I finally trashed my 14 year old Pentium II computer--it ran Windows2000 fine, but never could run L

Discussion in 'PC Hardware' started by RayLopez99, Jun 16, 2011.

  1. RayLopez99

    RayLopez99 Guest

    I threw out my Linux Pentium Two today, bought in 1996 or 1997, in the
    trash, after busting with a sledgehammer the Seagate 2 GB (yes two
    gbs!) HDs and the 48 MB RAM. I found out how the RAM was configured,
    after all these years: four sticks--I kid you not--of 16x2 and two
    sticks of 8x2 = 32 + 16 = 48 MB. LOL.

    And it ran fine Windows 2000. But it had a hard time running Linux
    (among other things the CD-ROM was hard to mount). I tried Puppy, DSL
    (had the best luck with this) and Mint. All with the same disastrous
    results.

    The graphics card was laughable. I think it was some 8 bit S3 Virge
    or some such with the barest of video RAM--I did not bother to even
    look. I forget if it even had a video card fan--I think it had a tiny
    one, certainly nothing like the massive heat exchangers of today. 200
    W or so power supply, but it got the job done. Floppy disk drive of
    course, that hardly ever failed even though it was a decade+ old. No
    blown capacitors. But again, Windows 2000 never had a problem with
    this old hardware (since that was the OS, right after Windows 98, that
    I targeted this machine for, proving that Windows works fine if you
    have the right hardware for it).

    I was just tired of having it around as a paperweight, though it
    worked fine. I guess I could have donated it, but the HDs had data on
    them and despite some freeware (CCleaner, an otherwise fine program,
    could not completely wipe out the disk of data in Windows 2000), I
    could not nuke the HDs (zero them out) using software...so I just took
    a hammer to them, which short of using an electron microscope to
    reconstruct data from shards works fine to clean your HDs of data.

    RL
     
    RayLopez99, Jun 16, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. RayLopez99

    RayLopez99 Guest

    I call this a Linux machine since I did have Linux dual booted on it.

    RL
     
    RayLopez99, Jun 16, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. No, you didn't.
    You claim to, just like Hadron does. This does not make it true.
    You are way too stupid to run anything which wasn't pre-installed.

    You could not succesfully spill a bucket of water without seriously botching
    it
     
    Peter Köhlmann, Jun 16, 2011
    #3
  4. RayLopez99

    bbgruff Guest

    All very interesting, Ray - especially the configuration of the computer
    that the "self-made millionaire" was using at the time (a few months ago)
    that he was asking advice about:-
    - Whether he should use WD40 rather than buy a new CPU fan!
    - Whether WD40 would keep his case fan going, rather than replace it!
    - Preferred, instead of that huge outlay, to leave the side
    off his computer, and point a domestic fan at the innards!

    - and I don't believe that you ever had Linux running on it.
    In fact, I don't believe you have ever installed Linux on anything.

    I told you what the problem is when you tried - you are too dense.
     
    bbgruff, Jun 16, 2011
    #4
  5. RayLopez99

    Chris Guest

    Am Wed, 15 Jun 2011 16:16:37 -0700 schrieb RayLopez99:
    I feel with you - because of only 48 MB ram. What exactly did you do with
    this machine? Even running a modern browser should have been too much for
    that little memory...

    Could you maybe explain "disastrous results" more?
    Following the wikipedia article DSL should be able to run.. somehow:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damn_small_linux#System_requirements
    "DSL has been demonstrated browsing the web with Dillo, running simple
    games and playing music on systems with a 486 processor and 16 MB of RAM."

    I haven't heard much about puppy but I'm not sure if it is really
    optimized for such really old hardware anymore.

    Linux Mint... Obviously it won't run well on 48 mb ram.

    The right comparison would be to run a Linux distribution from the year ~
    2000/2001 also. But I understand why that would be unpleasant and I
    wouldn't do that either.

    I would maybe test some modern distributions meant for embedded systems
    with low specs.
     
    Chris, Jun 16, 2011
    #5
  6. RayLopez99

    JeffM Guest

    ....because he's too stupid to set that up as swap
    and get the last several useful months out of it.

    ....or wipe it with DBAN and donate it to a charity.
    (Linux includes dd which will do this from the bootable CD.)
    Obviously.

    Multi-user Puppy, Damn Small Linux, MEPIS antiX, SliTaz,
    ConnochaetOS (formerly DeLi Linux),
    and the recently mentioned Zenix
    will all run on any box with 64MB of RAM.

    The only hardware I have had Linux fail to embrace on a PII
    was a LoseModem.

    The troll is obviously a liar.
     
    JeffM, Jun 16, 2011
    #6
  7. RayLopez99

    Mike Easter Guest

    MS sez 2K minimums:
    133 MHz or more Pentium microprocessor
    64 megabytes (MB) of RAM recommended minimum. 32 MB of RAM is the
    minimum supported.
    Hiren's boot CD has several utilities for shredding/ erasing/
    overwriting hdd.

    That is not the purpose of CCleaner.
     
