Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Linux on Older Hardware: The Complete Revival Guide

fosslinux.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 135 posts

Re: Linux on Older Hardware: The Complete Revival Guide

#61

Post by TacticalCoder »

> They are slow because Windows got heavier while the hardware stayed the same.

Heavier and then full of spyware, pardon, telemetry.

It's not just old hardware: I've got a laptop, some Lenovo thing, I bought used from a friend (as part of a pack with a NUC etc.). It had Windows 11 on it: I was Windows-free since many years, decades even already. So I got to "experiment" Windows 11 a bit again.

I don't understand how people can use a computer that does so many heavy updates, for a start.

Then Windows is simply dogshit slow as TFA point out.

It's not a beefy laptop: it's got only 6 GB of RAM (6 is a weird number but it is what it is) but...

It works totally fine under Linux (actually I'm typing this from the couch on this little laptop). Sure, my "24 GB of RAM" laptop is better, but with 6 GB this laptop under Linux definitely works. It runs OrcaSlicer fine, etc.

It's not just on older hardware that Linux is much better than Windows: on modern hardware too.

Re: Linux on Older Hardware: The Complete Revival Guide

#63

Post by raffraffraff »

rmnclmnt wrote: post #49
littlecranky67 wrote: post #9

I use Pop_OS! on my old 2014 Macbook Pro (16 GB LPDDR3, i5-4278U with 4 cores). It runs superbly with Gnome3. Given that it is 12 years old now and the latest supported macOS version with opencore legacy patcher was stuttering and unusably slow, there is a second life now for the machine. I mostly use it as a headless home server, the built in battery serves as UPS, keyboard and trackpad make it easier to setup and d…

Same been running Debian 13 Gnome on MBP 2015 13’. Works great, in a triple boot setting using OCLP For instance visio calls are unusable on Sequoia (OCLP) but rather smooth on Debian

I installed opensuse tumbleweed on mine and the bastid won't hibernate. Or: it hibernates but refuses to resume. It loads the saved state from disk and then 30 seconds of black screen later, reboots and loses state. Two solid days with Claude, exhausting every avenue, and it's basically unfixable. Sleep=OK, Hibernate=Fucked.

Re: Linux on Older Hardware: The Complete Revival Guide

#64

Post by ajross »

lstodd wrote: post #6
dmzxnico wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree with you. Linux itself is a good OS, even better when you have an old machine to "revive". But when even Linux can't run properly, time ditch it...

If you can't run linux you can always run netbsd. or any *bsd. Besides the advice on ditching hardware on account of thermal problems is .. terrible. If you went so far as installing obscure linux distros, surely unscrewing a few screws and applying a vacuum and then some thermal paste isn't out of reach.

> If you can't run linux you can always run netbsd. or any *bsd.

That was NetBSD's marketing way back in the days of "I have a Sparcstation 2 in my closet, can I do anything with it?". It really doesn't apply to the systems in the linked article, all of which ran Linux very well at the time of manufacture and for which support has been really quite well maintained.

I mean, it's no surprise really, but objectively the best system in terms of coverage for ancient junk is Linux these days. Yeah, NetBSD runs on a VAX, but does it run on a 2008 Wifi router? OpenWrt probably does!

Re: Linux on Older Hardware: The Complete Revival Guide

#65

Post by lutoma »

NoboruWataya wrote: post #30

I had a similar experience trying to use an old laptop with 2GB of RAM. I was surprised how much it struggled with basic tasks. I remember my first computer with 32MB of RAM. Obviously we live in a different world now but still, it's not like I was trying to do anything more ambitious than what I used to do on that PC.

It is wild how bad things have gotten. I have a small Linux tablet with 8GB of RAM that I only really use for browsing. Even that runs out of RAM quickly when I open more than 20 tabs (depends on the sites of course). And more than 3 Electron apps pretty much always means game over.

15 years ago 8 gigabytes of RAM were "wow what am I going to do with all this space" territory.

