So called lightweight Linux distros...

[Lucap]

As much as Mint Cinnamon annoys the crap out of me for having loads of programs installed that i will never use i keep finding myself going back to it.

[Rebel Dog]

Good Dog
My laptop, older,,,getting bogged down, take too long to boot, programs move slow.
I decided, if I cam make Puppy Slacko install Libre Office and my printer, I will use it.

I did it. I am so impressed with Puppy.
A pretty desk top is missing, but it found everything else including my Laser Printer.
In the software package was Google Earth, click to install, WOW, google earth runs fast in Puppy on my old laptop.
While the new Puppy has a lot of new stuff, it stopped barking.

Good Dog,,,I like Puppy

[Portreve]

One of the great things about the GNU+Linux world is that it is incredibly adaptable to probably every possible conceivable need. It's used in embedded applications like running routers and DVRs, it's used with supercomputers, server farms, it underpins desktop, tablet, and phone OSs... I mean, you could make it run a toaster if you wanted to stick electronics in one.

This, then, is the reason it's even possible to have deliberately light-weight distros as talked about up-thread here.

However, let's also not forget there's the "normal use case" range of distros out there, plus what you decide to use as a desktop environment.

What I've found, though it certainly does have its drawbacks, is that the very foundational Debian distro is actually pretty clean and efficient and, while one might not call it specifically "lightweight" it's hard to think of a fuller distro which is as minimally resource-demanding.

I have run the Cinnamon desktop environment on both LinuxMint and Debian, and far and away it is insanely faster in Debian than LinuxMint.

I also use Debian full-time to run my G4-based Mac mini as a headless file server because, frankly, you just can't find much else out there that supports the hardware. It's an older box and certainly would have issues if you tried to run it in a commercial environment, but as a personal file server in my house which doesn't do anything else, I'll run that box until it dies.

[The Old Timer]

Take a look at Peppermint OS:
https://sites.google.com/site/easylinux ... peppermint

I tried Peppermint 7 and it is A-OK / very colorful / full of features although I didn't find it to be very light weight on my old computer seemed to be very processor intensive.

Dell-Optiplex-320 (06/17/2007).
Intel Pentium D 950 (3400 MHz).
Radeon Xpress 200/1100 [RC410] Integrated Graphics Adapter.
DDR2 Memory 2.0GB.
Hard Drive WD 40GB 7200 rpm.

Well had some extra time today so I tried Peppermint 7 on a more capable computer and very impressed with how well it runs.
Think I will keep it and see what develops.
Very well designed Linux Distro.

Dell Optiplex 360 (11/28/2008).
Intel Core2 Duo e6300 Processor 1.8 GHz (1066 MHz FSB).
DDR2 Memory 3.0 GB (800 MHz FSB).
Intel 82G33/G31 Express Integrated Graphics Adapter.
Hard Drive SAMSUNG 80.0GB 7200 RPM.

[deleted]

WattOS looks like a viable option for ancient hardware. Manjaro Netbook Edition might be worth a look but I find Mint 17.3 Xfce works fine on the lower spec ones as does LM 17.3 KDE on my Acer.

+1 for WattOS

[lmintnewb2]

Light-weight distro by reasonable definition, or at least my def, is one which has a smaller memory footprint, less cpu overhead and utilizes less diskspace.

But as Flemur mentioned, any distro can be converted to be light-weight, this is gnu/Linux. It's just a matter of how much stuff a person has to strip out and customize during the process to get the Nix OS there.

Many distros offer a net-install or minimal base and then leave it up to the user to build to their taste from there.

Ie: Debian net-install, my go to solution. Arch, though either can be as light or heavy as the enduser decides.

Then there's ootb distros who come with the pre-config intention of being light-weight, Anti-X, RIP #! linux(now carried on with Bunsenlabs Linux). Visit distrowatch.com and search for distros in the meant for old computers category.

Will be ones light-weight ootb listed there.

[linux-dummie]

......I also use Debian full-time to run my G4-based Mac mini as a headless file server because, frankly, you just can't find much else out there that supports the hardware. It's an older box and certainly would have issues if you tried to run it in a commercial environment, but as a personal file server in my house which doesn't do anything else, I'll run that box until it dies.