    Mike Easter, Jun 16, 2011
    #7
  8. RayLopez99

    Snit Guest

    Peter Köhlmann stated in post itbeug$lps$ on 6/15/11 4:23 PM:
    And this is something the "advocates" will not speak out against.
     
    Snit, Jun 16, 2011
    #8
  9. RayLopez99

    JeffM Guest

    Not a problem--if you're *really* interested in Linux
    --unlike the stupid WinTroll.
    Obviously, with Windoze,
    he was running Internet Exploder 6 on that.
    Nothing approaching modern.
    Depending on your definition of "modern".
    ....not even the lightest spin of Mint (Fluxbox Edition).
    Windoze XP and Vista and Vista 7 won't run on it either.

    On the antiX forum,
    user "drg" got the 486 spin of MEPIS antiX running with 32MB
    and installed with 48MB.
    If he'd had exactly 40 MB, he figured that would have installed too.
    http://tinyurl.com/antiX-WillRunIn32MB
    http://antix.freeforums.org/post17065.html

    Had the WinTroll been even slightly interested,
    he would have ASKED first
    instead of shooting off his stupid mouth
    and expecting a heavyweight distro that can compete with Vista 7
    to install on ancient, low-spec crap.
     
    JeffM, Jun 16, 2011
    #9
  10. RayLopez99

    RayLopez99 Guest

    It did an incredible amount of disk thrashing, but it worked. And it
    worked under some versions of Linux, that's amazing. But it worked
    best in Windows 2000.

    I did nothing major with it. I played some chess games, and surfed
    the net (even posted here using Linux browser)


    Yes, correct. But I could not find any old 2000 yr Linux distros.
    From the year 2000 that is.


    RL
     
    RayLopez99, Jun 16, 2011
    #10
  11. RayLopez99

    RayLopez99 Guest

    You are obviously stupid. I told you I had 48 MB RAM, not 64 MB,
    stupid.

    RL
     
    RayLopez99, Jun 16, 2011
    #11
  12. RayLopez99

    RayLopez99 Guest

    And Win2k worked. I had above 32 MB RAM.
    But CCleaner does have a checkbox for overwriting hdd. It did not
    work for Win2k (only overwrote free spaces).

    RL
     
    RayLopez99, Jun 16, 2011
    #12
  13. RayLopez99

    David Brown Guest

    I've used systems like that as Linux file servers (one with a Pentium
    90, but with 64 MB instead of 48 MB). I also use even smaller systems
    (such as MIPs processor at about 100 MHz, 4 MB storage and 16 MB ram)
    for internet routers, gateways, and VPN servers.

    I can't really see the point of trying to get any desktop use out of
    such an old system. Yes, you can certainly get it running using a
    variety of distros - but why bother? You are not going to use the
    system for anything, unless you have need of a bulky thin client.
     
    David Brown, Jun 16, 2011
    #13
  14. RayLopez99

    RayLopez99 Guest

    Get back to work, Peter Kraut. You have bills to pay. My bills.

    RL
     
    RayLopez99, Jun 16, 2011
    #14
  15. RayLopez99

    Bill_h Guest


    Finally admitting you're a dole bludger? Would explain the powerful
    computers you keep playing with.
     
    Bill_h, Jun 16, 2011
    #15
  16. RayLopez99

    White Spirit Guest

    Even if the instructions were written on the bottom, he'd get it wrong.
     
    White Spirit, Jun 16, 2011
    #16
  17. RayLopez99

    chrisv Guest

    Come on, now. The computer described was obsolete. Get over it.
    Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.
     
    chrisv, Jun 16, 2011
    #17
  18. RayLopez99

    JEDIDIAH Guest

    A machine that old running the OS it came with is not even going to
    be supported. The main reason for running a monopolyware OS will be gone.
    You won't be able to run any recent versions of any of the apps that
    Lemmings like to drone on about because they aren't supported any more.

    --

    It is not true that Microsoft doesn't innovate.

    They brought us the email virus.

    In my Atari days, such a notion would have |||
    been considered a complete absurdity. / | \
     
    JEDIDIAH, Jun 16, 2011
    #18
  19. yeah,,.i had a laptop once..used it as a serial VT100 terminal and to
    telnet into servers.

    got stolen years ago.


    I've got another two beaten up freebies from friends. I use one to watch
    TV when camping.

    Both got linux on. Both installed straight off. mouse pad on one is not
    100% functional in every sense, but I use a mouse anyway. cant get along
    with touch pads.
     
    The Natural Philosopher, Jun 16, 2011
    #19
  20. RayLopez99

    TomB Guest

    ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.advocacy.]
    Why should we? It would be like speaking out against someone telling
    us that shit smells bad.

    And for the record, I have already told Peter K. that I don't agree
    with him claiming that Hadron doesn't use Debian or GNU/Linux in
    general. Of course that doesn't mean that I don't agree with his
    general opinion on Hadron, ie. that he's a lying, foul-mouthed troll.
     
    TomB, Jun 16, 2011
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.