Harold Hallikainen wrote:
> Interesting! How do you think Ubuntu works on older hardware? I've used
> Red Hat since something like version 6, and have now gone to Fedora on the
> servers. But it was WAY too slow on my wife's old Sony Viao notebook
> computer. I'm currently trying Puppy Linux, and it is working very well
> except for the wireless card on boot up. It says it's configuring it and
> doing DHCP, but it's messing it up some how. If I then unplug the card,
> plug it back in, and tell it to scan for networks, it works fine.
> Otherwise, it seems good so far. Really fast!
>
> Harold
>
>   
I "rolled my own"  with a minimal ubuntu setup on a P1 266 with 64mb ram 
and no optical drive. It didn't suck too hard. It was nowhere near as 
speedy as damn small linux though. But it came with all the bells and 
whistles and you could run any software you wanted on it. If you want 
lower system requirements with all the niftyness pre done check out 
Xubuntu. I installed it on a friends PC (1.2ghz P4 256mb ram (i think) 
with a 32mb ATI graphics card) and it was running fine with beryl (the 
super nifty 3d desktop eyecandy goodness that totally smokes vista) 
really seriously if you are running ubuntu and have a 3d card give beryl 
a go. Anybody who see's it will say "wow is that vista????" then you can 
point to a vista machine and watch their faces drop ;->

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist