# Slow Dell latitude C600



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

Trying to get an old Latitude of mine running enough for a down-on-her-luck friend to use for looking for work in addition to using the public library pc's.

This machine is obviously very old, and I've been trying to get it usable for surfing the web but it's been an uphill battle. I've got it to boot up, hook up to the wireless signal with good speed, and it runs but is extraordinarily slow.

I've cleaned all the personal files off it that I can find, optimized the disk, killed unneeded processes running, etc. There is not enough disk space to do a defrag.

The specs.
Latitude c500/c600
Win xp home with all updates
Firefox with all updates
HD: I assume it's a 10GB unit. Capacity: 9.35 GB, Free space: 1.04GB 11%
Page file size for drive: 384MB
32 processes running, commit charge: 289736
Physical memory: 261532
Avail memory: 107725
System cache 140440

Is it possible that the various system files are taking up that much HD space?

Is there some sort of program that can be downloaded that will analyze the system and look for other files that can be deleted and still let the system work?

Thanks


----------



## Tammy1 (Aug 31, 2011)

Wayne02,

I'm not a computer expert but I have a Dell Inspiron Laptop purchased in 2004. It crashed on me a couple of weeks ago. Thank goodness it has a restore drive and I was able to restore it to factory settings. I restored it, down loaded all the updates for XP and I started having problems again. It took many hours and restoring it 3 times before I narrowed my problem down to the updates. It's been about a week since my last restore. As soon as it finished restoring this last time I went in and shut down all my updates and removed the factory virus protection. I only use this computer for things like this site so if I'm hacked it will be pretty boring for the hackers and they may want to get a better life! I don't know if this helps any but maybe others on XP are having trouble with the updates also.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

XP with all updates is huge and bloated for this age machine.

You want a comparison, get a Puppy Linux live cd, set bios to boot from that cd and that will show you there is life in such a machine. No need to get rid of XP or modify XP in anyway, you just need to change boot order in the bios to boot from cdrom first. Puppy can be fully or frugally installed but doesnt have to be. You can also have a save file saving all settings, changes, added software, etc. But you dont have to. It can exist as a file on the XP partition of the hard drive. It can boot from usb thumb drive if your computer is new enough to support booting from usb.

Just saying there are alternatives. Puppy has a built in firewall, just run the firewall wizard to set it up. You dont need malware software cause frankly workstation versions of linux are very rarely target of any malware. Servers running linux are.

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/

If you just gotta have XP, do a google for TinyXP. Its a nlite'd version with most of fat removed. It is small. Dont try to update it. There is no updating that which has been removed. Much of what has been removed is what is targeted by those with ill intent. But it will run FAST on older hardware. Puppy is way to go in my opinion, but TinyXP if you just positively absolutely insist on windows. With older hardware you cant have your cake and eat it too, you want a full install with all update, you get SLOW! Just the way things are. Also with TinyXP, some stuff will be missing that would be needed by some software, so dont expect it to have everything nor do everything that a full install of XP would have.

If you just gotta have everything and its gotta be windows with all "i's" dotted and all the "t's" crossed and its gotta be fast, go buy a new system.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

To paraphrase Jerry Maguire, "You had me at C600....you had me at C600."

Those things were old like 4 years ago, dude.  As HJ said above, if it'll strictly be a web-surfing machine, I'd look at several of the minimalistic Linux loads out there, try the LiveCD versions, and then install whichever one you like.


----------



## Steve in PA (Nov 25, 2011)

Another vote for Linux. 

I'm currently typing on my Dell D610 running Ubuntu 10.04LTS. It's free (http://releases.ubuntu.com/lucid/) and Linux is all I've used for the last 5 or 6 years. Once installed you can't tell it apart from Windows and it works MUCH better.


----------



## backwoodsman7 (Mar 22, 2007)

Wayne02 said:


> Physical memory: 261532


That's your biggest problem. 256MB was always marginal for XP, but it's even worse with the updates. That machine can take 512MB max; even that's barely enough, but it'll be usable. But if you can get rid of XP it'll do a lot better.


----------



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

Thanks for the replies. Does Linux work well in regard to hooking up to a wireless internet signal? She has a wireless internet signal available as part of her rental agreement but I have no idea how strong it is or where it originates from.

The machine will be used to search job listing websites and fill out online job applications at various company websites. I suppose there might be occasional need for a word processor to create a document that's required by a job application, or change her resume which is probably in word format.

I think it is Open Office that mimics MS Office and the word processor in Open Office would likely suffice. I assume Linux would work fine with Open Office?

Thanks


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

yes. Anyway Puppy never gives me any problem at library. First time out with Puppy you use network wizard and after that Puppy will always be looking for wifi signal whenever you boot it and set it up automagically. Still on dialup at home. Frankly never tried any other linux with wireless. Only possible problem is if Linux doesnt support the wifi card built into your laptop, or whatever 3rd party pcmcia or usb card you are using if your laptop doesnt have wifi built in. But most cards are supported and those that are not can be made to work using windows drivers via NdisWrapper. Or you can just spend the $5 or $10 to get a 3rd party card that does work well with linux. But good chance card you have will work fine. Boot from a live Puppy cd and run network wizard, it will tell you right off the bat if it sees your card and if a driver has been loaded. And if you have one that gives problems either search the Puppy forum or post on Puppy forum for help in beginners section. Somebody else no doubt has run into simular problem and will help.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Uh, yes, for sure there is a linux version of Open Office that works fine, just like windows version. BUT, its a large bloated program much like Microsoft Office and whether under windows or linux, maybe open slow and run kinda sluggish on older hardware. Might try Abiword to see if it meets your needs for word processor before going to Open Office. It supports Word documents if they arent too sophisticated.

Oh as to browsers, you might also want to consider Opera browser. I've noticed it much happier on older hardware than Firefox or Seamonkey. Firefox/Seamonkey require more available memory than Opera. Havent kept up how functional linux version of Chrome is progressing. I am just used to Opera and keep fairly recent version installed. Puppy comes with Seamonkey (like Firefox, its Mozilla based). Its handy if you run into a site not supporting Opera. But seems more sluggish to me.


----------



## Steve in PA (Nov 25, 2011)

Wayne, follow the link that I sent you and download it. You're downloading an image to burn to a CD. It lets you try it before installing. It will run slower than installing, but you'll get the general idea of things like if your internal wireless will work.

Since I'm also on a Dell I will venture to guess that it will.

I haven't tried Puppy, but have tried a few others and found them all to work better than Windows on lowend machines. That's how I originally stumbled onto Linux. I stuck with Ubuntu because I thought it was closest to Windows in appearance and use so my family wouldn't have many issues.


----------



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

HermitJohn said:


> Only possible problem is if Linux doesnt support the wifi card built into your laptop, or whatever 3rd party pcmcia or usb card you are using if your laptop doesnt have wifi built in. But most cards are supported and those that are not can be made to work using windows drivers via NdisWrapper.


Thanks. The laptop doesn't have a built-in card. I just received this usb adapter thingy for the wireless. The pcmica card that was in the machine started malfunctioning when the machine was set down on its end one day. I couldn't tell for sure whether it was the card that had the problem or the slot in the laptop, so I ordered the usb adapter as the machine does have one usb port.


----------



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

Steve in PA said:


> Wayne, follow the link that I sent you and download it. You're downloading an image to burn to a CD. It lets you try it before installing. It will run slower than installing, but you'll get the general idea of things like if your internal wireless will work.


Ok thanks.


----------



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

Steve in PA said:


> Wayne, follow the link that I sent you and download it. You're downloading an image to burn to a CD. It lets you try it before installing.


I've downloaded it to my desktop pc and now it's asking about extracting the files. Do I extract to the desktop pc and then burn the whole deal to a cd, or burn the .iso file (without extraction) to a cd?

Thanks


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

Most CD burning utilities will know what to do with an .ISO file. If you don't have any CD burning utilities, use something like ImgBurn or CD Burner XP.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Any of the live cds you download will be in iso format. You need to find the option on whatever burner program you use to burn an iso. If you just burn the file normally, you just get a cd with the iso file burnt on it. It wont boot that way.

Dang I always use Puppy to burn things. There a free windows burner program made just to burn iso files. It ONLY burns isos, so no way to make wrong choice. Quick google. http://www.freeisoburner.com/ There are others if you dont like this one. If you have Nero or other burner programs, if you search there will be option for them to burn iso too. But one of the little iso burners means nothing to learn as it only burns isos.

Just heads up, Puppy is much smaller than Ubuntu or some of other distributions. Might try more than one. I found Ubuntu kinda slow to boot up myself, but then I am used to Puppy, have used it since its early days. By way there are several variations of Puppy, some aimed at particular uses or needs. Explore that Puppy forum link I gave in previous post. And there are lots other distributions. I'd look to the smaller ones to use on older hardware. Look for one called Slitaz, its significantly smaller than Puppy even. But maybe not quite as friendly. Anyway I liked it. Another called TinyMe. Then again I am just really used to Puppy so maybe not the best judge. Mint is another worth a look. I can deal with nearly any linux distribution anymore, but there are some that are definitely not newbie friendly. There is some site that I'd have to look up that rates popularity of various linux distributions. The more popular ones are going to tend to be the more friendly ones also. Thinking back One called PClinux I particularly liked, Mepis, and Knoppix were good. But I really havent used or even tried anything but Puppy in last two or three years. Puppy can be made to do anything any of others can do and as I say, I am very used to it and its quirks.

Distrowatch, thats the name. Here is the most popular 100 linux distributions in last six months that they list:

1	Mint	2720
2	Ubuntu	2100
3	Fedora	1693
4	openSUSE	1453
5	Debian	1311
6	Arch	1223
7	PCLinuxOS	1013
8	CentOS	934
9	Puppy	874
10	Mandriva	694
11	Mageia	654
12	Lubuntu	636
13	Sabayon	627
14	Chakra	601
15	Zorin	570
16	Slackware	551
17	Scientific	550
18	FreeBSD	539
19	Gentoo	458
20	Pinguy	457
21	Bodhi	454
22	Ultimate	447
23	PC-BSD	402
24	Kubuntu	387
25	Fuduntu	384
26	Tiny Core	372
27	Vector	354
28	ArchBang	351
29	KNOPPIX	349
30	Xubuntu	343
31	CrunchBang	336
32	MEPIS	331
33	Red Hat	310
34	Salix	308
35	BackTrack	308
36	FreeNAS	273
37	ClearOS	262
38	Unity	250
39	Peppermint	250
40	Ubuntu Studio	232
41	GhostBSD	232
42	Pardus	227
43	Macpup	226
44	Parted Magic	223
45	Frugalware	221
46	Zenwalk	219
47	Kororaa	206
48	AriOS	204
49	Solaris	198
50	Incognito	196
51	wattOS	195
52	ZevenOS	194
53	Clonezilla	194
54	antiX	188
55	Oracle	184
56	Dreamlinux	171
57	Super OS	170
58	OpenBSD	170
59	Fusion	170
60	ALT	170
61	Joli OS	169
62	aptosid	163
63	PureOS	160
64	Porteus	160
65	Zentyal	158
66	Dream Studio	155
67	SystemRescue	154
68	SliTaz	152
69	Absolute	150
70	Mythbuntu	149
71	Legacy	148
72	LPS	144
73	AV Linux	144
74	LFS	141
75	Toorox	140
76	moonOS	140
77	Calculate	140
78	SalineOS	134
79	Alpine	132
80	Connochaet	128
81	GParted	127
82	linuX-gamers	124
83	SUSE	122
84	DragonFly	121
85	Commodore	121
86	Yellow Dog	120
87	Parsix	120
88	Trisquel	119
89	MINIX	119
90	BlankOn	119
91	DoudouLinux	118
92	Imagineos	116
93	TinyMe	114
94	Deepin	114
95	Turbolinux	109
96	Netrunner	108
97	Lunar	107
98	IPFire	103
99	KANOTIX	100
100	RIPLinuX


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

backwoodsman7 said:


> That's your biggest problem. 256MB was always marginal for XP, but it's even worse with the updates. That machine can take 512MB max; even that's barely enough, but it'll be usable. But if you can get rid of XP it'll do a lot better.


That's unfortunate. XP isn't going to run well with 512 mb today. I'm actually surprised that the c600 has that limitation. I used to have a c610 and it took 1 gb of memory, but I see that you are correct about the 512 mb limitation for the c600.

There isn't much you can do with a Pentium 3 machine with 512 mb except look for a alternative operating system. I see some good suggestions on that here. I suggest that the OP take that route.


----------



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

HermitJohn said:


> Dang I always use Puppy to burn things. There a free windows burner program made just to burn iso files. It ONLY burns isos, so no way to make wrong choice. Quick google. http://www.freeisoburner.com/ There are others if you dont like this one. If you have Nero or other burner programs, if you search there will be option for them to burn iso too. But one of the little iso burners means nothing to learn as it only burns isos.


Now that was so easy even I was able to get it done. 

So I burned the cd ok on my desktop and put it in the old dell.

The first time it booted ok from the disc and gave three options. 1) demo and full install if desired. Can do full install (replaces xp) from within the demo. 2) run alongside xp. I didn't select this because I thought the goal was to get rid of xp altogether. 3) online ubunto information.

I couldn't figure out how to do the full install from within the demo so I exited out.

I selected number one and but I don't think it ever went into demo mode and I have not been able to boot from the disc since that first initial try. There is some sort of 'boot from disc installer help' option from the disc which install some sort of sofware to help boot from disc but that's not working either. Doesn't matter if I eject and re-instert, or boot-up from scratch, or select 'run - ubuntoexe'. It still doesn't seem to boot from the disc.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Wait for the Ubuntu people to give better answer. I assume you have your computer's bios set to boot from cdrom first since you were able to boot once? Also you may have a so-so cdr disk and need to reburn it to new disk.

I assume you right clicked on desktop when Ubuntu booted to desktop in order to get to menu of programs? There should be an option in there to install though I imagine easier to reboot and choose install option from beginning. Ubuntu uses Gnome desktop and I am not a fan of Gnome, if you are not used to it, can be bit of headache to navigate. Not that big of a fan of KDE either (the other big bloated desktop), but at least its little more upfront getting to stuff. Puppy and smaller distributions dont use one of big bloated desktops, they use a window manager and a file manager. I for instance am using older Puppy 4.3.1 and it uses JWM (Joe's Window Manager) and ROX file manager. I love ROX file manager. Its what attracted me to Puppy in first place. It can be added and used with any linux distribution though bit challenge to make it the default file manager in distribution with different default file manager.


----------



## backwoodsman7 (Mar 22, 2007)

I'm not really a fan of Ubuntu, for several reasons, but mostly because I've run into more problems than with some other distros, particularly on older machines. It seems to be a bit less compatible than some, even on machines with the resources to run a "standard" full-size distro. Your machine won't run very well, if at all, with newer versions of the Gnome or KDE desktops; you'll want to use a lightweight desktop like XFCE, or one of the distros that's made for "legacy" hardware.

Considering your hardware limitations, my first choice would be AntiX, followed by Puppy.
http://antix.mepis.org
http://puppylinux.org

PCLinuxOS is a good choice for a Linux beginner, and I think the version with XFCE would work OK on your machine. I just installed it on an 8-year-old laptop on which Ubuntu variants were unstable.
http://www.pclinuxos.com/?page_id=213


----------



## Steve in PA (Nov 25, 2011)

Wayne, not sure why you are having all those problems. Of the options you mentioned, #1 would be correct. Also note, there are many different versions of Linux and fans of one variety or another. That's what I like, there is no "best" version...rather it is so customized that you find the version that works best for you and your level of computer knowledge and willingness to explore.

I think that your problem from that disk is that you only have 512mb of RAM. I somehow missed that in your original post. Check this link: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/SystemRequirements and scroll down to the "Lightweight GUI alternative " section.

Or try one of the many alternatives posted in this thread. I think everyone is in agreement that WinXP is not an option. Good luck and keep us posted.

PS. I never saw Lubuntu before and may try it on a really old desktop we have laying around here at work. See, we both learned something in this thread...community is a good thing.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Steve in PA said:


> Wayne, not sure why you are having all those problems. Of the options you mentioned, #1 would be correct. Also note, there are many different versions of Linux and fans of one variety or another. That's what I like, there is no "best" version...rather it is so customized that you find the version that works best for you and your level of computer knowledge and willingness to explore.
> 
> I think that your problem from that disk is that you only have 512mb of RAM. I somehow missed that in your original post. Check this link: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/SystemRequirements and scroll down to the "Lightweight GUI alternative " section.
> 
> ...


I hadnt realized that Gnome/KDE had gotten THAT bloated. But both seem to be an eye candy war with latest efforts of M$. If he wants a distribution with Gnome/KDE, might have to make a linux swap partition. The Ubuntu live cd would see and use that.

As to XP, I mentioned in earlier post an n-lited version of XP called TinyXP will function fine on this computer. Its an "unofficial" version floating around. Not approved or recommended by M$ in any way, shape, or form. Would be considered an "illegal" copy by M$. Its had the fat rendered out but the person that did it, did excellent job and its still functional. You can n-lite your own Xp copy perfectly legit, but takes some experience not to remove stuff you really need. Actually there are several versions of TinyXP, ranging from Beast Edition which is completely stripped minimalist version to editions that still have all drivers and such available. I have one called R5 edition that does pretty well and can run the software I want to run. Actually Beast Edition mostly did what I needed except it had printer function disabled and I needed printer function working so moved up to R5. I however only use it offline since I dont even want to think about virus vulnerabilities of windows and prefer Puppy for surfing. I suspect if you say go for Beast Edition, it even has IE and Outlook and all the other M$ built in stuff actually removed not just hidden, and replaced with Firefox and Thunderbird. Meaning you probably are not going to have virus problems since stuff viruses tend to attack simply arent there anymore. Just make sure you use a firewall.

And we can get into legalistic arguments all we want, but if you currently have a functional windows XP version installed, then replacing it with an n-lited version isnt hurting anybody's profits. You are just replacing one XP with another.


----------



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

HermitJohn said:


> Wait for the Ubuntu people to give better answer. I assume you have your computer's bios set to boot from cdrom first since you were able to boot once? Also you may have a so-so cdr disk and need to reburn it to new disk.


I've tried a second cd. Right click on desktop shows nothing of Ubuntu. 

But you may be on to something with the bios setting. It may be that the only time I was able to get that initial Ubuntu option screen was when I either ejected and re-inserted the disk, or when I told it to run from the disk via the run menu. I've been messing with this thing so long I forget what I've done.

How do I check the bios, F1 on boot up or something?

Thanks

Nevermind. When I rebooted this time and was actually watching the screen for the bios opening there was an option to choose XP as the os or finish installing unbuntu, which is what it's doing right now. This thing takes soooo long to boot up I just set it aside and come back in 30 minutes so I did not see this particular screen I guess.

I'm hoping it will allow for the removal of xp as running alongside xp is not going to solve the memory/disk space problems.


----------



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

Ok finally got 10.04LTS installed. Probably should have installed the light version but was already going down the road.

Ubuntu seems to be running but there is no network connection through the usb adapter I posted previously. It worked fine with XP before the Ubuntu install.

I tried unplugging and plugging in the adapter, and using the setup.exe via the file browser off the usb device install cd but it comes up with the following error:



> An error occurred while loading the archive
> 
> End of central directory signature not found. Either this file is not a zipfile, or it constitutes one disk of a multi-part archive. In the latter case the central directory and zipfile comment will be found on the last disks of this archive.
> 
> ...


There is only one disk with the usb wireless device.


----------



## Steve in PA (Nov 25, 2011)

Wayne, I can walk you through installing the wireless adapter or you can try another alternatives. It's up to you. As long as you have the wireless adapter disk we can do this without too much trouble. I thought it may be supported natively, but apparently it's not.

I'll keep an eye on this thread.

PS. You got the error because even though Linux looks like windows (that's why I use that version) they are talking completely different languages underneath.

Edit: Here's a link with step-by-step instructions. There's still another way using your windows disk if you would rather try that.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

What's the make/model of your USB adapter?


----------



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

This is the usb wireless adapter.

http://www.amazon.com/TP-Link-TL-WN...X9C6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1323193943&sr=8-1


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Read SteveinPA link. Then here is another.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1564278

It works in linux, just bit picky.

Sure Kung will come up with an even simpler way to handle it.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Do a search of the reviews on the Amazon link you gave. People saying it worked instantly with Ubuntu 10.10????

Example from like 5th review from top:



> However, the product works great, I have purchased this for Ubuntu 10.10 (Linux) and which could not able to recognize built in wireless card of my Dell Studio laptop. As soon as I have plugged this to USB port, instantly it picked up lists of available wireless connections. Just select your connection and provide SSID and pass code, thats it.


