Thanks for your opinion.
Which are the main differences between the two builds?
Comment has been collapsed.
Lubuntu is Ubuntu with a lightweight Lxde desktop manager.
Lubuntu is a fast, energy saving and lightweight variant of Ubuntu using LXDE. It is popular with PC and laptop users running on low-spec hardware.
I have used it to recycle a weak notebook. It is a solution, out-of-the-box.
It is an official derivative release. And always updated.
Comment has been collapsed.
Bodhi Linux
It is the only Linux distro I know that still has an edition that is somewhat maintained and doesn't need a CPU with PAE. Had an old laptop that needed something like that.
Puppy Linux
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the info =)
What do you refer to with "CPU with PAE"?
Comment has been collapsed.
The very short and easy answer is: with a really old CPU. You'll know if it is old enough to only run Bodhi Linux if you see an error message saying PAE is needed when you try to boot or install some other Linux distro.
But the thing I liked in Bodhi is that it comes with almost nothing installed, so you can get the software you'd actually need. Many consumer distros also push the software they like the most. Even Puppy, but you can create your own installer online for Puppy (think of something along the lines on Ninite). Although, to be honest, I like Puppy more like an USB Linux for emergencies. (This reminds me… where on earth have I put that USB stick, I wonder…?)
Comment has been collapsed.
Thank you very much for the detailed explanation =D
Is there any way to check, before trying to install it, if my CPU could or couldn't support it, if it have PAE or not?
The error message should appear immediatly or during the installation(maybe when it should be almost finished, as a cruel joke ;( )?
USB stick are like lighters and bic pens, they are never to be found when you need them ;P
Comment has been collapsed.
You can create a bootable USB drive with Rufus for any Linux distro. Most, if not all give you the option during boot to try the OS from the USB drive or install it on your hard drive. If they have troubles with your hardware, you don't see that choice, you see an error message instead.
This Live CD mode also lets you play around the OS as much as you want to see if it really suits you. So technically you can try all recommendations from this thread and decide after experiencing all of them.
Comment has been collapsed.
PAE (Physical Address Extension) is only really needed when you want to use more than 4GB of RAM on a 32-bit system but for some reason many Linux distros requires PAE to install no matter what. Your computer seem to be a ThinkCentre M50 (8189WZM) which has a Pentium 4 CPU and that CPU has PAE support (all Intel CPUs since Pentium Pro has PAE).
If you get errors about missing PAE anyway (some chipsets may break PAE detection), look here for workarounds: http://askubuntu.com/questions/117744/how-can-i-install-on-a-non-pae-cpu-error-kernel-requires-features-not-present
Comment has been collapsed.
just add few symbols (google them) to grub config and pae need will be removed for any distro's install :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks Archi =)
Could you kindly give me a link to the official website, please? I tried to google "Debian Testing" but got no luck(just a lot of websites that have nothing to do with OS).
Comment has been collapsed.
Debian is a nice choice, as it gives you a large quantity of available packages.
I would stay away from smaller special distributions, unless you plan on packaging/compiling missing software for yourself.
Here is nice comparison of arch linux with different distributions showing what every distribution has to offer and why you should choose one over the other.
The next thing you have to decide is, which Desktop Environment to choose or if you just use a Window Manager (=> a lot less performance hungry, but needs some time/effort to get used to).
If you like to check out a window manager, I would recommend to test i3 (a video showing the basics), as it is relatively easy to configure and use in comparison to some other options.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for all the info =)
Which kind of packages?
I would just need to check email(Gmail) and a few websites(Steam, eBay, Steamgifts, etc...).
There would be no need for any other program like VLC, OpenOffice, Notepad++, etc...
Or are you talking about a different kind of packages(like driver)?
The Desktop Environment is not set by default with the downloaded distro? How and when do I decide which one I want to use?
I checked the video and found it to be a little too...complex for me, with too many lines commands to use. Would be more prone to use a desktop similar to windows, which focus on using the mouse cursor, more then the keyboard(Alt+Shift+a long sequence of arrows just to move the window? too much work for me to remember all that commands, for a backup PC that I hope I'll need to use the less possible :3).
Comment has been collapsed.
You are welome :)
Yes, this kind of packages, you are correct.
