# Most suitable Linux Distribution



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Hi,

I have been a long time user of Windows and want to try out Linux to see what the hype's about. I've got an old computer (Pentium 2, 128MB RAM and a 4MB Video card). And the hard drive's only 10GB. 

I currently have Windows 2000 installed on the hard drive. I want to keep this and partition the hard drive so I can install Linux along with Windows 2000. 

Can people please make some reccomendations on which Linux distribution would be the best. I prefer a stable operating system with good compatibality with software and especially hardware(almost all hardware in the computer's at least 5 years old). 

If you post a recommendation could you please let me know the goods and the bads about the distribution?

Thanks to anyone who helps.


----------



## V0lt (Sep 14, 2002)

Redhat 9 is a decent distribution. You'll spend less time installing it and more time working with it than a lot of other distros.

Plus, it fits well on a 10gb drive with room to spare for experimentation.


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Thanks heaps Fox. Is it possible to get a Live CD for that?


----------



## Sgt_Grim_Reaper (Nov 11, 2004)

Not sure about a liveCD for Red Hat 9.0... that I'm aware of. But don't fret; you are in luck, because there are plenty of distros based on Red Hat Linux with and without Live CD. Knoppix is one. :smile: 

http://lwn.net/Articles/46668/


----------



## Sgt_Grim_Reaper (Nov 11, 2004)

Also, DSL (Damn Small Linux) is great for not taking up much space.


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Thanks guys for those recommendations. While reading about Knoppix on the net a lot of reviews said that it had trouble recognissing hardware made before 1998. My computer was made in about 1996. 

At the moment Red Hat 9 and DSL looks like the best options. If someone could provide me with more information about DSL, it would be very helpful, because it sounds pretty good.

And somebody at another forum told me Xubunutu is also a good distribution. Although it has large requirements, I can run Windows 2000 without a hitch, so should I be able to run Xubunutu 6.10?


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Hi Kane, how much space is Windows 2000 taking up on the hard drive? 
Anyways, DSL is good for the machine, but it's known to not be as user-friendly, for new Linux users.
A distro that comes to mind is SimplyMEPIS. It's minimum requirements are 128mb RAM and 2.5 gig disk space, Pentium processor. 
But Xubuntu is probably your best option. It runs the light, sleek Xfce GUI (Graphical User Interface) instead of the "heavier" KDE and GNOME found on most other distros. Min. requirements are 128mb of RAM for running the Live/Install CD, 1.5 gig disk space. Once installed, xubuntu can actually run on 64mb of RAM. The best thing about xubuntu is, that it is user-friendly for the most part. Like Ubuntu.


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

I second kbalona, and would add that you should download the "alternate install" version of Xubuntu, not the LiveCD. The LiveCD starts running into problems with less than 256 of RAM. The alternate install CD doesn't need as much RAM to complete the installation. I get the impression there's a lot of confusion regarding the alternate install CD. It's easy to go thru, just text-based instead of the graphics you get with the LiveCD. And of course it doesn't give you the option of trying out the operating system first, but with 128 of RAM you probly don't have that option anyway.
When you're done there's no difference between the finished products. Xubuntu will be Xubuntu whether you got there via the LiveCD or the alternate install CD.


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Bartender said:


> I second kbalona, and would add that you should download the "alternate install" version of Xubuntu, not the LiveCD. The LiveCD starts running into problems with less than 256 of RAM. The alternate install CD doesn't need as much RAM to complete the installation. I get the impression there's a lot of confusion regarding the alternate install CD. It's easy to go thru, just text-based instead of the graphics you get with the LiveCD. And of course it doesn't give you the option of trying out the operating system first, but with 128 of RAM you probly don't have that option anyway.
> When you're done there's no difference between the finished products. Xubuntu will be Xubuntu whether you got there via the LiveCD or the alternate install CD.


Excellent info, Bartender. The "alternate install" only requires 64mb of RAM for the installation.


----------



## V0lt (Sep 14, 2002)

I really wouldn't recommend a LiveCD for a first-time linux experience either. Much of linux is learned through the process of installation and configuration. A first time linux user won't learn much by just popping in a Knoppix disk (which is based off of Debian, btw, not RedHat).

My advice: either set up a virtual PC with a real distribution on it, or just bite the bullet and set up dual-booting with w2k and the linux flavor you finally decide on. You'll thank yourself when you start understanding why things are working, and not just knowing that they work.


----------



## TheMatt (May 9, 2006)

The Ubuntu distros are more user friendly, and it is easier to set up the dual boot. I have never personally used XFCE, but it sounds like it is light. I would go with that or maybe SUSE or Mandrake, as those run well on older systems also. Just remember, no matter which distro you use, to use the 386 kernel, as that it optimized for older systems.


----------



## Cellus (Aug 31, 2006)

You can also use something like Damn Small Linux (DSL) which is based on Knoppix. It has very low system requirements and has a very small resource footprint. It works on old hardware as well.

http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/

If the above suggestions do not work, this one should. If it doesn't work, you may need to get the syslinux version (greater compatibility over older hardware than isolinux).


