Linux & 233Mhz. Am I Nuts?

RJ · 12-12-2007, 05:40 PM

I have an old Compaq 233Mhz Armada 1700 notebook with 128MB of Ram that I have Win 3.1 and 98SE on for old applications that a dabble with. I use an old version of System Commander for the multiple OS's. I get an itch to dabble with Linux once in awhile. I tried Ubunto ISO on a couple of newer notebooks, but the graphics were all screwy and I would have had to install it on the notebook's hard drive and play with drivers just to think about Linux. Is there an older version that I can use my old Compaq for getting my feet wet? I am a complete newbie when it comes to Linux, but I want to learn more as our business has Fedora Core 3.0 on it for an intranet with a firewall, and I occasionally have to type commands from someone over the telephone to restart some jobs, and this stuff is totally greek to me.

**k0NG0** · 12-12-2007, 06:20 PM

When I first installed GNU/Linux it was Slackware 8.0 on a PII 233 with, um, 192MB of memory I think. It was a web/ftp server that never had a single problem for years and years.

Slackware isn't one of the easier GNU/Linux distributions, but it's light-weight and a great way of learning how to do stuff through the command-line interface. If you really want to learn, it's a hill worth climbing.

If you want a graphical window system, I suggest using one of the light-weight ones such as Xfce (comes with Slackware 12), IceWM or FVWM. Should work pretty dang well with that Compaq system (KDE or Gnome are behemoths in comparison).

You shouldn't need an older version. Just one that's light on resources. The system may be slow compared to modern hardware, but it will still run the latest kernel and such.

**k0NG0** · 12-12-2007, 06:23 PM

Oh yeah, the Slack linky:

The Slackware Linux Project: Get Slack

WarpSpeed · 12-16-2007, 05:13 AM

Puppy Linux is ideal for your hardware; small but full-featured, very easy to try out. Fast, fast, fast, because it loads into RAM.
Puppy Linux

phazmatis · 06-10-2008, 04:04 AM

I had Redhat 6 running on a Pentium 90 in my basement for the longest time, complete with whatever god-awful version of gnome it shipped with.

Anyway, with 128MB of ram you should have enough to boot whatever <100MB livecd you can find. Maybe even an older version of slax, if you can find it.

Cogar · 06-10-2008, 12:08 PM

I mean no offense, but with a 233 MHz machine and 128 MB RAM, you are not going to get a good feel for what Linux can do today. Although Linux can pull more performance out of your machine than, say Windows XP can, it is still essentially obsolete hardware. Still, as WarpSpeed mentioned, Puppy will run on your machine--and quite well. Puppy is a good Linux distribution (I use it myself on occasion), but it is designed to run on "minimal" hardware and therefore does not have much of the features you expect in a modern Linux distribution. Incidentally, although it was designed from scratch, some of the structure was recently changed to make it somewhat compatible with Slackware's way of doing things. It is not like running Slackware, however.

It has also been mentioned that Slackware will run on such a machine, and I agree with that assessment. However, Slackware is a poor choice for someone who gets an itch to dabble with Linux once in awhile, since the installation of that distribution is very "hands on." I recommend reading the Slackbook (available on the Slackware site) before attempting an installation.

12-12-2007, 05:40 PM	#1
RJ Registered User Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Dodgeville Wis. Posts: 233	Linux & 233Mhz. Am I Nuts? I have an old Compaq 233Mhz Armada 1700 notebook with 128MB of Ram that I have Win 3.1 and 98SE on for old applications that a dabble with. I use an old version of System Commander for the multiple OS's. I get an itch to dabble with Linux once in awhile. I tried Ubunto ISO on a couple of newer notebooks, but the graphics were all screwy and I would have had to install it on the notebook's hard drive and play with drivers just to think about Linux. Is there an older version that I can use my old Compaq for getting my feet wet? I am a complete newbie when it comes to Linux, but I want to learn more as our business has Fedora Core 3.0 on it for an intranet with a firewall, and I occasionally have to type commands from someone over the telephone to restart some jobs, and this stuff is totally greek to me. __________________ Intel D975XBX2 / E6700 2.66Ghz / 3GB Kingston 800 ValueMemory/ ATI X1950PRO / SB X-Fi XtremeGamer / Seagate 80GB & 250GB Barricuda Drives / PC Power & Cooling Silencer 610 / Cooler Master Centurion Case / Current OS: Vista Home Premium 32 Bit with SP1 P4C800-E Deluxe, 3.0C, 2GB Corsair PC3200 (2 1GB Sticks), XFX 7600GT AGP 256MB, Audigy2 ZS, super cheap Raidmax case with 4 case fans, (1)Seagate 80MB SATA 720RPM IDE Drives, Antec TruPower 550 Watt PS, and XP Pro SP2 Intel DP35DP /E6600 2.4Ghz / 2GB Kingston 800 Value Memory / Visiontek HD3870 / Audigy 2ZS / Vista Business 32 Bit with SP1
(Offline)

