Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #90534
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.misc |
| Subject | Re: Ancient History |
| Date | 2026-08-25 14:23 +0200 |
| Organization | Tebibyte_Retro_Gaming |
| Message-ID | <s3e0mmxtnt.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> (permalink) |
| References | <nf4koiF5rktU44@mid.individual.net> <qi40mmx4l5.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <116js7i$3l8e9$1@dont-email.me> |
On 2026-08-25 12:53, Nuno Silva wrote: > On 2026-08-25, Carlos E.R. wrote: > >> On 2026-08-25 06:41, rbowman wrote: >>> In my OCD quest to rejuvenate old machines I finally dug out the tower >>> buried under other junk out in the shed. Turns out it's a Compaq Presario >>> 4550. It has a 233 MHz AMD K6 that was AMDs challenge to the Pentium II. >>> It was pin compatible and could be used in a Socket 7 board. It has 48 MB >>> of RAM (no, that's not a typo) and a 4 GB HDD. For your computing >>> convenient, it has a 56K modem. There are 2 USB ports although I think it >>> expects the mouse and keyboard to be plugged into the PS2 ports. >>> >>> Two distros that claim to run in 48 MB are Tiny Core and Slax. slax >>> specifies text only unless you have more RAM. Tiny Core isn't very >>> specific. >>> >>> I think I'll let that sleeping dog slumber on although I might see if it >>> boots at all. >>> >>> Now for the real puzzle. I was a fairly decent machine in 1997 and came >>> with Windows 95. Windows 95 claimed a minimum of 4 MB, recommended 8 MB, >>> and if you had 16 MB or more didn't bother creating a swap file. What the >>> flaming hell has happened to us? Even by Windows 98 24 MB was >>> recommended. Now you can barely run a pared down Linux in 48 MB and I >>> doubt it's a very appealing UX. >>> >> >> Back then, my machine that would happily run Win 98 had trouble >> running SuSE Linux. Linux wanted as much ram as possible. > > I used the same machine for Windows 98 and GNU/Linux. Granted, it > started with 64 MiB and was at some point upgraded to at least 256 MiB The machine I was talking above had much less than that. I think one machine had 5 MiB, later had another with maybe 8 or 16. I don't remember for sure. Not 98, after 95 I had Me. > (and later a bit more). That Pentium II Slot 1 machine was in use as the > main desktop until 2008 (by then running Debian for 1-2 years, IIRC), > while I at some point used KDE 3, it was happy with that amount of > memory (and could also run e.g. OOo; a laptop with 64 MiB was a bit of a > different story), and life became easier as at some point I moved away > from DEs. > > But this is already more than 48 MiB, and probably at a sweet point > where it was enough memory for the kernel, X11 and applications. > > The biggest challenge was updating (compiling, Gentoo) GCC because of > insn_attrtab.c [1] :-D > > Other challenges IIRC included Firefox coping with a larger amount of > open tabs (although it still behaved much better than nowadays), and in > one specific use case, Egacs, er, Emacs. FFx caused trashing. > Overall, Windows 98 was, even considering its issues, a nice system, a > nice interface usually with light resource requirements. I think the > only slowdown I remember was browsing DVD media in the Windows Explorer, > and I have no idea if that was a Windows issue in itself or something > with that specific optical drive. It's no Windows NT, but there's > probably a reason it tends to be fondly remembered, even with MICROS~1 > being MICROS~1 (they've, for example, IIRC not released the fix for > KB312108 (NDIS "Protection Error" on fast enough CPUs [2]), instead > making it available on request through their support channels... (I have > no idea if this was on ftp.microsoft.com, I suppose it's possible it was > there despite this?)). > > [1] <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29442> (behind Anubis) > [2] <http://web.archive.org/web/20040513001718/http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=312108> > -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
Back to comp.os.linux.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 04:41 +0000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-25 03:15 -0400
Re: Ancient History John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-08-25 08:19 -0700
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 19:57 +0100
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-26 04:25 -0400
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-26 09:33 +0100
Re: Ancient History "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-25 11:41 +0200
Re: Ancient History Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 11:53 +0100
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:54 +0100
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 19:25 +0000
Re: Ancient History "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-25 14:23 +0200
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-26 03:28 -0400
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-26 09:12 +0100
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:31 +0100
Re: Ancient History Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-08-25 07:53 -0400
Re: Ancient History Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-25 18:26 +0000
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 19:37 +0000
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 19:16 +0000
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 20:21 +0100
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-26 04:40 +0000
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:30 +0100
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-26 02:49 -0400
Re: Ancient History "Mr. Chang Man-wai" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-08-25 20:07 +0800
Re: Ancient History Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-08-25 11:20 -0400
Re: Ancient History Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-08-25 17:44 +0000
Re: Ancient History Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-25 21:55 +0000
csiph-web