1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Which Linux?

Discussion in 'Linux / BSD / Mac OS X' started by Goodman, Mar 3, 2010.

  1. Goodman

    Goodman

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,519 (0.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    324
    Location:
    Canada/Québec/Montreal
    Ok! here the thing , I already got boot CD of Ubuntu 9.10 x86 (not for laptop?)

    I use it to boot from CD & use my USB Key to backup all the files from an old laptop before i format & reinstall XP

    The thing is is the laptop as only 512MB (510 free) so Ubuntu is running really , really slow , it looks like Ubuntu takes all the Ram's & not much is left out...?

    His there any other version of Linux that would take very little amount of Ram as possible so i can finish transferring/backup all my files (Transferring files go fast enough it's Ubuntu that is running slow)

    Thx!
  2. hellrazor

    hellrazor

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2010
    Messages:
    1,568 (0.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Well, since you haven't installed it, it would need to keep a copy of itself in memory or it would have to keep looking at the CD drive (even slower)... so.... you might want to try puppy linux....
    Goodman says thanks.
  3. KieX

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    2,408 (1.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,461
    Location:
    London, UK
    I'd second Puppy Linux. Or if you're willing to give it a go, try Xubuntu since XFCE is not a resource hog like Gnome.
    Goodman says thanks.
  4. Frick

    Frick Fishfaced Nincompoop

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    10,384 (3.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,085
    +1 on Xubuntu.
    Goodman says thanks.
  5. [Ion]

    [Ion] WCG Team Assistant

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2009
    Messages:
    11,786 (6.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10,889
    Location:
    North Carolina, United States
    I've used Xubuntu, and I like it, it's good for slower systems where GNOME or KDE doesn't run very well. DSL (Damn Small Linux) would also work, but it isn't nearly as fully-featured as Xubuntu
    Goodman says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  6. Goodman

    Goodman

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,519 (0.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    324
    Location:
    Canada/Québec/Montreal
    Thanks! to all of you , i am running Puppy Linux for now & it's run great :rockout:

    I'll will download Xubuntu also & try that later on & see which one i like better

    Thanks! again , guys :toast:
  7. Killer_Rubber_Ducky

    Killer_Rubber_Ducky

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,675 (1.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    294
    Debain is also a good pick or Lubuntu which is a project that is intended to lead to an official derivative of the Ubuntu operating system that is "lighter, less resource hungry and more energy-efficient", using the LXDE desktop environment.
    Also try CrunchBang Linux its ubuntu based using the OpenBox Window Manager and GTK+ apps.
    Fluxbuntu uses Fluxbox Window Manager
    Moon Os uses Enlightenment
  8. Boyfriend New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Messages:
    160 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    34
    Although Ubuntu is most common, but I will recommend SimplyMEPIS (8.0.xx). It is one of the best Linux version, as it already contains all programs including multimedia and it works, available as bootcd to try --> decide --> install.
  9. jimmt New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2010
    Messages:
    8 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Pretty much any flavor of Linux will perform great on 512mb of ram. What is heavy is the DE environment. KDE 4.0 is probably the most resource intensive of the popular desktop DE's. Though I found 3.5 to run pretty smooth on limited memory machines. Why Xubuntu is great is it uses XFCE as its DE which tends to have a very light footprint.

    Personally, in my opinion the best DE for small memory footprint machines are:

    FVWM
    Blackbox or Openbox
    IceWM
    AmiWM
    Windows Maker
    Afterstep
    Enlightenment 16.x
  10. Killer_Rubber_Ducky

    Killer_Rubber_Ducky

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,675 (1.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    294
    I'm liking E17 because I like the ability to easily create your own theme / gui. Plus it is beautiful.
  11. regexorcist

    regexorcist New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2010
    Messages:
    178 (0.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    46
    Location:
    ~/
    I agree about the 512mb of memory.
    I normally run conky and have never seen memory usage go over 500mb,
    but it does get close when compiling huge programs under Gentoo.

    To clarify things, try not to confuse Desktop Environments with Window Managers.

    Desktop Environments such as Gnome, KDE, XFCE, etc... have applications
    associated with them as well as a default Window Manager and typically all
    you need for a normal computing environment at run level 5 (GUI).

    Window Managers are much smaller and typically handle window characteristics
    in a GUI environment. Some have a few associated applications but not many
    and usually just configuration apps. There are many Window Managers such as
    Metacity (default WM for Gnome), Kwin (default WM for KDE), Fluxbox, AfterStep, etc...
    (many are denoted with a WM at the end of the name).