A default DE is not set on every distribution, but for the most it is. You can save a lot performance if you choose one that is not very performance hungry, e.g. LXDE, XFCE, Enlightenment. So if you want a *buntu distribution you should choose the one with the desired DE, e.g. Lubuntu for LXDE.
If you want a functional, easy-to-use and lightweight DE I would recommend trying out LXDE (or LXQt). If you go with Debian you can check here (LXQt) - I think you can even choose during install which DE to install - or if you choose *buntu, just install Lubuntu
Comment has been collapsed.
Ambo linked you debian stable, testing would be http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/unofficial/non-free/cd-including-firmware/daily-builds/sid_d-i/current/amd64/iso-cd/firmware-testing-amd64-netinst.iso
Comment has been collapsed.
How is this a problem if he only want browser and email client?
2yo is too old for you?
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, I have testing even on my server, not to mention desktop :3.
I mean, it's subjective matter, but I'd say that 2 years is a lot. It's like comparing current ASF to V0.1, and even that has only 1,5 years so far. Linux software is even more dynamic than ASF, it might look like the same OS, but between one and another version of Debian there is usually a gigantic difference, like between jessie and wheezy we have systemd vs sysv-rc, the only bigger change would be dropping linux kernel for something else.
Comment has been collapsed.
But for the person who only uses browser and mail cliend not only difference between systemd and sysv-rc is not important, but even kernel change can go unnoticed! Also, for older hardware it could be even better to use older software, because even for linux it is true that every new version consume more memory and cpu.
Comment has been collapsed.
But it also fixes bugs, adds support for new hardware that the user could be using, and likewise. The actual increase in memory in terms of software is marginal - Debian Testing without DE takes around 35-80 MB of ram, depending what you picked during installation. Add LXDE on top of this and you'll make it under 256 MB for sure, so I'd always say go for the latest unless you have a reason against it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Stable version gets bug fixed too, while it's still supported. Also, it does not have new bugs, that testing branch might have. Considering this - it have less bugs, just like the branch name says.
adds support for new hardware
Oh, it's really important when using old PC, lol.
So, I'd always say use the oldest software that is suitable for your needs. The only reason to use something newer - if it adds features you lack on old one.
And I said nothing against LXDE - but it still can be used on stable branch. It's a good choice for a low performance PC.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd say Manjaro Openbox, Manjaro Fluxbox or Crunchbang but they are all dead now. :( But since you want a more end user friendly system, you can check Lubuntu, Xubuntu, Manjaro XFCE.
Also you can look up for Archbang, you can try it without installation but probably it'd be hard to install for you. But probably faster than above.
By the way you can create bootable USB drives with Universal USB Installer or Rufus.
Good luck with your old chap. ^^
Edit: Puppy Linux is the lightest but it doesn't need an installation actually.
Comment has been collapsed.
If possible, it would be better something that is still followed by his creator, just to be sure that it'll keep working for a while or that it would be easier to find support for it.
Thanks for the programs, they'll be useful to prepare the USB key(way easier and cheaper that using a DVD) =D
What do you mean that Puppy Linex doesn't need an installation? That is a portable versione to use on Windows?
Comment has been collapsed.
It means most Linux distros can be booted and run on a DVD or USB stick. You don't need to install them on your hard drive first. Think of it as a portable OS, where your OS remains the same (same wallpapers, user settings, etc.) but you can plug it to any PC as you can keep all files on your USB drive.
Comment has been collapsed.
Good to know, even if I don't count to keep the old OS.
If I were to use it as a portable OS, the files(like browser's bookmarks, photos, etc...) would be saved on the PC or on the USB key?
Comment has been collapsed.
Normally, on the USB, but if there is a suitable partition on at least one hard drive that can be mounted by the OS (Linux handles drives different than Windows), then you can keep them locally as well.
If it helps, you can think of the USB-booted edition also as a demo that doesn't require you to modify anything on your computer to try the OS. =)
Comment has been collapsed.
Interesting.
But would the Key OS remember the position of the file?
Let's say that I use it today, download an image and make it save on a folder on the PC. I remove the Key OS and turn everything off. Tomorrow I'll turn it on and insert the Key OS: will it remember where I saved the image or would I need to tell it where to go find it again?
What would happen if, whilst using it, I were to wrongly remove the USB key?
Comment has been collapsed.
