Well my XP is running extremely slow on my old computer. I am searching for some good Linux Distros but they seem confusing. I'm confused because I need gnome or kde which is confusing. I was hoping you can choose one for me. The computer is just for minor we browsing, not much more. It has a 667Mhz processor and 384MB Ram. I want to install it on the HDD too.

If you know nothing about Gnome or KDE then I suggest you pick the one that comes as a default on whatever distribution you choose. Installing the non-default desktop requires some knowledge of how to configure the desktop.

I recommend Ubuntu for your first install. You can usually take all of the defaults in Ubuntu and end up with a working system. Installing Ubuntu requires the least amount of knowledge of Linux of any of the distributions. Ubuntu uses Gnome as the default desktop.

-------------------
Steve Stites

Since you are using a low power pc, I suggest you try xubuntu . It's a light weight version of ubuntu.

- Cheers

That's what I was going to say. I think XFCE4 will probably run much faster on your hardware than gnome or kde.

Although if you only want to web browse, you could actually go even more stripped down than that and just use a base distro (debian or arch, for example), with X and a window manager like openbox or fluxbox. then just add a browser and whatever other few apps you need, and have a speedy little computer without all the bloat. It might take a little more effort to make sure you have needed plugins installed, etc. but that's all part of the fun.

http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/

This is extremely small. And it comes with the browser "Dillo."

You can probably install it to a Flash Drive, and then change your boot settings to boot off of that. You can try it out that way without bothering the Windows installation.

Highly debated topic so I will try not to give you my preference, but here are some points that differentiate the two:

KDE:
-Standard interface tends to look/behave like M$ Windows
-Can customize just about everything until it looks nothing like windows
-Built on top of QT toolkit which is solely maintained by a company called trolltech
-GUI code is written in C++

GNOME
-Standard interface looks somewhat like Mac, but not quite
-KISS(Keep It Simple Stupid) interface; can customize, but not near as much as KDE
-Built on top of GTK+ toolkit which is maintained by community developers(open-source)
-GUI code written mostly (if not all) in C.

As far as desktop performance, I've heard conflicting figures and I can't notice any difference in performance myself. I would try downloading liveCD's of a distro with GNOME(ubuntu) and a distro with KDE(Kubuntu, Knoppix) and some others that people have mentioned (XFCE, fluxbox, etc).

P.S. when dealing with KDE, I would stick with version 3.5.x; KDE 4 is nice but it still has some kinks, whereas 3.5.x is darn near bullet proof.

Good luck!

I wouldn't reccomend damn small linux coming from XP, it's quite a leap in terms of learning curve. If you want to experiment, DSL is great, but it's not the best way to dive into the linux pool.

Xubuntu would probably be your best bet. XFCE is fast, and Ubuntu is fairly easy to use, especially with apt-get package management. Fluxbuntu might also be fast.

I have a computer with comparable specs, 500MHz processor and 386MB ram, and I run Debian with KDE just fine. It's slow, but not dreadfully slow. Again, coming from XP I'd choose Ubuntu over debian.

There is a new desktop that I've heard good things about. LXDE (Lightweight Desktop Environment)
http://lxde.org/

You might want to look in the distrowatch website. There will be many distro's there with reviews to give you a better idea.

Since you have windows already installed, you can download and use unetbootin to install a linux distribution:

http://unetbootin.sourceforge.net/

It runs like any other windows installation wizard, and begins a net-installation of many different distributions.

I have looked at the following page, and it seems you probably wouldn't be able to install ubuntu. I was hoping you could install it and then install xfce and use that as the desktop instead of gnome or kde:

http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whati...desktopedition

You could install damnsmall linux. You could also install debian and then use the package manager to install the xfce desktop, and if even that is too bloated, use fluxbox, which is even lighter.

If you have difficulties, don't hesitate to keep posting.

I would also suggest considering simplymepis. You could install it and then make use of the xfce or fluxbox environments. You can also install the mepislite or anti-x flavors if the full version is too much even after replacing kde with xfce or fluxbox

http://www.mepis.org/docs/en/index.p...m_Requirements

Simplymepis is a very good first distro, like ubuntu, but has more of the proprietary multimedia codecs and drivers installed by default, although adding them in ubuntu is a simple matter.

I wrote down some of the most popular distributions and then drew them from a hat, the winner is Knoppix.

The point of that is, we can give all the suggestions we want, the choice is really yours to make. I'd suggest trying out a few so YOU can decided which one to use. Start by going to distrowatch.com and on the right side they have the page hit ranking of the top 100 distributions. Start from the top and work your way down to find the best distribution for you.

All good suggestions here, but here is one more,

Try at least two.

I would suggest you try SUSE 11. YASTE makes things real easy to install and configure. KDE would also be the way to go as it would be sort of hand holding because it gives you some form of Windows.

Try it, you'll like it.

I see grave injustice, when there are people in the world using 667 MHz processors for desktop PCs. I installed Debian Etch not too long ago, on a Pentium III 1000 MHz, with 384 MB of ram; and it was slow. The mouse pointer couldn't keep up with the movement of the mouse.

I was swapping continuously. I was using gnome, so a light weight gui might make a difference.

More memory might of made a dramatic difference as well.

I have a P-III, 733MHz, with 320MB of RAM. It does quite well with just about any version of Linux I have tried. Nonetheless, I'm sure more RAM would help**.

For getting started, anything in the top ten on the "hit list" at distrowatch will be fine.


**Anyone notice that RAM has gotten really cheap lately?