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Is Ubuntu 10 the same as Xubuntu 10? If not which one should I donwload?

And I recently saw most people think that openSUSE is the best for beginners. Do you guys think it would be fit for my hardware? Anyone here use it? What are its features?


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

6.10 is the latest release of Ubuntu and Xubuntu. Xubuntu is based on Ubuntu, with a different GUI. So they have similar qualities. But xubuntu is better for slow systems. OpenSUSE is a good distro. It looks like your system meets the minimum requirements, but it might run slowly.


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

Yeah, Kane, 6.06 is the "Dapper" release, called LTS for Long Term Support. The 6.06 version is available as Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, & Edubuntu. 6.10 is called "Edgy" and is not Long Term Support. Edgy is available as Ub, Kub, Xub, Edu. It will be replaced with Feisty Fawn in a few months.

I've tried 6.06, 6.10, Xub, Kub, and Ubuntu. I like Xubuntu. Struggling for the correct term - don't want to use "stripped" or "bare-bones" or some other term that hints at an inferior experience. It does not offer certain conveniences that we take for granted, such as the ability to easily drag-and-drop icons to the desktop. I also noticed the super-easy dial-up modem setup in 6.06 Ubuntu was gone. But who's on dial-up any more anyway? Well, besides me anyway... :upset: 

The default desktop is pleasant and if you have access to broadband you can add pretty much whatever you want. Automatix2 works with Xubuntu. But I think it's important to remember that Xubuntu is designed to be lightweight. It doesn't include the entire OpenOffice suite. You can add OO, but it's kinda like hitching a big old U-Haul trailer onto your Porsche, if you know what I mean. You'll get there but it'll feel slow.

For you, I'd suggest the Xubuntu 6.06 Alternate Install CD. 6.10 would probly run just fine, but I don't think there's any compelling reason to use it instead of 6.06.


----------



## Raven (Oct 19, 2006)

Kubuntu all the way


----------



## fredobrien (Nov 18, 2005)

Kubuntu, xubuntu,ubuntu & ATI video cards have problems. If you have ati would not try. Nvidia will work. Mandriva 2006 is nice & friendly & easier for frist time user.Works with most hardware & will work with modems. I hear 2007 is better. Have not tried. Fred


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Bartender said:


> But I think it's important to remember that Xubuntu is designed to be lightweight. It doesn't include the entire OpenOffice suite. You can add OO, but it's kinda like hitching a big old U-Haul trailer onto your Porsche, if you know what I mean. You'll get there but it'll feel slow.



I would be very thankful if you could tone down on the slang/jargon. So are you saying that Open Office is already pert of Xubuntu, but only part of it and if I want the full version it's going to slow down the OS?


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Right. You can easily install it through the Synaptic Package Manager (think Add/Remove Software). However it may slow down your system some, but I'm guessing it would still run OK.


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

I didn't mean to confuse you with jargon. Just trying to create a visual image.

Xubuntu comes with abiword, a nice word processor that would work just fine for most of us. However, I don't think abiword can change the format of your document to Word 97. OpenOffice can, and it's an awfully nice feature to have when e-mailing documents to friends who use that other OS. 
If you have broadband, you can add the OpenOffice suite via Synaptic when you're done installing Xubuntu. kbalona, please correct me if I'm wrong on this, but the only time you'll see a performance hit is when you actually use OpenOffice. Installing OO isn't going to slow the PC down all the time, just when you use it. The rest of the time your Porsch - er - PC will run just fine.

Same with other programs. For example, Google Picasa is an image management program with all kinds of features, but it's big and slow. You'd be better off using F-Spot (available in Synaptic after you enable the extra repositories) for photo management and GIMP for image manipulation.

I just looked back to your first message. 10GB is going to get awful tight, especially if you start adding programs like OO to your Linux OS. Any chance of scrounging up a second drive for your Linux install?

Hey, while we're on this subject of OO responsiveness, here's a link for speeding up OO. If you've got lots of RAM you can boost those settings higher. I've got 650+ and pushed the first setting to 120 MB or so.


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Bartender said:


> I didn't mean to confuse you with jargon. Just trying to create a visual image.
> 
> Xubuntu comes with abiword, a nice word processor that would work just fine for most of us. However, I don't think abiword can change the format of your document to Word 97. OpenOffice can, and it's an awfully nice feature to have when e-mailing documents to friends who use that other OS.
> If you have broadband, you can add the OpenOffice suite via Synaptic when you're done installing Xubuntu. kbalona, please correct me if I'm wrong on this, but the only time you'll see a performance hit is when you actually use OpenOffice. Installing OO isn't going to slow the PC down all the time, just when you use it. The rest of the time your Porsch - er - PC will run just fine.
> ...


Correct, it shouldn't slow down your system unless it's running. OpenOffice is definitely tops as the free Office suite. 
I'm currently running Fedora Core 5 on a 10 GB partition (or less, can't remember exactly but I know it's not more than 10). I have about 2 gigs free space. So I think for starts you should be OK with 10, unless you're planning on downloading lots of music/video.