Re: Linux on Older Hardware: The Complete Revival Guide

#66

Post by zahlman »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #28

The reason this advice is bizarre is that old memory isn't actually that dear. The machines that would have had 2GB of RAM or less would be from the Core 2 Duo era or so, taking DDR2 or DDR3, and typically supported 8-16GB. 8GB of DDR3 is currently in the ballpark of $10 and the machines that take it can be found by the pallet in the "free e-waste" pile, so who is going to suffer <2GB instead of 8GB over $10?

> 8GB of DDR3 is currently in the ballpark of $10

Where would I find it sold?

> and the machines that take it can be found by the pallet in the "free e-waste" pile

Hey, I'm using one to write this :(

Re: Linux on Older Hardware: The Complete Revival Guide

#67

Post by zahlman »

initramfs wrote: post #59

Thanks for this link! "antiX is my top pick for truly constrained hardware. It runs on systemd-free Debian Stable, uses around 256MB at idle, and includes a full desktop experience. The trade-off is a less polished interface compared to Ubuntu-based options. If you need something even lighter, Puppy Linux runs entirely in RAM and can resurrect machines that most distros would reject. The learning curve is steeper, bu…

> and it had issues crashing on browsers under even a couple tabs.

Surely this has way more to do with the browser (and the website!) than the OS, nowadays.

Re: Linux on Older Hardware: The Complete Revival Guide

#68

Post by zahlman »

joe_mamba wrote: post #45
Borg3 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its a pathetic world.. and sad.. I have currently 2 browsers open and my memory commit is 370MB.. If I hear that Win11 uses 3GB of RAM idling, I really get shivers... WTF?! How is that even possible? Bloat is astronomical and yet.. Most people just does NOT care...

> I have currently 2 browsers open and my memory commit is 370MB.. In what context? >If I hear that Win11 uses 3GB of RAM idling Modern Gnome and KDE distros with batteries included also idea at around 2GB RAM which is a useless metric anyway as Windows 11 also preloads frequently used takes and apps on boot.

> Modern Gnome and KDE distros with batteries included also idea at around 2GB RAM

Really? I'm seeing 1.3 for Mint/Cinnamon.

Re: Linux on Older Hardware: The Complete Revival Guide

#69

Post by initramfs »

zahlman wrote: post #67
initramfs wrote: post #59

Thanks for this link! "antiX is my top pick for truly constrained hardware. It runs on systemd-free Debian Stable, uses around 256MB at idle, and includes a full desktop experience. The trade-off is a less polished interface compared to Ubuntu-based options. If you need something even lighter, Puppy Linux runs entirely in RAM and can resurrect machines that most distros would reject. The learning curve is steeper, bu…

> and it had issues crashing on browsers under even a couple tabs. Surely this has way more to do with the browser (and the website!) than the OS, nowadays.

true, and I think some pre-2015 machines might not have anticipated the diverse, but unpredictable ecosystem that 800 lb browsers allow under their hood these days. :)

Re: Linux on Older Hardware: The Complete Revival Guide

#70

Post by christianbryant »

The overall sentiment expressing the growing gap between software needs and hardware capabilities is sound. This is where FOSS projects shine who put deep thought into providing the same features modern users need into an OS that can intelligently utilize older computing resources. I've been in the industry since the Nineties and it still amazes me how many companies invest so little into backward-compatibility and performance during their OS and application design process.

I've had my Panasonic Toughbook (CF31-5) for almost 10 years and while it's a dinosaur to some, it's a major upgrade from what I had before in terms of portable computing. Its max memory is 16 GiB DDR3 SDRAM on an Intel Core i5-5300U. When I first bought it I tried Debian and Ubuntu, but even back then those ran slow. I installed Xubuntu and have run that ever since with no performance issues whatsoever.

Because I primarily use Emacs and TeX tools, writing Elisp and LaTeX, the system is more than enough for me. I've not played graphics-heavy games, run GPU-intensive UI or done any heavy data plotting. However, one benchmark I do have: I am able use the test automation framework required for my day job with ease. I run that software on Xubuntu because on my work-provided systems (Windows 11 and macOS Tahoe) the application crawls and is practically unusable.

Post reply on HN