One thing that's not mentioned enough in forums is how lightweight linuxes are helping to keep old computers out of the landfills. There are hundreds of millions of boxes in the world that are seen as just too old to be of any good use, and many of them end up just being rubbished, not recycled in the least way (I've encountered at least 20 of them in the last year, salvaged a few). But many many of them can be repurposed with linux.
So thanks to all of you who use those light os's to keep old equipment running usefully instead of polluting the environment. Kudos.

[KBD47]

I consider Linux Mint Xfce and MATE lightweight. Even on ten year old machines if you can upgrade the ram to 2 gigs those two distros will run like a champ.

[Portreve]

I can't speak for other countries, but here in the U.S., we are the pre-eminent "disposable culture". Whether it's hardware or knowledge, we just discard anything seen as old or not the latest thing, and now our landfills are mere cesspools of good-but-dated technology. And don't even get me started on the subject of recycling. I have friends in Germany who gasp in horror at the state of recycling affairs in the U.S. They separate out, for example, just about every type of item — say, different kinds of glass — whereas here we're lucky in a lot of areas if they even will take certain kinds of items as recyclable.

[Citizen229]

We used to have the Maytag man who could repair you stuff and keep it running forever. But thanks to corporations and government. Repair costs, cost as much as a new item. Even if you repair it yourself. but dont worry The auto industry is working diligently to make sure people cannot repair there own cars. Which will push cars even closer to the same territory. Soda/Pop tasted better with real sugar and glass bottles. I miss the good ole days.

[johnywhy]

Antix ... is a good little one that does everything the big flagship mainstream Linux Distros do just faster.

I use Lubuntu 16.04 a lot on older computers as I find it to work well.

hi, which of these do you recommend for new hardware with minimal RAM? -thx

[Moem]

hi, which of these do you recommend for new hardware with minimal RAM? -thx

How much RAM is minimal RAM?

[BG405]

I was about to ask the same thing!

Xfce runs fine on my machines which only have 512MB RAM. It depends what you do with it, for example you'll probably struggle with a lot of tabs or open applications but I find my ancient K7S5A based system is pretty snappy, in fact surprisingly so. Horses for courses. Give it a decent sized swap partition!

[The Old Timer]

Antix ... is a good little one that does everything the big flagship mainstream Linux Distros do just faster.

I use Lubuntu 16.04 a lot on older computers as I find it to work well.

hi, which of these do you recommend for new hardware with minimal RAM? -thx

If you only have 512 ram then go with antix-16 and if you have 1.0 GB or more ram Lubuntu 16.04.

[The Old Timer]

I was about to ask the same thing!

Xfce runs fine on my machines which only have 512MB RAM. It depends what you do with it, for example you'll probably struggle with a lot of tabs or open applications but I find my ancient K7S5A based system is pretty snappy, in fact surprisingly so. Horses for courses. Give it a decent sized swap partition!

MY experience with Xfce no matter what Linux distro you are using anything less than 2.0 GB ram just is SLOW especially if you are running with an integrated graphics adapter which uses system memory.

[johnywhy]

MY experience with Xfce no matter what Linux distro you are using anything less than 2.0 GB ram just is SLOW especially if you are running with an integrated graphics adapter which uses system memory.

i'm trying xfce Porteus linux (about 250 MB ISO) on 512 MB RAM, and not bad! (On VMware)

[The Old Timer]

I tried LXLE Linux and Porteus Linux and didn't have any luck with either of them.

Just couldn't get LXLE to run at all and couldn't find solutions for problems with Porteus.

[johnywhy]

I couldn't find solutions for problems with Porteus.

Hm, maybe a hardware issue?
So far, working well for me.

[The Old Timer]

Exactly as I run ten year old desktops and do run into hardware problems occasionally.

I've had real good luck with antix-16 on old computers that I use.

[johnywhy]

I'm guessing your hardware may require the very same drivers, whatever Linux you're running, and therefore maybe you can keep those drivers on hand. No?

I'm not expert, I'm sure you tried everything.