When I got it, it had Win95 installed. I just installed Win98Se on it. Not much use for it except word processing which is reason enough for me to not blow it up. I'm gonna be using it for writing or programming while my brother hogs the main comp to play Oblivion. Are there any OSes from 10 years ago that I could install on this thing other than Windows? It's a real drag.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-28 15:45
windows 3.1
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-28 15:57
Can someone suggest a good minamalist Linux Distro?
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-28 16:00
There's FreeDOS too-- try turning it into a 'classic' games system.
Name:
J3ph422006-04-28 16:02
NetBSD - it will run on anything. It will run on much less than that. Seriously. http://netbsd.org/
VectorLinux I hear is pretty well designed for older systems, Damn Small linux is an option, but it might be more work setting it up than you want. VectorLinux should give you a decent base to work with
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-28 17:03
mmmm on second thought looking at the stats, even Vector might be too much. Not sure though check their page for more
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-28 23:25
haha, awesome, that thing is an older version of my laptop. and my laptop is an older than the hills!
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-29 3:11
Suggest more minimalist Linux distros. Something that can be installed to a hard drive and is optimized for wordprocessing.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-29 6:21
Try Beatrix. Runs off a LiveCD, can be installed to HD, minimalist, designed for basic office/internet functionality (comes with OOo, Firefox and a mail client (forget which one) and not much more). Runs GNOME in kernel space, which is insane but makes it dead snappy.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-29 7:03
>>12
I also need to be able to boot it from a floppy cause this crapbox can't boot a CD and I don't really need an internet connection for this one. NetBSD is having a few problems. >_<
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-29 10:17
is it possible for you to remove the hard drive, put it in another computer, install linux, and then put the hard drive back in the notebook?
you can probably use debian or whatever you want then, and not have to worry about using a minimalist distribution.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-29 10:33
>>15
Not the best idea with any OS unless you're putting it into an identical model computer. The differences in hardware can throw any OS into a tailspin. It's somewhat akin to waking up one morning and finding yourself in the body of, say, a camel.
>>5 >>6
Sure you'll get NetBSD running. I've got a 486DX75 w/ 16MB & 400MB HD with it installed. It'll be absolutely useless for anything graphical-- although I've got Linux emulation running for a ZGV binary (command-line jpeg/gif/png viewer).
The NetBSD Toaster? The TS-7200 system they used has more grunt and memory than the OP's machine. I call shinanigans. uCLinux runs in 1MB on 16MHz Dragonballs that cost pennies.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-29 13:58
>>14
If you can't boot from CDROM you can make a boot floppy that contains nothing but a bootloader that will boot the CDROM for you.
>>16
it's worked for me every time I've done it. it's something to keep in mind if you can't do anything else. unless you see an obvious reason why there would be a conflict, then go for it.
You must have at least 32MB of memory and 110MB of hard disk space. For a minimal console-based system (all standard packages), 250MB is required. If you want to install a reasonable amount of software, including the X Window System, and some development programs and libraries, you'll need at least 400MB. For a more or less complete desktop system, you'll need a few gigabytes.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-01 9:26
Debian will work on this machine. I Guarantee It.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-01 13:09
zimmer? is that you?
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-01 13:37
>>21
troll, Slackware would be a good choice for an old computer. I installed this ditro on an old 486 and it's fast enough for my needs.
Name:
Zimmer2006-05-02 9:08
Almost any Linux will operate outstandingly on our overhaul of this outdated operating object. I Guarantee It!
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-02 16:25
>>16
You can transfer any HD from any linux system to another provided that it stays at the same virtual device (e.g. if it shifts from /dev/hda to /dev/hdb you will have to edit your /etc/fstab). Linux does its hardware detection at boot time, and provided that your kernel is compiled for the lower of the two CPUs (if it needs to run on a 486, compile for i486, not p3, obviously) and the kernel has enough compiled into it to detect and use the ide controller and read the root partition to grab modules, it should be a 'drop-in' replacement. (I've done this before.) >>21
I used zipslack (a pared down version of slackware that fits in 100mb) back in the 9.0 days on a 486 laptop with a 500mb hard drive. If you reallyreally need X, hook it up to the internets briefly and add the packages using the shit that slackware has to do that (don't do what i did and try to compile from 3.3.6's source because the newer versions dropped native support for your laptop's chipset, because that will kill your machine -- but when you try it again years later, everything will work great and even the pcmcia modem you use will dial beautifully.)
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-02 22:58
Hay guyz,
I once installed Slackware on a 386 w/4MB RAM and a 40MB HD.