12-12-2007, 06:20 PM	#2
k0NG0 The other tainted meat... Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Sweden Posts: 13,549	Re: Linux & 233Mhz. Am I Nuts? When I first installed GNU/Linux it was Slackware 8.0 on a PII 233 with, um, 192MB of memory I think. It was a web/ftp server that never had a single problem for years and years. Slackware isn't one of the easier GNU/Linux distributions, but it's light-weight and a great way of learning how to do stuff through the command-line interface. If you really want to learn, it's a hill worth climbing. If you want a graphical window system, I suggest using one of the light-weight ones such as Xfce (comes with Slackware 12), IceWM or FVWM. Should work pretty dang well with that Compaq system (KDE or Gnome are behemoths in comparison). You shouldn't need an older version. Just one that's light on resources. The system may be slow compared to modern hardware, but it will still run the latest kernel and such. __________________ Use Firefox - "the one that blocks all the schmutz" Feeling multicore elation? Remember this correlation: Amdahl's Law.
(Offline)

12-12-2007, 06:23 PM	#3
k0NG0 The other tainted meat... Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Sweden Posts: 13,549	Re: Linux & 233Mhz. Am I Nuts? Oh yeah, the Slack linky: The Slackware Linux Project: Get Slack __________________ Use Firefox - "the one that blocks all the schmutz" Feeling multicore elation? Remember this correlation: Amdahl's Law.
(Offline)

12-16-2007, 05:13 AM	#4
WarpSpeed Quod erat demonstratum Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 194	Re: Linux & 233Mhz. Am I Nuts? Puppy Linux is ideal for your hardware; small but full-featured, very easy to try out. Fast, fast, fast, because it loads into RAM. Puppy Linux __________________ IS-7, 2.6C @ 3.45GHz, 2GB OCZ PC3200, Antec 500, W2KSP4 Last edited by WarpSpeed : 12-16-2007 at 05:15 AM. Reason: link added
(Offline)

06-10-2008, 04:04 AM	#5
phazmatis Registered User Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 6	Re: Linux & 233Mhz. Am I Nuts? I had Redhat 6 running on a Pentium 90 in my basement for the longest time, complete with whatever god-awful version of gnome it shipped with. Anyway, with 128MB of ram you should have enough to boot whatever <100MB livecd you can find. Maybe even an older version of slax, if you can find it.
(Offline)

06-10-2008, 12:08 PM	#6
Cogar Sleuth Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: It varies, but usually within 100 feet of a keyboard. Posts: 7,184	Re: Linux & 233Mhz. Am I Nuts? I mean no offense, but with a 233 MHz machine and 128 MB RAM, you are not going to get a good feel for what Linux can do today. Although Linux can pull more performance out of your machine than, say Windows XP can, it is still essentially obsolete hardware. Still, as WarpSpeed mentioned, Puppy will run on your machine--and quite well. Puppy is a good Linux distribution (I use it myself on occasion), but it is designed to run on "minimal" hardware and therefore does not have much of the features you expect in a modern Linux distribution. Incidentally, although it was designed from scratch, some of the structure was recently changed to make it somewhat compatible with Slackware's way of doing things. It is not like running Slackware, however. It has also been mentioned that Slackware will run on such a machine, and I agree with that assessment. However, Slackware is a poor choice for someone who gets an itch to dabble with Linux once in awhile, since the installation of that distribution is very "hands on." I recommend reading the Slackbook (available on the Slackware site) before attempting an installation.
(Offline)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode