The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    Installing Ubuntu with 256 MB RAM - Unable to Install

    Discussion in 'Linux Compatibility and Software' started by xTank Jones16x, Nov 7, 2008.

  1. xTank Jones16x

    xTank Jones16x PC Elitist

    Reputations:
    848
    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    56
    My Ubuntu 0.04 CD says I must have atleast 256Mb of memory installed to run the installer, but I have 256Mb installed.

    I am trying to install it on a computer that is atleast 6+ years old, because it takes for ever to boot up in XP, and it runs very slow all together, so I figured running Ubuntu with a clean OS w/ no viruses would help it along a bit more.

    Any idea on how I can get it to install?

    Heading to bed, will check on post tomorrow.
     
  2. xTank Jones16x

    xTank Jones16x PC Elitist

    Reputations:
    848
    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Well nvm, forgot I burned the 8.10 version to a CD, and during the beginning, it said I have 253MB and need 256Mb to run set up, but let me continue anyway.

    Lol, 3 Mb's short ftw.
     
  3. zephyrus17

    zephyrus17 Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    646
    Messages:
    1,576
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    They count using 1Mb=1024Kb
     
  4. Amranu

    Amranu Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    103
    Messages:
    233
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    I'd probably use some other distro instead of ubuntu on that computer.. it'll probably still run quite slow.
     
  5. zephyrus17

    zephyrus17 Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    646
    Messages:
    1,576
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    I agree. DSL, Arch, Xubuntu, etc would be better. Or, why don't you just buy more ram? It's hella cheap these days.
     
  6. Charr

    Charr Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    415
    Messages:
    1,564
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    If you want to give Ubuntu a shot, use the alternate install disk.
     
  7. Algus

    Algus Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    130
    Messages:
    948
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Yes, take a look at Xubuntu. There are also other options that consume less space.

    Linux can actually be a good way to salvage an old machine and extend its life but Ubuntu is a poor choice if you're that thin on system resources.
     
  8. zephyrus17

    zephyrus17 Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    646
    Messages:
    1,576
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Yeap.. Ubuntu is one of the more resource heavy ones. Part of the blame is Gnome, I think.
     
  9. pacmandelight

    pacmandelight Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    260
    Messages:
    909
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    With less than 384MB memory, Ubuntu cannot install with the normal disc. You have to use the alternate install disc.

    But if your computer does not have much memory (i.e less than 512MB), I would not recommend Ubuntu. PCLinuxOS, DSL, etc. would be better options on older hardware with less memory. Ubuntu enables a lot of stuff out of the box, so is relatively more of a resource hog.
     
  10. Bungalo Bill

    Bungalo Bill Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    97
    Messages:
    806
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Xubuntu ftw.

    It uses xcfe instead of gnome. It's a lot less of a resource hog.