Best O/S For PII-333Mhz w/128MB PC100 RAM

[RDM1]

Hello all. It has been a while. Am interested in getting opinions as to which operating system would be best for the above configuration? Will consider MS, Linux, etc. In your recommendation, please include detail as to why your O/S would be best.

It will be run on a Compaq Armada M300 which I just recently purchased with the intention of upgrading to 256MB (will be used to run MS Word or equivalent, MS Excel or equivalent, and listen to MP3s).

After extensive research, I have discovered that 128MB is the maximum RAM the processor can support on this model of Armada.

Am debating selling this one and purchasing a PIII-500/600Mhz w/192-256MB RAM.

Comments?

 

[Modelworks]

If you want windows , win2k.
Its got a small footprint on load and works with tons of applications.
Last time I installed it, it only used 47MB ram when loaded.

Linux - pick from any of the masses.
You can pick and choose only what you need, keeping the ram requirement low.

 

[RDM1]

Hello Modelworks. Thanks for your recommendation. Other people I queried thought MS Win 98SE would be the best O/S in the Microsoft family. As for Linux, I was considering either PCLinuxOS or perhaps Puppy Linux. Those two are pretty minimalist.

 

[nweaver]

the jump from 98 to 2000 isn't too bad, and the stability/reliability of 2k more then pays off for that difference.

xubuntu is pretty small, not sure how it would run with 128MB. I know that I can run xfce (it wasn't xubuntu, but rather xfce on gentoo) with several browser windows, email, and several terminals without hitting swap at all.

 

[Maximilian]

I would say go with windows 98 SE, it will support most things that hardware is capable of.

 

[Chadder007]

2000 for stability.

 

[lxskllr]

Originally posted by: Chadder007
2000 for stability.

:thumbsup:

 

[htne]

Agreed, Win2k. If you only had 64 megs, then I would recommend Win98. I ran Win2k for years with 128 megs, and I was very happy with it.

 

[Noema]

Originally posted by: nweaver

xubuntu is pretty small, not sure how it would run with 128MB. I know that I can run xfce (it wasn't xubuntu, but rather xfce on gentoo) with several browser windows, email, and several terminals without hitting swap at all.

Xubuntu is indeed small and the RAM won't be an issue with it.

However I fear the CPU would be a problem. I run it on a P4 1.2GHz (Williamette Core) with 128MB and even with Firefox and GAIM running, it doesn't hit swap. Problem is, even the most menial tasks push CPU usage to 100% and the computer feels sluggish (though usable) as a result.

Puppy Linux or DSL would be a better fit, methinks.

 

[Arkaign]

98se + Free AVG + Spybot/AdAware, there aren't many viruses still in the wild that target it, but running 2k online these days takes some serious security software to stay clean. Running 2k + decent antivirus/firewall on 333Mhz/128MB is staggeringly slow.

Browser = IE 6 SP1, Firefox 1.5, Opera all work really nice on 98se.

BEST SOLUTION = SELL THAT THING, get something with 256mb or more memory, and get XP and tune the bootup (MSCONFIG, Regedit, Services.msc, etc) .. you can make XP zip pretty nicely on 256MB and any cpu north of say 550-600mhz.

 

[drum]

W2k

 

[Nothinman]

Sell it and get something that can hold more memory.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
Sell it and get something that can hold more memory.

:thumbsup:

 

[Oil]

If you go the Windows route, use Foobar2000 for playing mp3s. Fastest and lightest program out there

 

[sanzen07]

Windows 2000 for sure if you want to use Windows, very solid and I used it for years before switching to XP.

 

[Fullmetal Chocobo]

I have win2k on several P2 & P3 crunchers. Works great.

 

[Kadarin]

Another vote here for Win2K... I ran it back then on equivalent PCs, and it ran just fine.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
Another vote here for Win2K... I ran it back then on equivalent PCs, and it ran just fine.

Aye, but it's not the same world these days. I found this out recently with 98se and a modern browser on a 233mmx, it was just awful, and I didn't even attempt to put current antivirus protection on it.