It should remember, yes. But if not, you just need to mount the drive again and it'll be there.
If you unplug it while using it, the same happens when you unplug the USB drive while it is in operation on Windows: data loss, possible corruption.
Comment has been collapsed.
So better feed it some fish with a lot of calcium to help it remembers better? ;)
In this case, it would be better and safer to simply install it; I wouldn't need to use it on other PC, so the portable side would just be a surplus risk. It happened in the past that I wrongly removed USB keys(mainly cause of their position, near my legs) and whilst I had no problem with them(rarely happened whilst I was moving files between the PC and the key or viceversa), I would risk many more damages if it were to happen with a working OS(that would be working all time).
Thanks again for all the info =)
Comment has been collapsed.
No problem. ^^ Installing from USB drive is always a better option.
Yup, just like a portable system, it runs on your RAM and keeps your files on USB drive.
By the way with Debian LXDE probably you'll get faster opening time compared to Lubuntu. Otherwise for your situation they're almost same.
I couldn't see your network card there, if you have a network card like BCM4313 you'll need to setup its driver manually in Debain.
Comment has been collapsed.
K, so the files would be saved on the USB. It there would be any way to make it save on the PC memory, instead? So to not overweight the limited USB key space(i've 4 and 8GB keys only).
The opening time speed difference would be great between the two different versions?
Strange. It should be integrated on the motherboard.
Comment has been collapsed.
4 GB should be enough to try most lighter Linuxes, they usually need 1-2 GB of space for themselves.
Comment has been collapsed.
By the way, you can try Bunsenlabs, i freshly installed it, seems quite perfect for me. It'll be a fast OS for your PC too. (It also uses Debian as a base.)
Comment has been collapsed.
Normally you have to install them on your hard drive, but Puppy Linux is a little bit different, you don't have to install it, still you can but if i don't remember it wrongly its installation is kinda different than the others. Anyway, differency between Debian and Ubuntu, Debian is the base system of Ubuntu and flavours. Ubuntu comes with everything, which means it effects opening time on older PCs. But Ubuntu is easier to install compared to Debian. So in the end, you decide. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
CrunchBang lives on as BunsenLabs Linux and CrunchBang++ :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh my god, i've been wasting my time with kernel compiling since they're all dead. (It's actually a good thing for speed but what the hell.) Thank you for your message, i'm happy again. ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
I freshly installed Bunsenlabs and love it. Thank you again. ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
i perfer mint personally, but not for a pc like that.. i think i'd have to lean towards lubuntu, dsl, or puppy for a computer like that.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah...it's a quite old PC, so last version, for how good it can be and looks, would risk to be too heavy :3
I tried to search for the DSL one, but got no luck(too many other things with the same name); could you give me a link to his official website, please?
Comment has been collapsed.
I use Linux Mint too, with MATE desktop (as opposed to d3m4n's Cinnamon). MATE is a lot lighter in weight, I use it on my 10 years-old netbook (Intel Atom, 1GB DDR2 RAM) and it runs quite well.
Comment has been collapsed.
So, there are different version of Mint?
Where or how I could change the desktop part of the Mint distro?
Comment has been collapsed.
Erm... If you go to the Mint's official website, they show you a list of pre-built installers for different type of desktop.
https://www.linuxmint.com/download.php
MATE is one of them.
Or, some simple Google search and I found this: https://community.linuxmint.com/tutorial/view/744
How to install a bootable Live USB drive of Linux Mint.
If you have an existing Windows PC, pendrivelinux.com have a very simple tool to make a bootable Live USB drive. Linux Mint (with Cinnamon or MATE) is one of the officially supported distro (however my memory tells me it didn't officially support the latest version of Mint yet, but you can still try).
Comment has been collapsed.
sorry, that's my bad. dsl = damn small linux = http://damnsmalllinux.org/
and i didn't even think about it, but like shauntmw said the different X environment (mate or xfce) version of mint probably would be a good candidate too.
Comment has been collapsed.
I thought about recommending damn small linux, but the web site has been offline a few times over the years, and it looks like it is fairly outdated. Depending on security concerns that could be a problem.