----------



## TheMatt (May 9, 2006)

10 GB isn't too bad, especially if you're installing a light distro. I installed Kubuntu along with a ton of KDE Programs, games, and OpenOffice (which came with Kubuntu) on the 15 GB partition on my laptop. I still have 8 GB left after all the stuff I put on there.

BTW, In my Kubuntu installation, OpenOffice takes the same amount of time as Konqueror to open if you install the OpenOffice Quickstarter (oooqs2). After installing it, go into the Tools > Options > Memory > check > Enable Systray Quickstarter. Works like a charm if you have 512+ MB of RAM.


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Thanks heaps everyone and Bartender. Your help is unparreled by any other forum. I think I'll be able to get another 10GB Hard drive for free, just for Linux so I should be fine with space. I currently run Office 2003 on the computer and the computer gets slow but I guess OO isn't that large?

ANd according to what you've said, Bartender, there's a downloading program on Xbuntu that recommends which applications are best for Linux?

Thanks again for everyone's help.


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

Kane2000 said:


> there's a downloading program on Xbuntu that recommends which applications are best for Linux?


Synaptic, the package manager built into all the flavors of Ubuntu, is just awesome. It doesn't recommend programs, but if you find them in the main repositories you can feel confident they'll work. Other repo's can be enabled, such as multiverse, and I'd say you'll be just fine with anything found there too. 

In the Windows world, a download like - um - I don't know, let's say you wanted to download IE7 or the latest Adobe Reader. The download is one contiguous package. When you're done you click on the .exe.

In the Linux world, packages are often accompanied by "dependencies", smaller packages of data that your PC needs to run the main package correctly. Synaptic Package Manager handles all that for you. It gets the main package, identifies the necessary dependencies, downloads them, then installs the packages, cleans up, stashes the old packages in an archive, etc. You can also install packages manually, but I think Synaptic is the beginner's friend.

I also mentioned Automatix2, which is a really neat script put together by a guy who goes by the tag arnieboy. Useta be you had to find Automatix via the Ubuntu website but he's set up an Automatix2 website now. I'm not going to go thru all the details because there are tons of posts and instructions everywhere. Just want to explain the basic concept. You have to edit your repositories list so that your PC can go to a new repository when arnie's script asks it to. Then you download the Automatix script. Then you start Automatix and scroll down thru the listed programs, picking out the ones you want Automatix to download & install for you. Then you tell Automatix to go get 'em. This is a super way to get Opera and multimedia codecs and a bunch of other stuff installed all at once. 

You can do everything Automatix2 does by hand, and many people think that you should for the learning experience.

I was trying to help a friend install Opera. We went to Opera's website, followed the directions, found the download for Ubuntu; it didn't work right when we finished. He uninstalled it, then let Automatix2 install Opera and it's working fine. Take that for what it's worth.


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Bartender said:


> main repositories


Thanks heaps Bartender. But what are repositories?


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Repositories are like databases of software that is available for download. Linux distributions each have "official" repositories. And you can enable other repositories and have access to more programs. For instance, some all Open-Source Linux distributions come with only the default repositories enabled, and those repositories contain only Open-source programs. So if you want to for example, install Macromedia Flash Player, you have to enable a repository that contains it. Below is a link describing what Ubuntu's Multiverse and Universe repositories are about. Maybe that will help you understand.
http://www.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/components


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

Very nice link, k -

Kane, here are a couple more that should help you gain a further understanding of what the repositories are, what they can do for you, and how you can access them...

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Repositories/Ubuntu

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RestrictedFormats


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Thanks heaps kbalona and Barteder. The links are very helpful. Now it's more clear to me what you guys were talking about before. Makes much more sense. Ok, now I have decided to install Xubuntu 6.06 LTS on the computer. 

Is there anything I should know about Xubuntu before I install? Any last comments about Xubuntu?

Thanks everyone for the excellent help you've given me.


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Well, if everything goes smoothly you should be set. It will be easy since you are installing Linux on a separate hard drive from Windows. 
But remember that if you are installing Linux on the same hard drive as Windows, before you install Linux you must Defragment and Defragment again. 
I hope everything goes well.


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Goddamn it. I didn't get that new hard drive. So now I have to install Linux on the same hard drive as Windows and I have never partitioned. So guys I need a bit of help. How do I partition? Do I just put the Linux CD in and install on a different partition or something.

And can you please make sure all your explanations are easy for a noob like me to understand.

Thanks heaps.


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Well first you need to find out how much space Windows is taking up. And then figure out how much you can allot for Xubuntu. The xubuntu installer will take care of the partitioning and setting up your Bootloader (so you can choose either Windows or Xubuntu to load). You just need to "tell" it how big a partition you want to make. You aren't going to have much space for extras until you get another hard drive. 
The steps will go like this:
1. Backup any and all important files in Windows. The chance of something screwing it up is not very high, but there is always a chance, and it's best to be prepared. 
2. Defagment your C: drive. Once is good enough, twice is better. The reason for this is that when you resize an existing partition to make a new one, if that partition (or the whole hard drive in your case) is fragmented ("pieces" of data scattered over the hard drive instead of neatly arranged) you have a higher risk of getting corrupted files. 
Then you're ready to install Linux! There is a really good step-by-step dual boot guide with screenshots, it is using Ubuntu but is the same for xubuntu except for graphics.
http://users.bigpond.net.au/hermanzone/p3.htm
That should be helpful for you to read over before you start or you may even want to print a few pages out for reference.
If any of this confuses you, don't hesitate to have it clarified.