In 2001, running Norton 2001 or whatever, along with Mozilla or IE5, meant that you could have a decent experience running Win2k on this kind of hardware. These days, with even the 'lightest' Antivirus programs being pretty resource-hungry, and with Web browsers and web content getting much heftier, it's not such a pretty picture.

I have an old HP Server, with two 333Mhz P2 processors, 256mb memory, and a 9.1G 10k rpm hard drive, and Win2k + SP4 + AVG + Firefox/IE6SP1 is still pretty sluggish for internet browsing. Imagine running 2k and modern antivirus/browser on 128mb of ram, and a 3600 or 4500rpm notebook hard drive. It's probably terrible.

It's even happening again in certain configurations with XP. XP with a 2ghz P4 and 256mb of ram was once a decent experience, but if you want decent antivirus/antispyware protection, the drag on the system just gets worse and worse. Of course some AV programs are more efficient than others, KAV for example. But many people use Symantec or McAffee products, and have you SEEN the minimum system requirements for the recent releases? It's just nuts.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Simple - don't install AV software then.

 

[htne]

To those who suggested selling this box to buy a better one, I doubt you will find anyone to buy this at any price. It is probably landfill material.

To the Original Poster: Who told you that you could not upgrade the memory? According to the Crucial web site, the Compaq Armada M300 (333 mhz) can be upgraded to 256 megabytes of memory.

http://www.crucial.com/store/l...mada+M300+%28333MHz%29

 

[nismotigerwvu]

could make something useful like a NAS with FreeNAS or a firewall or something of the like...as a desktop machines its day are pretty well numbered (besides DSL or puppy linux)

 

[Nothinman]

as a desktop machines its day are pretty well numbered (besides DSL or puppy linux)

Not really, my desktop machine is idle 99% of the time. It won't be as fast as the current offerings out there but as long as email and web browsing are in the category of "most intense" things they'd like to do with that machine it should be fine.

 

[jazzboy]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
Another vote here for Win2K... I ran it back then on equivalent PCs, and it ran just fine.

Aye, but it's not the same world these days. I found this out recently with 98se and a modern browser on a 233mmx, it was just awful, and I didn't even attempt to put current antivirus protection on it.

In 2001, running Norton 2001 or whatever, along with Mozilla or IE5, meant that you could have a decent experience running Win2k on this kind of hardware. These days, with even the 'lightest' Antivirus programs being pretty resource-hungry, and with Web browsers and web content getting much heftier, it's not such a pretty picture.

I have an old HP Server, with two 333Mhz P2 processors, 256mb memory, and a 9.1G 10k rpm hard drive, and Win2k + SP4 + AVG + Firefox/IE6SP1 is still pretty sluggish for internet browsing. Imagine running 2k and modern antivirus/browser on 128mb of ram, and a 3600 or 4500rpm notebook hard drive. It's probably terrible.

It's even happening again in certain configurations with XP. XP with a 2ghz P4 and 256mb of ram was once a decent experience, but if you want decent antivirus/antispyware protection, the drag on the system just gets worse and worse. Of course some AV programs are more efficient than others, KAV for example. But many people use Symantec or McAffee products, and have you SEEN the minimum system requirements for the recent releases? It's just nuts.

I think you just have to pick your software carefully.

For firewall, you won't need one if you're connecting to the internet through a router. For anti-virus, again you can live without one if you browse responsibly and log on using a restricted account. For web browsers, I don't wish to be one of those annoying "Opera FTW" trolls, but in my experience the latest version is still quite light on memory at the slight expense of website compatibility.

I guess Openoffice is the only common offending app when it comes to memory usage - assuming you can't install MS Office.

 

[nweaver]

or you can run Linux (like xubuntu or a smaller distro) and not have to worry about firewalls/AV.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: nweaver
or you can run Linux (like xubuntu or a smaller distro) and not have to worry about firewalls/AV.

Puppy or DSL as well. Although I must say, a PC which won't run 98 or 2k well will probably run even light Linux w/KDE or Gnome pretty sluggishly.

Get a faster unit with more memory if at all possible, it will make using it a LOT less aggravating.