At the same time, if Aleandrus is only going to a few trusted web sites at a time, it may be a good choice.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah i'm not so sure it was a good suggestion, i hadn't used it in years now either really. i just assumed they eventually made a new one, but looks like latest RC build is 2012, so clearly not.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks anyway for the suggestion =)
Seeing that it has not been updated for a while, I'll probably not try to use it, but it is been useful to know about his existence anyway and, who knows? Maybe it could still be useful in the future, if their devs would restart to work on it.
Comment has been collapsed.
It would be mainly needed to check my email(Gmail) and check a few websites like Steam, eBay, Amazon, Steamgifts, etc...just to keep updated, whilst waiting for the return of my main PC.
So, their support has been a little "missing" during the last period? Maybe it would be better to try some other version, then, just to stay safe.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would watch the distro in case it becomes active again, but for the time being it is outdated and there are other good options other folks have recommended here.
If you choose to run an OS from a USB stick, it is going to be slower than if it were to be installed directly, so keep that in mind if you go that route.
Whatever you choose, good luck :)
Comment has been collapsed.
No problem and thanks for your help =)
Nice name they used XD
So, Mint would good, if I would be using a different kind of "enviroment/desktop"?
How can I decide which I would want to use?
Comment has been collapsed.
Lubuntu suits your needs and easy to deploy.
I use Arch on an similar old P4+865g+2G PC, it needs some configuration during and after installation. I also installed Slackware on a P2+256MB potato, it runs fine as long as you don't open too much tabs while surfing.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks =)
Seeing my PC specs, which do you think would be best of the three you suggested?
Comment has been collapsed.
Lubuntu, since you got some experience on ubuntu and it got a huge community, easy to ask for help while stuck. The latter two are for experienced user.
Your computer is not too old like potatoes in p2 or k6 era. So no need to try those non-mainstream distros aim for extreme low hardware specs. Besides LFS rocks in this case.
Comment has been collapsed.
for old pcs, BunsenLabs Linux is best choice in my opinion. It's a continuation of CrunchBang Linux. It's really fast, easy to use and highly configurable. my sister's old laptop was running it, it became a lot faster than using old xp or any other distro that's meant for low end pcs.
i wouldn't go with puppy if you're thinking about it. at least for me, it's big pile of ****
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for your suggestion.
Why would you not suggest the Puppy version?
Which kind of negative side does it have?
Comment has been collapsed.
imo, puppy is too specific. let's say, i'm an Ubuntu user (running XUbuntu atm), and I did install puppy for my dad. it was so specific for itself, ubuntu / debian commands ain't working. imo, it's for some learning maybe but not like you will be able to use what you learned there on any other distro. maybe for someone completely new to pc but not for someone who want's to use Linux now
Comment has been collapsed.
Mmm....thanks for your opinion about it.
For what I'll need to use it, it wouldn't be a problem. As main PC, I count to keep going with Windows for still a long time(cause 99% of the games and programs I own works only on Windows) and I don't have a big interest to start learning to fully use Linux.
Just looking for a light distro to use on my old PC, where I don't need any specific program, but just need to be able to check a few things online. The less I've to learn to use the command terminal, the better it is ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
i still think that BunsenLabs is great choice. in puppy you still will need to learn new way cause it is still different from Windows
Comment has been collapsed.
lubuntu +1. Easy to use and lots of resources on internet.
Comment has been collapsed.
since I can't see the specs anymore ... just my guess
lubuntu works fine for me ... celeron(p6 - 900mhz) /2gb and atom(first gen)/1gb
should work with 512mb, but below I would go for something different.
Comment has been collapsed.
Strange. The link works for me. Which problem are you meeting whilst trying to check it?
I've 1GB, so there would be no need to check for an even lower one ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
I only use Linux on servers with CLI (command line interface). So, I've got no idea but bump.
Comment has been collapsed.
I just need a little backup PC, not a full server! XD
But thanks for the bump ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
have you considered chromeos, or the nearly-identical open-source version chromiumos? it's basically what you get with a chromebook. it'll be chromium not firefox, but that's basically all the os is, so should perform better than something more general-purpose like windows or linux. i've used neverware's cloudready distribution of chromiumos on a virtual machine (so i can help family members with chromebook questions) and it was pretty reasonable to set up.
Comment has been collapsed.
So, would you suggest linux chrome version(chromium) over firefox?
When I tried Linux in the past, I didn't try that browser, having a negative idea of it from the Windows version(RAM glutton).