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

Yeah, what k said -
I'm doing that a lot lately, just agreeing with kbalona. No independent thoughts rattling around I guess  

Go into Settings, Disk Mgmt in XP and make sure you don't have a chunk of data parked way over to the right. I don't have a specific suggestion for getting Windows to move the data over, but you don't want to proceed until you see open space on the disk.

My first and only Windows/Linux dual boot was done with the test Linux PC and another PC both on the same bench. The second PC was online and herman's website, the one that k points out, was displayed so I could walk thru the steps one by one very carefully. There were way too many things to do for me to try it any other way.

Kane, I'm sure you're chomping at the bit to proceed with this, but if there's any chance of picking up a spare drive from someone in the next few weeks I'd suggest holding off. If you had a bigger drive I'd say go for it but I'm afraid you're going to have trouble with 10 GB of storage. I mean, how much is Windows taking up now?


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Thanks heaps Bartender and kbalona. I've gone to about 5 different forums and no one in any forum has helped me and clarified stuff to me as easy or kindly as you guys. All the big heads on the other forums told me to stop asking the same question everyone is asking and read all the forums and ALL the documents for Ubuntu before asking them anything. They were no damn help. Man I would like to say I love you two guys but (assuming both of you're guys) I would be considered gay if I said that. So I love you in a non sexual way. The thing is I've been really busy due to exams and I'm doing a whole heap of other stuff, so I don't have enough time to read all the documents. Thanks again to everyone in TSF for the help they provided :grin: 



Bartender said:


> Kane, I'm sure you're chomping at the bit to proceed with this, but if there's any chance of picking up a spare drive from someone in the next few weeks I'd suggest holding off. If you had a bigger drive I'd say go for it but I'm afraid you're going to have trouble with 10 GB of storage. I mean, how much is Windows taking up now?


If I wait for about 3 more weeks I may be able to get that free hard drive, but I don't have that much time in my hands. I want to install it this week as I'm going to be really busy during the summer holidays. And 3GB of my 10GB hard drive has been taken up by Windows 2000. So I have 7GB of empty Hard drive space. And I also found out I have 256MB of RAM, although I think the old motherboard can only handle 128MB of it.

Thanks again to everyone.


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Kane2000 said:


> Man I would like to say I love you two guys but (assuming both of you're guys) I would be considered gay if I said that. So I love you in a non sexual way. The thing is I've been really busy due to exams and I'm doing a whole heap of other stuff, so I don't have enough time to read all the documents. Thanks again to everyone in TSF for the help they provided :grin:


LOL, that made me laugh! Thanks for the compliments. 
BTW Bartender, I'm glad we can agree!:grin:
Kane2000, 7 GB will be fine for starters, like we've said before you won't be able to install a whole lot of extra programs or store much digital content (music, etc.). 
If you could get 256mb RAM in, that would be great. But you'll be OK with 128. 
Good luck!


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

More RAM goooood

Hey, tell us what you want to do with the PC and we can probly suggest some programs to add to the basic install before you're done with classes.

Also, if you've got some spare time take a look at the Automatix2 website. I would give you the link but it's down right now. Automatix2 will help you jump-start Xubuntu with multimedia codec's and DVD burners and other neat stuff.
Just make sure to get started on the right part! A few weeks ago I followed the directions for installing the version of Automatix designed for Edgy to a friend's Dapper PC. Whoops A quick post on the Ubuntu Forum and arnieboy himself told me how to start over again. That was embarrassing.


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Bartender said:


> Hey, tell us what you want to do with the PC and we can probly suggest some programs to add to the basic install before you're done with classes.


Well the thing is I have school from Monday to Wednesday then I have 7 weeks of summer holidays. So on Thursday I'll try to read as much of the Xubuntu documents and install guides as possible. On Firday I'll install the OS. Then I will tell you what I want to do, because I haven't really planned yet. But right now I'm thinking of the same programs as Windows 2000. Nothing in particular. I just want to test out Linux and see how programs work on it. Do I have to decide which programs I want during the installation process?


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

You do not not have to decide during the installation. Sure, you can if you want to, but you can just as easily install them later.


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

How easy is uninstallation and what corruption/fragements does it leave on a dual boot harddrive, if I or kane installed Xubuntu and then didn't like it?

I have an empty 7GB drive partition. Thats the only space I have left at the moment but its empty and never used. I'd like to install Xubuntu on there too, but I have this final query. I have 2GB RAM tho. If I get you correctly, when I install through the xubuntu CD, it will ask which harddrive or partition to be installed on and that won't affect my other partitions?

Thanks.


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Right. Just make sure you select the right options that you have another OS that you want to keep (therefore a dual boot). Specify which partition you want Linux on.
If you don't like it, no problem. Just format it (you can even do that right from Windows) and install another distro of your choice.


