Allegro.cc - Online Community

Allegro.cc Forums » Off-Topic Ordeals » What Linux for this old laptop?

This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. rss feed Print
What Linux for this old laptop?
Johan Halmén
Member #1,550
September 2001

I have an old HP Compaq nx9105 laptop. There's nothing wrong in the hardware. So I thought I could empty everything that has to do with Windows (XP) and install some kind of Linux on it, just to start getting a hang of Linux. We still have some of these laptops at work and no one is interested in updating them. And since they are more or less useless for anything, since the systems are cluttered with years of installed crap and whatnot, I thought they could be used for some single tasks, like controlling info screens, running some apache html/php servers for testing purposes, whatever. Or simply for me to learn more about Linux, which I use at work for a very narrow field.

So any advice would be nice. Which distro, which version etc? I don't even know the right questions.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Years of thorough research have revealed that the red "x" that closes a window, really isn't red, but white on red background.

Years of thorough research have revealed that what people find beautiful about the Mandelbrot set is not the set itself, but all the rest.

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

I just installed the latest Slackware 14.1 on both my computers a month ago, the older one has a 1.6Ghz Sempron 64 with 1.5Gb ram and it works fine. A few years ago, I had one of the two 512Mb memory sticks go bad and I was running with only 512Mb memory for a while, Slackware 13.? ran fine then too. I replaced that slot with a 1Gb stick which is why it has 1.5Gb now.

They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas.

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

I personally would go with debian, but I'm biased.

I've tried RPM based distros and Ubuntu, and I liked neither very much. They all liked to blow up.

Debian Sid/Unstable will occasionally have issues if you try updating at the wrong time, but they are generally fixable by either waiting it out, or uninstalling one or two packages that are messing things up before trying to update again.

For a beginner, Debian Stable or Testing would probably be a better bet than Sid. Fewer update issues, but packages can be older. Though you can always add the Debian Backports package repos, and get newer software for stable.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

Just install Xubuntu and be done with it. It's Ubuntu with a low system requirement window manager Xfce. Runs fine on my 1.6 GHZ Atom, which is a POS.

But know this. A low end laptop is still a low end laptop regardless of operating system. So you can run *NIX tools all you want, but load more than a few Chrome tabs and it'll slow down.

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

A low end laptop is still a low end laptop regardless of operating system

I think it's just that you're used to a faster computer. This older computer of mine seems horribly slow compared to the main one I'm on now, but I remember how lightning fast it seemed compared to the previous one which had an AMD K6 and a VIA video chip, which in turn was lightning fast compared to the 486 I was running before that, etc. etc.

They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas.

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

Websites are ridiculously higher power than they used to be. Java is huge, Javascript, CSS, CSS2, HTML, flash, and all the images and formatting.

Try loading a webpage dated from the 90's and it'll load super fast.

Plus, when people write code, they compare it to whether it runs slow on their computer. If it doesn't, they don't speed it up. It's natural. The developing computer is a benchmark. So a 5/10 year old computer is going up against an unfair benchmark.

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
avatar

I'd try XUbuntu. (I use it as my regular OS.)

The main thing is to use a lightweight windows manager, like Xfce (as XUbuntu does). There are other ones; I only recommend it because I'm familiar with it. It's very similar to Windows XP, or at least if you move the panels around it is.

The latest fancy windows managers with GNOME or KDE aren't going to run well.

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

Mostly it's that everybody wants to be "cool" and "Web 2.0" and "HTML5" and <insert_buzzwords_here>. It's completely unprofessional and it wastes a ton of computing resources on client machines needlessly. I wonder if the additional damage to the environment (i.e., global warming) would be significant and/or measurable[1]. Even my rather awesome desktop struggles with mere tens of tabs of modern Web sites whereas 8 years ago much slower, smaller machines could handle 100+ gracefully. ::)

References

  1. I watched a rather thought provoking movie a few days ago on Netflix called The Age of Stupid. I recommend it.
Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

If I have five or six tabs open I get confused! :-/

They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas.