    The power of Linux is having an Xserver (xorg or XFree86) where you can choose
    to use most any Desktop Environment and or Window Manager.
    For example you can have a Gnome DE w/ Metacity WM or
    you could have a Gnome DE w/ OpenBox WM or
    you could have just OpenBox a rather good stand alone WM.

    Personally, I have one login that uses XFCE and in addition to XFCE,
    I have many independent and KDE applications installed, while under
    a different login I have JWM (Joe's Window Manager) and
    no Desktop Environment at all. I have a mis-match of independent
    and XFCE applications I use under this login
    (this user login has a much lighter footprint than the first one I mentioned) .

    NOTE:
    My current Linux distro is Arch which comes without any Xserver or GUI environment
    so you learn about these things real fast if you ever want to see a GUI :laugh:

    Yes I agree Enlightenment is awesome!! :D
    No matter what DE or WM I'm using, my main terminal is always Eterm (Enlightenment Terminal). :cool:
    Frick and TheLaughingMan say thanks.
  12. r9

    r9

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2008
    Messages:
    2,144 (0.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    284
    Use Hiren`s boot it jas Live Windows XP that takes no more than 50 MB of ram.
  13. TheLaughingMan

    TheLaughingMan

    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    5,066 (2.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,292
    Location:
    Marietta, GA USA
    Everyone here seems to think you will continue using the Linux distro, but I read your post and I noticed that you are just using it to backup files because WinXP that is on their now is FUBAR.

    Honestly, for a lappy that is just for day to day task like web browsing, music playing, a document here or there, I would say switch as well. Many of the light weight distros mentioned will improve battery life and seem snappier than reinstalling WinXP.

    Since you already said you are using one, but will check on Xubuntu, I have to assume you are a little curious about it now, so try all the ones mentioned. Fun fact, you can install most Linux distros onto a decent thumb drive. It is a plug n play OS and a good way to check out an OS. As stated before, LiveCD's install the entire OS into RAM and in your case, leaves little room for actual RAM usage. Since you actually install the OS onto the USB drive, your system has its full RAM to use while running. This will still be kinda slow since USB transfer rate is crap compared to a HDD, but once an app is started, you can get a better sense of how it would run if you actually installed the OS onto the HDD. Since it is also an actual install, you can do things BootCD's cannot such as play with customization, have persistant files, and ability to turn it off and on without needing to wait for the entire thing to be reinstalled again. It can also make your choices for Linux Distros to check out more flexible since you can now try OS's that require more space than you have in RAM for a LiveCD like Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Sabayon, OpenSuse, etc.

    P.S. Every true computer user has a Knoppix LiveCD on hand. It is the swiss army knife of fixing broken computers. Light weight, powerful, preinstalled tools for diagnostics, file scanners, partition repair, virus scanner, etc.

    Just a suggestion.
    Frick says thanks.
  14. Frick

    Frick Fishfaced Nincompoop

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    10,384 (3.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,085
    Aww. :(
  15. cyriene

    cyriene New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    183 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    19
    Location:
    Miami
    I'm no linux expert, but have used ubuntu for a bit. I tried Mint and really like it so far. It is based on ubuntu. I don't know how well it'll work with 512 ram though.
  16. jimmt New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2010
    Messages:
    8 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1
    LOL I say potato you say potata'. The thing is everyone I listed are in fact desktop environments. Well at one time before Gnome and KDE became more popular DE's. Maybe applying the Gnome/kDE test they are not. ;)

    I am a fan of E17 as well, but thinking on memory it might not perform well on 512mb footprint where as the older E16 performs great. Personally, I keep an old Redhat 5.2 media set around to use on older machines and fire up E14. Man E14 with Hand of god is the shizzle. The older KDE 1.x that came with it too is pretty dang good for its time.

    EDIT:
    I am loving this forum :)
  17. Goodman

    Goodman

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,519 (0.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    324
    Location:
    Canada/Québec/Montreal
    You guys... :slap: :laugh:
    This thread is a bit "old" & as you can see in my last post problem solve...:rolleyes:


    @TheLaughingMan...

    The laptop wasn't mine it belong to a client that wanted to back all is files , pictures & video's before i reinstall XP (with recovery disk)
    that was damage by some viruses & also having a small 30GB , the HD was full of sh*t! :eek:


    I think this thread can end now... ;)
  18. Killer_Rubber_Ducky

    Killer_Rubber_Ducky

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,675 (1.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    294
    While yes the problem is solved, discussion of the topic is possibly able to provide insight to others with the same issue.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page