There are different build of that browser? Is there any way to compare all of them, to see which one would suit my taste and need?
Comment has been collapsed.
my suggestion is chromium os, which is actually a very stripped-down linux distribution focused or running the chromium browser. chromium os is basically the same as chrcome os, just like chromium browser is basically the same as chrome browser. i haven't tried but chromium os might run android apps, so that might let you run the firefox app. one disadvantage for me with chromium os is that your os login is actually a google account, and google sites like gmail and youtube see that login and don't allow you to switch to a secondary account without switching over the entire os. doesn't matter if you only have one google account though.
as far as trying chromium browser on a more general-purpose linux distribution, i think you should try all reasonable browser options and see what actually works best. seems like you might use firefox normally which might mean you can sync bookmarks, history, and saved passwords (i do that with chrome). i'd put up with slightly worse performance to have it all connected.
Comment has been collapsed.
In my personal experience (having way too many old, now considered crappy, laptops because yes, I have a laptop problem... thanks a LOT, Woot...) I've found Peppermint to be the best for older systems. The thing I like about it most is that it's focused on "web app integration" kind of like ChromeOS (the stuff they install on Chromebooks). In fact, it is considered to be the best known linux based cloud OS. Therefore, your system doesn't have to be beefy at all. It's based off of Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (long term support), and the install is really nice. They don't install a lot of crap.
EDIT:
Here are the minimum specs required.
512 MB of RAM.
Processor based on Intel x86 architecture.
At least 3.8 GB of available disk space.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would go with debian because it will definitely work and that's what I'm used to. Can you install a 64 bit OS in your PC ? Sadly your dxdialog doesn't say anything about the processor. Also I would definitely recommend trying to add some RAM. Even on light distros many browsers are memory-hungry, and if you have the occasion of adding a RAM upgrade for cheap or free, I would go for it (of course you shouldn't spend more than $20 on such a PC)
Comment has been collapsed.
Peppermint Linux is based on Lubuntu, which is itself based on Ubuntu. But, the difference is that it doesn't pre-install stuff like office programs. Unless Lubuntu has changed a lot since the last time I looked at it, that could be an important point for OP.
Comment has been collapsed.
My now-very-old fanless server runs Ubuntu server very happily. Mutt and Lynx for all your internet needs :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, Archi didn't gave serious reasons why it should be the testing branch, so I vote for stable Debian 8 "Jessie" . LXDE as environment is a good choice.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a matter of preference, there is no any good reason for using testing over stable, and there is also no good reason for using stable over testing - it's simply a matter of preference if you like rolling distro with more recent packages or something hard as rock that is super reliable and well-done, for potential cost of being slightly oudated.
Either choice is decent, but as an user of testing for almost 5 years I simply don't have a reason to use stable anymore, even on my server.
Comment has been collapsed.
Now that's what I can completely agree with!
Comment has been collapsed.
It's mostly about the desktop environment you pick, so make sure you use a distro wihich makes such choice easy and then...pick a lightweight one!
Comment has been collapsed.
Sorry if I'm late to the discussion but I could suggest BunsenLabs Linux (formerly Crunchbang!) which is based on Debian.
Comment has been collapsed.
As the title say, I'm in need of an opinion from someone who has good experience with the OS Linux/Ubuntu.
Which distro/version/release would you suggest for an old PC with the following specs:
Dxdiag log: http://www.writeurl.com/text/sltjxctd33h9f0dtomtb/86hxbkq3d0sav4g1dm71
It's an old PC that I use as backup when my main is not available due to reparation or upgrade.
I need to just be able to check email(Gmail) and browse internet(preferably on Firefox; it has too low RAM for that glutton of Chrome), with a fluid navigation, if possible.
No need for any other particular program or feature. So even an old distro, with limited functions, would be okay.
I'm actualy using Windows 7 Professional 32bit as OS and is veeery slow.
For the installation I can use a DVD or a USB key(could even read floppy, so old it is, if I had one :P).
P.S: I made use of Ubuntu in the past, but I'm not an expert(last time, it took me almost 3 days to activate the internet connession....whilst using another PC to find tutorials online), so I would prefer if it was a veeeery user-friendly version, please ;)
Little giveaway as thanks for whoever would be so kind to read my message and share is opinion about it: https://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/xpGUK/grav =)
Comment has been collapsed.