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

Thanks. Can I keep Windows XP (my other boot) files/folders on that harddrive and they'll work for me using XP but nothing will happen to them when booting into Linux?
When you say format, if I have any folders/files on there belonging to XP, will they be deleted?

I'd think so, but making sure as I test for Firefox and Thunderbird nightlies and at many times I keep the latest version zips on this harddrive partition.


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Kalim, that's right, nothing will happen to the files on your XP partition. 
When you format, you only format the partition that Linux was on and nothing happens to your other partition that has XP on it.


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

Thanks kbalona. Another qs, please pardon the ignorance of but with any OS drivers are usually required for the hardware... so for the hardware I have installed, will I have to install the drivers again?


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

No, that's a good question. You will need drivers, and Linux drivers are totally different from the Windows versions. 
But I think most distros will properly detect and install the required drivers for your hardware. (Automatically). I don't know what kind of onboard video you have, but video cards seem to be the toughest to get Linux drivers for, although manufacturer support for Linux has drastically improved and is more and more manufacturers are realizing the need to provide drivers for Linux.


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

Where would the distro's get the drivers from if the mobo manufacturer doesn't make them? (mine doesn't provide for Linux)

Mines integrated Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 900 (GMA900) BTW. I'm not a gamer at all.


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

Kalim -
Any major distro (Ubuntu, Mepis, etc.) will have no problems with the Intel onboard graphics, so no need to worry about that. Linux developers have to build drivers for devices themselves because most manufacturers only develop drivers for Windows. The "Install" CD that came with your printer or scanner likely only has Windows or Mac drivers so is worthless within Linux.
The best thing you can do is start doing some searches on the Linux sites for your devices. Or ask us :grin: 
HP printer/scanners generally work well. Most digital cameras with a USB output are recognized. Etc. etc. Some brands work better than others and that's where a little homework comes in handy.


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

While we are on the topic of Graphics cards, my old computer has an old S3 Trio 3D graphics card. And the S3 official site hardly has any drivers for Windows. Do you know where I could find the drivers when I install Linux?


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

Kane2000 said:


> While we are on the topic of Graphics cards, my old computer has an old S3 Trio 3D graphics card. And the S3 official site hardly has any drivers for Windows. Do you know where I could find the drivers when I install Linux?


Do you not find any drivers for the S3 (windows) here: https://ranger.s3graphics.com/362drv [go through the prompts it'll get through]


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

Thanks kbalona and Bartender. I do use a range of devices that are not mentioned in my system info here. I'll still do some searching first.

Thanks again


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Kane2000 said:


> While we are on the topic of Graphics cards, my old computer has an old S3 Trio 3D graphics card. And the S3 official site hardly has any drivers for Windows. Do you know where I could find the drivers when I install Linux?



Did you mean hardly any graphics for Linux?
Anyhow, I really don't think Ubuntu family will make any problems with your graphics card.


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

Kane, after all this work you may not be done. I did a search for "s3 trio" on the Ubuntu Forums. You may have to tweak your xserver settings. 

At this point might as well go ahead and see what happens. You may get 2D support but not 3D, or maybe it'll just work, or maybe you can tweak some things to get 3D; I don't know and it would take too long to research it. You've already tried a Ubuntu LiveCD and your monitor worked OK, didn't it?


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

kbalona said:


> Did you mean hardly any graphics for Linux?


I meant Windows. It's so hard to find the drivers for it. Not even the official site has it anymore. 

And unfortunately, Bartender, I didn't try a live CD because you guys said that too much RAM's needed. Hopefully the windows drivers would work ion Linux.

And also Kalim, thatnks for the link, but I already have a windows driver. What I meant was it's so hard to find it.

Thanks everyone for the help.


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

Sorry, Kane, I'm losing track...

and Windows graphics card drivers will not work in Linux


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Damn it. So I'm screwed unless I get a different grpahics card? 

What I meant was that if it's so hard to find S3 drivers for Windows, it's going to be considerably more difficult to find drivers for Linux.


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

Kane2000 said:


> Damn it. So I'm screwed unless I get a different grpahics card?
> 
> What I meant was that if it's so hard to find S3 drivers for Windows, it's going to be considerably more difficult to find drivers for Linux.


Well it didn't take me long, actually around 30 seconds to find a link to your graphics drivers the last time I posted. But yes, they're maybe not in the common places you'd expect to find them hence you have to look around a little.

I doubt Linux provides drivers for your S3 though. Do you not have onboard so you can just use that with Linux instead of the added card?


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

According to his system at the left, his video is onboard.


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

kbalona said:


> According to his system at the left, his video is onboard.


Thats mine :tongue: 
Kane hasn't provided any system info in that section.


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

LOL what the..? ROFL. My bad, bad. Sorry.


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

At this point I'd say download the Xubuntu alternate install CD and toss it in. If you get visuals, then Xubuntu has drivers for you and you can proceed. If the screen goes blank or you get just a cursor blinking uo in the left hand corner of the screen, then we know that xorg (I think that's the right term) can't make sense of the graphics. There are about a million posts regarding tweaking on the xorg file in order to get the graphics working, at least in 2D if not 3D. I haven't had to go therre so not familiar with process. Sometimes you can just change one line to "vesa". I'll try to find a coupla good links.


