Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations Chriss Miller on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Old windows 95 laptop with 32 meg ram will run Linux? 5
- Thread starter orypecos
- Start date
-
1
- #2
There is a good chance that it will work fine. However, the current desktop versions of Ubuntu are a little "resource heavy" and it may not be your best choice. You might be better off with the Netbook remix which uses a different windowing system that is lighter on resources. I would recommend at least staying away from Gnome and KDE and going with a lighter window manager like XCFE or Fluxbox.
Other distributions are geared towards being light weight and options include Damn Small Linux and Puppy Linux. Give them a try. You can download a copy and try a live CD for the cost of a CD.
Other distributions are geared towards being light weight and options include Damn Small Linux and Puppy Linux. Give them a try. You can download a copy and try a live CD for the cost of a CD.
-
1
- #3
stefanwagner
Programmer
It will not work with Ubuntu, but should work with a linux from that time.
With XFCE you need at least 128 MB RAM, but for work without anger you should have at least 256 MB, and the more the better.
A recent linux without X, to use it as a special purpose server, could work.
don't visit my homepage:
With XFCE you need at least 128 MB RAM, but for work without anger you should have at least 256 MB, and the more the better.
A recent linux without X, to use it as a special purpose server, could work.
don't visit my homepage:
-
1
- #4
I've tried that - it is difficult to get anything modern to work on a machine with that spec. I used a 166MHz P1 with 64Mb and I just stopped it after it ran for 3 days continuously trying to install LXDE Ubuntu. Similar story on the 120MHz P1 with 32Mb.
LXDE CrunchBang linux installed but grub wouldn't install.
One of the problems is the WiFi connection - are you using PCMCIA or USB for the WiFi. If PCMCIA, does the machine support cardbus i.e. 32-bit or is it just 16-bit. I have yet to find a WiFi card that is 16 bit. Almost all of them are 32-bit. You might get away with it if it is USB but that really does depend on whether you can get the drivers.
I've just settled for RH7/8/9. That seems to work and run at a reasonable speed but only on wired connections.
LXDE CrunchBang linux installed but grub wouldn't install.
One of the problems is the WiFi connection - are you using PCMCIA or USB for the WiFi. If PCMCIA, does the machine support cardbus i.e. 32-bit or is it just 16-bit. I have yet to find a WiFi card that is 16 bit. Almost all of them are 32-bit. You might get away with it if it is USB but that really does depend on whether you can get the drivers.
I've just settled for RH7/8/9. That seems to work and run at a reasonable speed but only on wired connections.
stefanwagner
Programmer
A 32MB Laptop will not have USB, not even USB-1.0 I guess.
don't visit my homepage:
don't visit my homepage:
-
1
- #6
DonQuichote
Programmer
- Nov 9, 2001
- 980
You might try to burn Xubuntu to a CD and boot from the CD. Mind you, the PC might not be able to boot from CD at all, or there might be a BIOS upgrade available to enable booting from CD (this was the case with my old win'98 PC).
If you can boot from the CD, you can see if it works. Running Xubuntu from the CD is very slow, but it could give you a good test.
+++ Despite being wrong in every important aspect, that is a very good analogy +++
Hex (in Darwin's Watch)
If you can boot from the CD, you can see if it works. Running Xubuntu from the CD is very slow, but it could give you a good test.
+++ Despite being wrong in every important aspect, that is a very good analogy +++
Hex (in Darwin's Watch)
stefanwagner
Programmer
@PostDonQuichote: Xubuntu will definetively not run on 32 MB. Not even close. Years before - about 2005 - you could badly run xubuntu on a 64 MB system. Without cups (printer) with maximum opera, not firefox, no office,
Visit the homepages an read about the requirements. i.e:
It talks about a minimum of 256 MB as requierement. 32 MB is 1/8 of that.
If you don't know what you're talking about - please don't give advice. People might spend time for downloading, burning and experimenting, just to get frustrated.
don't visit my homepage:
Visit the homepages an read about the requirements. i.e:
It talks about a minimum of 256 MB as requierement. 32 MB is 1/8 of that.
If you don't know what you're talking about - please don't give advice. People might spend time for downloading, burning and experimenting, just to get frustrated.
don't visit my homepage:
Try entering "linux on 32mb ram" into google. You will get a lot of discussion threads for suggestions. It has been a while since I have done it, but I have run Ubuntu and before that Red Hat on some really old hardware that dates back to the late 1990s; back when 16 to 32 mb of ram was still common. Lastly, I ran a copy of Ubuntu server 9.04 edition (no X) on that machine before retiring the machine after a failure of the add on SATA card. It served as my email, dhcp, and dns server for over a year before that.
I personally take "minimum system requirements" with a good dose of salt, having lived through the days of a higher clock speed Pentium 2 and software that forced you to upgrade just because it could, but running current versions of Ubuntu may be a bit much as they tend to be resource hogs.
