"Bill Laing, a General Manager in the Microsoft Windows Server Division, has been quoted as saying that Windows Server 2008 will be the last 32-bit operating system. Bill is a server guy and indeed Windows Server 2008 is the last 32-bit server operating system - all future operating systems for server hardware from Microsoft beyond Windows Server 2008 will be 64-bit. A few folks took Bill's comments on Windows Server and applied them to Windows Client deriving that Windows Vista would be the last 32-bit operating system. That is an incorrect extension. While Windows Vista includes both 32-bit and 64-bit and there is a growing community of drivers for 64-bit Windows Vista we have not decided when Windows Client will follow Windows Server and become 64-bit only."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-08-18
FUD. I have a P200 here and I installed Slackware on it. I can only use it as a home FTP and CVS server. I tried installing X11 on it. Yes WindowMaker and Fvwm ran fine. However, I could't use any recent GTK/QT apps. Firefox was not usable at all. Same for all gecko-based browsers. Konqueror was really slow too. What can I do with it if I can't run a recent (and secure) web browser to visit simple html pages?
Thats not a Linux problem.
Firefox's minimum system requirements are 233 MHz CPU and 64 MB of RAM on all platforms. Konqueror is part of the heaviest *nix desktop environment: KDE. You cannot expect that to run well either.
You have to use lightweight browser like Dillo or Links for web browsing or an old version of Firefox.
On the other side, Win98SE runs ok on it. I can even browse the web with Internet Explorer 6 (it still gets patches!)
Yes, legacy versions of Windows were much lighter than any Unix-like OS. I wont lie and say they aren't. I have Windows 95 on my 386 with 8 MB of RAM. Linux can barely barely boot into the command line with those specs.
You can probably get your Pentium 200 to work fine in the Equinox Desktop Environment. It looks much like Windows 98.
Starting with Vista, however, things have changed. My 2.66 GHz Pentium 4, 1 GB RAM, 128 MB ATI Radeon chokes on Vista and Aero but runs just fine with Linux and Beryl/Compiz. On Vista my system fans are running at full RPM at all times and I worry that some component may fail (system is over 4 years old).
Linux and old hardware is a big mystery for me. It has never been nice. Even Xubuntu on a Celeron 400 with 256mb of ram is too slow.
The latest Xfce isn't much lighter weight than Gnome. 350-400 MHz is probably the least you'd want to run it on.
You can improve performance and reduce virtual memory requirements by disabling unnecessary daemons and services at boot up.
Edited 2007-05-18 19:36
Member since:2005-11-10
Starting with Vista, however, things have changed. My 2.66 GHz Pentium 4, 1 GB RAM, 128 MB ATI Radeon chokes on Vista and Aero but runs just fine with Linux and Beryl/Compiz. On Vista my system fans are running at full RPM at all times and I worry that some component may fail (system is over 4 years old).
That is rather strange. On my system (AMD X2 4200+ / 2.2GHz, 2GB RAM, Vista), according to CPU-Z, most of the time my CPUs are working at ~1 GHz (AMD's Cool 'n Quiet adjusts the clock dynamically). For example, when surfing in Firefox (2-3 tabs open) and playing some mp3 in background, it is almost always at that speed. It jumps to higher clocks (~1.8 or ~2.2 GHz) only every now and then (when opening a new page) and only for a second or two.
Member since:2007-04-06
Now try Puppy Linux
http://www.puppylinux.org
It is made for old computers basically, and comes with all the software that you will need for basic tasks (Browser, IM, Word processor, Spreadsheet, Media player etc) without any slowdown. In the same vein you can also try DSL.
http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/
These distros are designed to work with a config as low as 486 with 16 MB RAM. For all the myth bashing just download them (50 to 70 MB), boot them from the CD (if you have 128 MB of RAM else just install), and then come back to post.
Edited 2007-05-18 20:21
Member since:2005-07-08
DSL is only good has a "usb-key" OS. For exemple, when I went to south-korea last year, I had it loaded on my usb-key to access my mail from hotel's pcs (unsafe).
At home, I think I would pick Win95 OSR2 over DSL unless I need a web browser (then I would choose Win98 SE). DSL isn't good. It's loaded with old GTK+1.x applications. It has poor fonts (old fonts, too small to browse the web).
I think the same of PuppyLinux. Seriously, I can't use Fluxbox, Icewm, etc for a long period of time. I need something better (at least Win95 level).
Anyway, I wasn't saying that Linux is no good. I just said it doesn't work well on old hardware. However, Feisty runs very well on my Centrino laptop. Very very well.
Member since:
2005-07-08
Linux and BSD on the other hand can still be made to work on a modest 486 or Pentium 1 system with X11 and a lightweight desktop environment. Without X and a desktop environment, perhaps even a 386 DX.
FUD. I have a P200 here and I installed Slackware on it. I can only use it as a home FTP and CVS server. I tried installing X11 on it. Yes WindowMaker and Fvwm ran fine. However, I could't use any recent GTK/QT apps. Firefox was not usable at all. Same for all gecko-based browsers. Konqueror was really slow too. What can I do with it if I can't run a recent (and secure) web browser to visit simple html pages?
On the other side, Win98SE runs ok on it. I can even browse the web with Internet Explorer 6 (it still gets patches!)
Linux and old hardware is a big mystery for me. It has never been nice. Even Xubuntu on a Celeron 400 with 256mb of ram is too slow.