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Ok, that sounds alright. I think I'll install it on Friday. I donwloaded the alternate install CD and got it on CD.

I have an S3 3D graphics card. And I have AMD something that's equivalent to a Pentium 2. And 256MB RAM, although the motherboard can handle a max of 128MB. So there are my specs.


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

Kane -
Is your S3 a discrete video card or built onto the motherboard? It looks like the S3 products are thinly supported
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=264650&highlight=vesa
and might give you a real headache. 

_If_ the Xubuntu install just goes to a blank screen, and _if_ the S3 is a discrete card, and _if_ you're willing to spend a little bit of cash to make the problem go away, just ditch that old S3 card and replace with a compatible graphics card that's carrying an Nvidia chip. NVidia graphics are the best for Ubuntu. 

My test Linux PC had an ATI 9200SE vid card. Everytime the PC went to screensaver, it'd lock up tight. If I even visited the screensaver page to turn off the screensaver mode it'd lock up!

So I replaced it with a compatible AGP card (ASUS card with an Nvidia chip) and the problems evaporated. I'm hoping that your graphics will work just fine but I won't be surprised if they don't. 

Sometimes spending a little bit of money is easier than trying to hack a solution, especially for those of us who are new to Linux. If you're reluctant to spend money on an ancient PC I'd sure understand but wanted to make the suggestion anyway...


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

According to X.org wiki, s3virge - S3 ViRGE series (ViRGE, ViRGE DX,GX,GX2,MX,MX+,VX and Trio3D,Trio3D/2x) are supported.
http://wiki.x.org/wiki/VideoDrivers


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

kbalona said:


> According to X.org wiki, s3virge - S3 ViRGE series (ViRGE, ViRGE DX,GX,GX2,MX,MX+,VX and Trio3D,Trio3D/2x) are supported.
> http://wiki.x.org/wiki/VideoDrivers


Hooray. My graphics card is supported. The only problem is which one I'm supposed to download. Do I choose OS/2 Drivers or Miscellaneous drivers to run on Xubuntu? The rest of the drivers are for Windows. I checked on the official S3 website and found it.


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

S3 does not supply the Linux drivers for your card. They are provided by xorg (made by xorg's developers, not S3).
Since xorg supports it, and Xubuntu uses xorg, I should think that it will detect it for you and install the drivers.


----------



## Valandil (Dec 6, 2006)

SuSE is probably my personal favorite Linux distro.


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

kbalona said:


> S3 does not supply the Linux drivers for your card. They are provided by xorg (made by xorg's developers, not S3).
> Since xorg supports it, and Xubuntu uses xorg, I should think that it will detect it for you and install the drivers.


But how do I donwload it from the website. There isn't a link for downloading it.


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

Maybe you have to subscribe/register for it...


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

Whats this I'm hearing about Ubuntu uninstallation issues on a dual boot?

I heard you just have to format and loose everything because the grub messes everything up. IS this a known issue?


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Kalim, it's all on your Ubuntu CD. You don't have to do anything. 
There's actually no "Uninstaller" in Ubuntu. All you have to do is delete & format the partition that it's on. Then you need your Windows XP disk, you put it in and boot your computer from it. Then you go to the Recovery Console (it's like a DOS prompt) and type fixmbr.
It overwrites GRUB with the normal Windows MBR (Master Boot Record). Nothing happens to your XP partition.


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

I see. Right, thanks for that kbalona :grin:


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

Kyle, thanks for the xorg link. Had no idea there was such a thing as an xorg website!

Kalim, it would be better for everyone if you started your own thread when you have questions which are not closely related to the original poster's discussion.

It just works better that way. I've seen threads where several other people jumped in and the whole thing becomes a mess. Nobody can tell who's talking to whom, the wrong person acts on info intended for someone else, the original poster gives up in frustration, it can get ugly...

Thanks


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Kalim said:


> Maybe you have to subscribe/register for it...


Can't do that. I simply cannot find where the download link is. And I still haven't read any of the documents for Xubuntu. I guess I'll install it by the end of next week.


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

kbalona said:


> Kalim, it's all on your Ubuntu CD. You don't have to do anything.
> There's actually no "Uninstaller" in Ubuntu. All you have to do is delete & format the partition that it's on. Then you need your Windows XP disk, you put it in and boot your computer from it. Then you go to the Recovery Console (it's like a DOS prompt) and type fixmbr.
> It overwrites GRUB with the normal Windows MBR (Master Boot Record). Nothing happens to your XP partition.


Oh boy! That first part was meant for Kane2000. Very sorry. It's like Bartender said, very confusing with 2 people in the same thread.
Kane2000, you don't have to download anything. The drivers should come with xorg which is on your CD.


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

kbalona said:


> Kane2000, you don't have to download anything. The drivers should come with xorg which is on your CD.


Oh, now I get it. So xorg is a built in program on Xubuntu of some sort?


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

xorg is the "windowing system". It's what runs the GUI. (Graphical User Interface)


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Ok, I got permission from my sister to completely format the hard drive. After I format it, should I install Windows first and then partition and install Linux second, or do it the other way around.

And also would it be better and faster for me to install Win 98 rather than Win 2000? The only thing is that Win 98 is FAT32. Would that be a problem?


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Windows first, then Linux. 
I really up to you which version of Windows you want to install. Win 98 might run better on your hardware. It doesn't matter that it's FAT32, in fact, it's better that way because you can read and write to FAT32 partitions from Linux.


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

kbalona said:


> Windows first, then Linux.
> I really up to you which version of Windows you want to install. Win 98 might run better on your hardware. It doesn't matter that it's FAT32, in fact, it's better that way because you can read and write to FAT32 partitions from Linux.


Thanks Kbalona


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Sorry for double posting.

Is making a partition for Dapper Drake with a FAT partition already on the hard drive, the same as with NTFS? I just want to make sure that I can use the tutorial called "Windows with NTFS + Dapper Drake". 

Thanks for any help.


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Yeah, the steps should be the same, you won't have any trouble because of that (that I know of).


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Hooray, I installed Xubuntu 6.06. But I decided not to go with dual boot. SO I only have Xubuntu on my computer now. The desktop looks so god damn different. And how the hell do I run a program? 

My most important question is how do I install drivers for my router? I've got a software CD with the router but it has drivers for Windows and Mac only. I have the router connected to the computer via USB but the available Linux driver for my router is only if the connection's via ethernet. My router is Netcomm NB5Plus4W and I need a USB Linux driver for it. Do any of you guys know where I can obtain that from?


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

I think maybe your router won't work USB in linux


> USB Modems
> 
> Currently the only NetComm USB modem that will work with Linux is the NetComm Roadster II USB (AM5050 Rev3). It requires a Linux Kernel that supports USB CDC communications devices (Development v2.3.x kernels and 2.4 or later kernels). The modem will be allocated a /dev/ttyACM0 or similar name.


http://kb.netcomm.com.au/kb/default.asp?id=1293&Lang=1


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

This one guy on another forum told me I don't even need a driver for it, just need to configure something. I asked him to clarify what I need to configure, so I'll have to wait and see.


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Really sorry for double posting, but I feel it's necessary.

Forget about the minimum requirements. Which Linux is most user friendly: OpenSUSE 10.2 or Ubuntu 6.10? Which one is more like Windows.

Thanks for help.


----------



## Raven (Oct 19, 2006)

I haven't used SUSE yet, but Ubuntu is very nice,
Mind I tell you that _K_ubuntu is better , It's a "spinoff".


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

I'd say both are right up there. Suse is considered quite user-friendly. Yesterday I installed PCLinuxOS, after hearing a lot of good reports on it. I was totally astonished at it's "out of the box" working capabilities. I had not yet tried out a distro that had so many features working out of the box. For instance, the Java plugin for Firefox is working. I went to Youtube, watched videos there. Listened to an mp3 in Firefox with the mplayer plugin, then I downloaded it to see if one of the installed players could play, but it couldn't. So it does have a few small things to be tweaked. But I was impressed with it's pretty layout, nice eye-candy. I have a feeling it'll be the main distro I use.


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Ok that's it. I've given up on Xubuntu. It's too difficult to work with. The GUI sucks. I tried installing Ubuntu twice but stopped installing twice halfway through the process.

Any other Linux distributions anyone wants to recommend?


----------



## Raven (Oct 19, 2006)

Yes, like I said, *K*ubuntu
Very nice and user friendly:grin:


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

Ubuntu (two versions), Fedora Core 5 and Mandriva 2007 work very well for me after some reading around and experimenting. To me Ubuntu 6.10 sounds better after installation than the other [x]buntu's. And the way to install it would be through the Live CD.


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

Try simplyMEPIS! It is reputed to have the best hardware detection around, although I have not personally tried it. If your computer specs were a little higher, I'd tell you to go with PCLinuxOS if you want a system that works "out of the box".


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Ok, now my computer's really stuffed. It was working perfectly for over a year when I had Windows 200 installed. But then I tried Xubuntu 6.06 with the Alternate Install CD dual boot with Win2000. It worked fine excpet I didn't like it. I thought it was alright so I formatted the whole hard drive and installed Xubuntu 6.06 by itself. Again it worked fine. But after using it for about half an hour I decided I didn't like it. So I formatted the whole drive and installed Win2000. Then I decided to have another shot at Linux and tried to install Ubuntu 6.10 with the Alternate install CD. ut about half way throguh the installation process stopped. So then I completely formatted the whole hard drive again and tried installing Ubuntu 6.10 again but it froze again, but at a different position. I tried once more but the same result, stopping at a different position. 

So I got pissed off and decided to stick with Windows. I installed Windows 98 and installed all the drivers and then installed AGV free antivirus. After its installation, it asked to be restarted, so I said yes and it restarted. But after loading Windows, rather than going to the desktop, a sreeen with a Windows backgrous with all screwed up colour was displayed. So I decided to restart the computer and then I went to Safe Mode and uninstalled the antivirus. After a day the computer started having more problems. I couldn't open Internet explorer or My Computer. I also couldn't open any pictures. And everytime I turn the computer it asked to go on to Safe mode saying I didn't Shut down properly (which is false). 