I personally take "minimum system requirements" with a good dose of salt, having lived through the days of a higher clock speed Pentium 2 and software that forced you to upgrade just because it could, but running current versions of Ubuntu may be a bit much as they tend to be resource hogs.
Some old laptops, like my 1999 64Mb P1-166 Fujitsu have USB1. May be slow but it works.
If you are trying modern distributions, make sure you use the i386 or i486 versions. Many of the i686 versions just don't run on P3s. They will just fall over on some unknown instruction.
Also burn the CDs on the lowest possible speed. The hardware may cope but the CD may not be up to it.
If you are trying modern distributions, make sure you use the i386 or i486 versions. Many of the i686 versions just don't run on P3s. They will just fall over on some unknown instruction.
Also burn the CDs on the lowest possible speed. The hardware may cope but the CD may not be up to it.
stefanwagner
Programmer
1999: 64 MB sounds reasonable (for a laptop) and 97 with 32 MB.
Talking about google: You will find everything with google - even how to install linux on a beaver.
As I said before: Linux yes, but not ubuntu or xUbuntu.
The first ubuntu came 5.04 (April 2005) which is 8 or 9 years later. There wasn't a xUbuntu-release in that year, if I remember correctly. New desktop-machines had about 2 Ghz CPUs and 500 MB RAM at that time.
There are well suited distributions for old hardware - ubuntu is not one of their names.
don't visit my homepage:
Talking about google: You will find everything with google - even how to install linux on a beaver.
As I said before: Linux yes, but not ubuntu or xUbuntu.
The first ubuntu came 5.04 (April 2005) which is 8 or 9 years later. There wasn't a xUbuntu-release in that year, if I remember correctly. New desktop-machines had about 2 Ghz CPUs and 500 MB RAM at that time.
There are well suited distributions for old hardware - ubuntu is not one of their names.
don't visit my homepage:
-
1
- #11
Yes there are Linux distroes suited for old hardware.
DamnSmallLinux: "Minimum Requirements for DSL with X-Window:
i486
24 MB RAM "
TinyCore: Requirements:
"An absolute minimum of RAM is 48mb.
TC won't boot with anything less,
no matter how many terabytes of swap you have.
Microcore runs with 36mb of ram.
The minimum cpu is i486DX (486 with a math processor)."
DamnSmallLinux: "Minimum Requirements for DSL with X-Window:
i486
24 MB RAM "
TinyCore: Requirements:
"An absolute minimum of RAM is 48mb.
TC won't boot with anything less,
no matter how many terabytes of swap you have.
Microcore runs with 36mb of ram.
The minimum cpu is i486DX (486 with a math processor)."
DSL needs at least 24-bit colour. Looks really crap on 16-bit colour. It has this really annoying colour background that is a mix of two colours in alternating pixels. Works fine for 24-bit colour but not for 16 bit colour. The block on the top right telling you IP addresses etc is almost unreadable.
maybe SuSE 7.3 will work for you?
see here for the Download link: (from 7.3 to 9.3)
ftp://ftp5.gwdg.de/pub/linux/suse/discontinued/i386/
Ben
"If it works don't fix it! If it doesn't use a sledgehammer..."
How to ask a question, when posting them to a professional forum.
Only ask questions with yes/no answers if you want "yes" or "no"
see here for the Download link: (from 7.3 to 9.3)
ftp://ftp5.gwdg.de/pub/linux/suse/discontinued/i386/
Ben
"If it works don't fix it! If it doesn't use a sledgehammer..."
How to ask a question, when posting them to a professional forum.
Only ask questions with yes/no answers if you want "yes" or "no"
Many years ago I purchased SUSE Linux 7.3, disks, manuals and all. (any offers?) 
The Network Manual does not mention wireless networking at all - getting your modem to work was a more relevant exercise in 2001.
I think that 32 megabytes will limit the scope of any Linux to a text-based interface, and certainly no easy wireless configuration or internet browsing.
Have a look here for a range of mini-distros, one or two of which may just run X in 32 MB:
Windows 98 SE would probably work, and would look terrible unless you can find a suitable graphics driver, but your choice of browser would be limited. Old versions of IE are pretty useless - I remember using Mosaic on Windows 95 - Opera 9 works on 98 in a VM.
The Network Manual does not mention wireless networking at all - getting your modem to work was a more relevant exercise in 2001.
I think that 32 megabytes will limit the scope of any Linux to a text-based interface, and certainly no easy wireless configuration or internet browsing.
Have a look here for a range of mini-distros, one or two of which may just run X in 32 MB:
Windows 98 SE would probably work, and would look terrible unless you can find a suitable graphics driver, but your choice of browser would be limited. Old versions of IE are pretty useless - I remember using Mosaic on Windows 95 - Opera 9 works on 98 in a VM.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question