian/Mandriva
Posts: 56
Rep:
|
While I have a lappy w/100M cpu and 40 whole M of ram that browses via ethernet or wirelessly using puppy linux [v1.0.8]. I should think that windows 95 or possibly 98se as a better choice, should be plenty for word processing chores. As for security w/o internet or other outside influences, all the security you should require is a lockable closet!!!
Good luck
RP
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:06 PM.
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|