----------



## Steve in PA (Nov 25, 2011)

HermitJohn said:


> Do a search of the reviews on the Amazon link you gave. People saying it worked instantly with Ubuntu 10.10????
> 
> Example from like 5th review from top:


They added a lot to later Kernels. It was probably an area that they really concentrated on improving. I have a usb that worked marginally in 10.04 after some tweeking. Updated to 11.10 and it's 87% or greater all the time.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Wayne02 didnt say which version of Ubuntu he is using. But seems like if his specific usb wifi device worked for several people with 10.10, it should work for him out of the box so to speak if his version is at least 10.10. That was my point.


----------



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

It's version 10.04LTS.

What happens if I want to try a different version. Do I have to format the hd, or do I burn a cd with the new version and then that version will install itself in place of the current 10.04 on the hd?


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Wayne02 said:


> It's version 10.04LTS.
> 
> What happens if I want to try a different version. Do I have to format the hd, or do I burn a cd with the new version and then that version will install itself in place of the current 10.04 on the hd?


Just download the newer version and burn to cdr. When it boots, it will probably see the older version and ask if you want to replace it with newer version. Just say yes.

You could no doubt follow info in the links provided to fix your 10.04 version. But since you have a fast connection, personally I'd just download a newer version. I remember when I downloaded Ubuntu at library that they have very fast storage servers and it didnt take much longer than the much smaller Puppy iso. Think Puppy took 20 minutes and Ubuntu took like 30 minutes to download. Some linux versions with slower servers, it was going to take couple hours even with fast connection. Here at home on dialup, Puppy takes like 10 hour and Ubuntu would take couple full days. Not only makes me unhappy, makes my dialup isp unhappy.


----------



## Steve in PA (Nov 25, 2011)

Hi Wayne...I recommended 10.04LTS because LTS stands for long term stable. It's the version sold to companies and supported (for $$) by Ubuntu. Other releases are what is released in between LTS releases so they can tweek things. 

If you have a fast connection and are feeling lucky, I'd go with 10.10 Lubuntu. That's the version mentioned earlier made just for older computers.

Here's a link to it It's another ISO so you will need to burn it to CD. When you install it, one of the questions will be where to put it and it will show all the operating systems on your computer. The option you want to select is "use entire disk" which will format the disk and install it for you.

Keep us updated.

Update: Downloaded and played with Lubuntu from the live disk (try without installing). It's pretty sweet.


----------



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

Ok I've downloaded 10.10 Lubuntu on desktop and burned to disc. Now I'm trying to load on the old laptop that still has 10.04 on it and I can't figure out how to install 10.10

The disk is in the drive, the laptop boots up to 10.10 and goes straight to the sign-on name and password screen. When I sign on it goes to what I guess is the main screen for ubuntu with applications, places, system, firefox, help, across the top left. And then there is a 'cd-rom disc' icon on the screen.

Clicking on the cd icon brings up the file browser with the following folders on the cd.
casper
dists
install
isolinux
pics
pool
preseed
ubuntu

Then files
autorun.inf
md5sum.txt
readme
usb-creator.exe
wubi.exe

How do I get the cd to run and install 10.10?
wubi.exe?

The 'install folder' has the following three files.
mt86plus
readme.sbm
sbm.bin

Thanks


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

First have you let the Lubuntu cd boot to the desktop? If so does it recognize your usb wifi thingie? If not, then Lubuntu isnt for you. Go and download Ubuntu 10.10 or personally I'd just get the latest stable release rather than try to pick some particular release from the past.

However if it does recognize and has ability to use your usb wifi thingie, then...

There will be an install script someplace in menu once you've booted to the desktop. Or at least all live cd linux distributions I've ever seen have an install script that you can run from desktop once you get to the desktop. You dont have to choose install option beforehand.

Are you trying to install Lubuntu from windows? EXE are windows/DOS only files. You cant run them from linux. I assume they are there as some sort of way to install Lunbuntu within windows. Seems many people dont want to mess with partitions and such so this is the option for those that want to go as far as installing without losing windows install and without changing partitions around. 

Anyway you want the install script. Boot to the Lubuntu desktop and start poking around for menus. I cant help cause I dont have Lubuntu, never used it, have no idea what window manager or desktop it uses. Some linux desktops have menus obvious and others for whatever reason want to hide them, I guess so it doesnt distract from some pretty wallpaper. If you see no icons and no toolbar at top, then try right clicking on the desktop.


----------