So I formatted the whole hard drive, yet again, and tried installing Windows 2000 Pro. After installation, as error screen said that some sort of file with an .inf extention couldn't be copied and asked if I wanted to continue anyway. I clicked no and then tried installing all over again after formatting again. But a blue scree came up before any Windows files were copied to hard drive saying "...if this is the first time you've...." I can't rememeber the exact error. The I tried installing Xp and XP pro, which also stopped kidway with the blue screen. Then I tried installing Win 98 and then Xubuntu, but both stopped half way saying files couldn't be copied. 

Any idea what's happening to the computer? I've got a 10GB IDE hard drive. Could it be something wrong with the hard drive?

Thank you for any help,


----------



## K-B (Oct 24, 2005)

You could use a Win 98 startup disk or the XP Disk, with the XP disk go to the Recovery Console (press R). Then do a chkdsk /p and see what it finds.


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

Kane, I've dinked around with several old/surplussed PC's and run into a few defective optical drives. I'll tell you the worst experience. I had a brand new W2K CD. Put the CD in the tray, and the optical drive spun up. It sounded harsh and kinda clattery but I didn't pay much attention. The PC wouldn't install W2K. Kept failing at various steps. In frustration I popped the CD out and looked for dust or a fingerprint or a hair stuck to it. 
I just about crapped myself. My brand new W2K CD had a crack in it, right at the edge! The optical drive was so worn out it'd tossed the CD around and broken it. I took the CD over to another PC and was able to copy the data to a couple of new CD's. I got error messages but kept trying until I got a good read off of it.
That was a hard-learned lesson about trusting expensive new CD's to old and untested hardware.

What you describe sounds to me like an optical drive that's not working right. Might be an easy fix, like popping in one of those cleaner CD's and trying to clean the lens. 

One way to find out if the drive is failing is swap it with another. Optical drives are just about the easiest thing in the world to swap. Just pay attention to the way the ribbon cable goes (don't get it backward) and make note of the little jumpers on the back of the drive. If your existing drive was jumpered as slave and you pop in one that's jumpered as master it won't work. You can just set the drive on top of the PC or a stack of books or whatever. It doesn't have to be bolted into the PC chassis if you're just testing.

EDIT: I've lost track of which PC we're talking about. Does your sister's PC have less than 256MB of RAM? I don't blame you for getting a little frustrated with Xubuntu. It is harder to get started with than Ubuntu or Kubuntu or SUSe or PCLinuxOS or SimplyMepis. 

I would suggest that in your situation you'd be better off to try and find some more RAM, enuf to get at least 512 under the hood. Then you can install whatever version you want instead of being pushed back toward the "lighter weight" but harder to use distros. 
Finding the right RAM might take a little research. If you're interested in trying, post your exact PC model or open it up, look for any info on the motherboard, and post that.


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

Do that and its always best to run a HDD and RAM scan using UBCD tools before installing anything. Also the chkdsk /(parameter) is a good way to go at this stage.


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Thanks for the quick replies guys. Bartender, I'm getting another hard drive tommorow. Same capacity. We are talking about my sister's computer which is: 
AMD equivalent to Pentium 2
256MB RAM (although I think the motherboard can only handle 128MB)
10GB Quantum fireball HDD

I keep the old computer to experiment, such as installing different operating systems. But at the same time I've got to make sure the old computer's working most of the time so my sister could use it. So that means I'm NOT willing to upgrade ANY hardware. I just want to experiment. 

I got so sick of Linux because of one reason: I couldn't connect to the internet as I couldn't install my router. But I got the ethernet card and plugged it in and when Xubuntu 6.06 was installing, it detected the router. So I was all happy and excited about Linux again. But as I said before, the installation froze. I also have another CD Rom drive, so I'll use that the next time. 

Thanks heaps for your advise. I'll install Xubuntu again and let you know about the result ASAP.


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

Kane - Can you dive into the BIOS for me please, and tell me how much RAM is detected? I'm pretty sure that whatever the BIOS reports is what the PC is using. If there's a 256 stick inside but BIOS reports 128, then we know the motherboard is only utilizing 128. However, 128 seems awful low, even for a motherboard of that vintage. 

I have a couple of expensive sticks of Corsair memory that got damaged when a power supply failed. They're 256's but the motherboard they're in now only detects 128. The third Corsair stick survived the frying and is detected as 256. I wonder if your stick of memory is damaged?


----------



## Kane2000 (Jun 20, 2006)

Ok I guess I was wrong about the BIOS detecting only 128MB, because it detects 264MB. I find that a bit strange because I only got a 256MB RAM stick not a 264MB.


----------



## Bartender (Jun 10, 2005)

Yeah, it's not often you get more than you pay for!

Have you ever run Belarc? It's a small program that you download, then run it, and it'll tell you all kinds of neat stuff about your hardware and software. Pretty sure it reports the amount of RAM too.


----------