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

If you're not too hot on XFCE and whatnot, theres a Qt based light desktop called Razor-Qt that I liked quite a bit last time I used it. At the time it was far less broken than LXDE was, and lighter than XFCE.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

furinkan
Member #10,271
October 2008
avatar

CrunchBang Linux is what I'm currently using. It is essentially the same as Debian, but it is slimmed down and a joy (for me) to use.

It's using around 8GB of disk space (my files included), and 667MB of RAM. I rarely touch my swap, too.

If you need to look up how to do something on it, and you can't google "how to do x in crunchbang" with success: ask the same question and put "Debian" instead. This distribution is 95% the same as Debian (and thus you benefit from Debian's popularity).

Aikei_c
Member #14,871
January 2013
avatar

I installed Lubuntu on an old laptop of mine which had been terribly slow even when running XP. It works pretty well now, compared to its performance in the past, at least.

Gideon Weems
Member #3,925
October 2003

Long story short:

Stable Debian + Xfce is a good choice, regardless of performance concerns.

I concur that the DE matters just as much as the distro when it comes to performance. I've tried MATE, Cinnamon, KDE, Xfce, and LXDE on a Linux Mint Debian installation. I ended up settling with Xfce--but not for performance reasons. It simply presented the most stable and logical design. KDE was very stable but had an unresponsive feel that pervaded all control widgets. MATE and Cinnamon are more or less interchangeable. Both are young and lack some key customization features; the nail in the coffin was hard-coded color values that interfered with light text on dark backgrounds. LXDE was the ugliest of the bunch and felt a little too stripped down.

I sampled all DEs precisely one month ago, using the latest versions available in my distro repos. I noticed no performance differences between any of them, but that's mostly because my computer is super awesome. 8-)

Before the week is done, I'll be ending my 18-month relationship with Mint for a more attractive and stable Debian, who also happens to be a better cook and knows a good trick or two in the sack. Mint has too many "quirks," and the main reason I went to Mint was because it (supposedly) Simply Worked... If I'm going to have to do everything manually regardless, I want to be as close to the metal as possible.

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

Aikei_c said:

I installed Lubuntu on an old laptop of mine which had been terribly slow even when running XP. It works pretty well now, compared to its performance in the past, at least.

Seriously try Xubuntu. LXDE is a piece of junk. I say that having used it for ~3 years. Having to hand modify obscure configuration files every single piece of junk menu and key combination, and even worse, external monitor support for my Netbook damn near never worked. Losing my desktop after an update and having to hack back the desktop manager into loading. xfce is just as light-weight, except they actually spent time to make configuration menus for everything. LXDE lacks lots of tiny user functionality things that you don't notice till their gone.

That being said, Lubuntu is probably still worlds better than Linux Mint with LXDE which I have on my Netbook. Linux Mint has tons of distro/dependency/support problems because they don't use the Ubuntu branches/whatever-you-call-it. I didn't realize Linux didn't have to be so damn hard till I tried another distro and went, "What the hell?!"

Granted, Linux in general still has gaping holes in some hardware support. My 1st-gen P4 took weeks to diagnose and get working properly. It took a long time to realize the stock Nouveau driver was corrupting the entire system. Linux also mangled my NTFS partition on my 3 TB external hard drive to the point it couldn't even access it--even though it was supposed to be read-only! Luckily, Windows eventually was able to detect the HDD and fix all the journal errors so the HDD would work again. I'm never making that mistake again.

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

I'd like to suggest Razor-Qt again.

{"name":"04.Taskmenu.png","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/d\/d\/dde86519c2c3979752324cb855bd53eb.png","w":1024,"h":768,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/d\/d\/dde86519c2c3979752324cb855bd53eb"}04.Taskmenu.png

Last time I tried it, it was super light (lighter than XFCE), and less crap than LXDE.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
avatar

It's no good. The menus are gibberish.

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

The menus are gibberish.

As long as you can access Google Translate, you're good, right?

They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas.

Gideon Weems
Member #3,925
October 2003

Furinkan, thanks for mentioning CrunchBang. I'm going to try it out. In addition, browsing the official forums introduced me to the beauty of tiled window managers, which I'm also going to try out.

Linux Mint has tons of distro/dependency/support problems...

I wholeheartedly concur, good sir.

Go to: