Comments on: 6 Lightweight Linux Distributions To Give Your Old PC A New Lease of Life

By: Lgwlinda

Lgwlinda — Mon, 14 Mar 2011 16:16:00 +0000

Did anyone every give you an info on system requirements? I have a laptop running (or rather “chugging” along like the little engine that could) XP Home SP2 664 MHZ, 256 MB of RAM that is not upgradeable. DSL (damn small linux) will not work on this machine no matter what I do or how I do it.

By: Tim Brookes

Tim Brookes — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 13:36:00 +0000

Thanks for the input, I’ll check it out. It’s always nice to turn that old PC into something useful!

By: mlburch

mlburch — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 04:06:00 +0000

I would also suggest trying legacyos 2010. I believe it’s an offshoot of Puppylinux. It runs great on an old celeron pc I had laying around. Very usable os with apps for most common tasks.

By: guest

guest — Tue, 25 Jan 2011 03:38:00 +0000

nice hearing this news I’ll try lubuntu on one of my laptop (ibm t22 which is so old that cannot boot by usb disk!) running w2k now.

By: Gusto

Gusto — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 21:03:00 +0000

Cape Verde: why not try a more light weight distro and use Hiawatha instead of apache?

By: Cape Verde

Cape Verde — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 18:42:00 +0000

I have an Acer that is 4 years old with 1gb of RAM and 2ghz processor single core. It runs Ubuntu nicely but since i started using Lamp it is like a snail. Gotta invest in hardware!

By: DarkDuck

DarkDuck — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 11:01:00 +0000

I personally would not name anything *buntu as “light”. It is still full-throttle OS with light desktop environment. Puppy and its derivatives (macpuppy, fluppy etc) is really light one. Other example already given is DSL.
And then… just to name a few: TCL (Tiny Core Linux), xPUD, SLAX.

I tested some of them, so you may find some useful info at http://linuxblog.darkduck.com

By: darkduck

darkduck — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 10:01:06 +0000

I personally would not name anything *buntu as "light". It is still full-throttle OS with light desktop environment. Puppy and its derivatives (macpuppy, fluppy etc) is really light one. Other example already given is DSL.
And then... just to name a few: TCL (Tiny Core Linux), xPUD, SLAX.

I tested some of them, so you may find some useful info at http://linuxblog.darkduck.com

By: Gusto

Gusto — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 07:11:00 +0000

Every version of puppy is “lite”. The latest LucidPup (lupu 5.2) is 125 MB. If you are bothered by the looks of the basic pup, try Macpup (a staggering 188 MB iso…)

Eeebuntu Base however is over 500 MB in size…

By: Gusto

Gusto — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 06:11:48 +0000

Every version of puppy is “lite”. The latest LucidPup (lupu 5.2) is 125 MB. If you are bothered by the looks of the basic pup, try Macpup (a staggering 188 MB iso…)

Eeebuntu Base however is over 500 MB in size…

By: stlouisubntu

stlouisubntu — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 02:07:00 +0000

lucky is right. Use Xubuntu if you like Ubuntu and the Xfce desktop, but don’t use it because you need an OS that is light on resources. It isn’t as it consumes nearly the resources as gnome.

By: Nhee Ghee

Nhee Ghee — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 23:32:00 +0000

Puppy is still an ugly dog.It has improved the icons and wallpaper but the dialogs have an amateurish appearance one should be embarrassed to show when spreading the word about Linux. Also there is no “lite” version of Puppy; it typically comes loaded with a large number of apps. For a true lite version you need something like Eeebuntu Base (soon to be Aurora Base) or the bizarre Tiny Core Linux.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 22:39:00 +0000

Another well-known small linux distro: Damn Small Linux. It can run on a 486 with 16MB RAM!

By: lucky

lucky — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 22:38:00 +0000

Xubuntu is nowhere near Lubuntu or any other Lxde based distro when comes in being light on resources.

By: Guest

Guest — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 20:55:00 +0000

What is missing from each of the distro’s description is the minimum system requirements such as RAM, MHZ processor etc.
Thanks.
From a real neophyte.