Thinkpads Forum

I use my 600X as a secondary computer, usually for web browsing and such when something's taking up the whole screen on my main machine. While I realize that the aging PIII won't be comparable to modern hardware, the experience on the 600X is still painfully slow. Right now I have Xubuntu installed, and even with Chrome, Youtube videos look like slideshows. Any tips to make the machine a bit more responsive?

Thinkpad 600X
500 MHz Pentium III
512 MB RAM

What sort of network connection are you using? When I use my 600X (Crunchbang) for YouTube, it's not totally smooth, but almost when I'm on a higher bandwidth connection. I can play DVD or AVI files just fine in VLC player, so I don't think it's a local hardware issue with video.

The other thing that makes a 600X feel more responsive is a fast hard drive. A large capacity 5400RPM drive will make it feel so much faster that the 12GB or so drive it shipped with. Much bigger difference, IMHO than RAM, but you are near the max for RAM anyway.

For now, my 600X does everything that I need from a laptop, and does it acceptably well.

Pocket Aces wrote:Right now I have Xubuntu installed, and even with Chrome, Youtube videos look like slideshows. Any tips to make the machine a bit more responsive?

Two things:

1) Xubuntu is not a lightweight distro.

2) Flash is a sloppy, inefficient, bloated mess. It's better on Windows, but it's still horrible compared to actual native software. There's really no way around this, and Flash's shortcomings in the areas of performance and security are the very reason that I gave it up last year. I can still find all the content I need in other formats, and I can't say that I've found myself missing Flash...

ThinkRob wrote:2) Flash is a sloppy, inefficient, bloated mess. It's better on Windows, but it's still horrible compared to actual native software...

I second this.

I'm running one of my 600X's with an upgraded PIII 850MHz, max memory, and Windows XP SP2. At one time, it ran a very pared down version of XP, using the classic theme and with many visual/graphics elements disabled. I had a standard high speed residential DSL line. And even then, Youtube, and other embedded flash or streaming video was sometimes still choppy, especially if I tried to run them at a higher resolution or full screen.

There were two ways I found to improve this, but neither method is something I would recommend. The first method is to run Windows 98SE instead of XP SP2, and pare down your install to almost nothing at all -- i.e. create a custom Win98SE install built specifically for doing nothing but viewing YouTube videos and playing games. This method will especially not be very attractive if you are currently running Ubuntu. The second method is to buy a SelectaDock III docking station and install an nVidia PCI video card with proper video acceleration.

In my case, I used the first method for a while, until I lost patience with the need to switch OSes. Then I started downloading Youtube and other videos to my hard drive first, and playing them using VLC or Media Player Classic. I found that the exact same Youtube/flv file would play dramatically better when played directly from my hard drive. There are services like KeepVid that allow you to download Youtube videos for later play instead of streaming them live.

Phil.

If downloading videos to a harddrive, another workaround is to play them on a separate box with a decoder chip in it, such as Patriot Box Office, or WD Live HD TV.

I have the Patriot, and it's great for playing from ethernet or usb (or wifi but I haven't tried that) directly to a TV or monitor, very high quality, no choppiness at all, with any file I've tried so far, and was very cheap with the deal I got some months ago. There's other good boxes out there that are sometimes under $75.

If it were reasonably possible to upgrade a 600 or 600X to the Mobile III-M (Tualatin, 512 L2) maybe that could give a nice boost? Similar TDP, but Different FSB.

--My 600 experience is very limited! I have a 600 rescue project on the back burner. Got rid of all the beep codes, now there's just a big yellow bar down the LCD.

eyestrain wrote:If it were reasonably possible to upgrade a 600 or 600X to the Mobile III-M (Tualatin, 512 L2) maybe that could give a nice boost?

Not possible. PIII 850 MHz on an MMC-2 board is the fastest CPU upgrade (except for hardcore modders who may try to overclock that CPU, or who are ready to build their own custom heat sink and fan assembly in order to get the ultra-rare PIII 1GHz MMC-2 chip to work).

ThinkRob wrote: 1) Xubuntu is not a lightweight distro.

It's not? Can anyone recommend an even lighter operating system? I'm not a hardcore Linux user or anything. I just thought Linux would run a little smoother than Windows.

Pocket Aces wrote: It's not? Can anyone recommend an even lighter operating system? I'm not a hardcore Linux user or anything. I just thought Linux would run a little smoother than Windows.

Oh, it will. It's just that Xubuntu has about the same resource requirements as Ubuntu (practically speaking -- I know that the "official" requirements are a bit lower.)

Personally I've used CrunchBang on low-spec machines with good success.

XFCE *is* lightweight, just not as it's configured in Xubuntu. I personally run Debian stable with XFCE, but any distro that ships XFCE should work fine.

Xubuntu's not bad -- I actually think it's one of the best "out of the box" XFCE-based experiences out there -- I just don't want you to think it's representative of a lightweight distro (i.e. if it's too heavy for your box, don't despair: there's much lighter options out there.)

ThinkRob wrote: Personally I've used CrunchBang on low-spec machines with good success.

I'll give CrunchBang a shot when I get the chance! Thanks!

Don't be surprised if it becomes one of your fave OS'.

I <3 <3 <3 #!

I might wait until CrunchBang 10 before I try it out. Seems like it's right around the corner.

I got around to installing CrunchBang 9.04 and I'm loving it. It's much snappier than anything I've tried before. Thanks for the recommendation!

Neil wrote: The other thing that makes a 600X feel more responsive is a fast hard drive. A large capacity 5400RPM drive will make it feel so much faster that the 12GB or so drive it shipped with. Much bigger difference, IMHO than RAM, but you are near the max for RAM anyway.

For now, my 600X does everything that I need from a laptop, and does it acceptably well.

Or even a 7200 rpm HD which i have.
I love my 600x but its maxed out, and sadly, being used less and less.

A few manufacturers make 2.5" PATA SSD's. For instance NewEgg carries two Transcend models in the 32GB size. One is the slower MLC variety for about $125 and the other is the SLC variety for over $300. Both are faster than mechanical hard drives. Although, it may be hard to justify the cost of either.

The first thing to upgrade the hard drive. I replaced the original 12gb 4200rpm drive with a newer (but still old) 60gb 5400rpm drive and saw a noticeable jump in performance. I would stick with windows 2k pro. The 600x was designed for windows 2k and it works just as well as xp in most cases. I now use my 600x as my primary computer while I replace a cracked lcd in my t60. Flash is basically a no go with the 500mhz processor. Most youtube videos play at 5-10 FPS. I use KMPlayer to play divx and quicktime videos full screen with almost no problems.

Just keep the startup programs to a minimum and defrag the harddrive from time to time.

Is Microsoft still providing security updates for Windows 2000?

If not, I wouldn't use it for any computer that connects to the internet.

For an unconnected computer, it's a pretty good os IMO, for some old computers. I really liked it when it first came out, jumped right at it to replace NT that came with my 770e. Was still using 2000 regularly until a couple years ago, finally switched to Linux and XP.

I'd imagine that some smaller distributions of Linux are faster than 2000, but maybe not the friendliest ones?

eyestrain wrote:Is Microsoft still providing security updates for Windows 2000?

As of this month no new updates will be released (but old ones are still available through Windows Update).

jdrou wrote: As of this month no new updates will be released (but old ones are still available through Windows Update).

I'm still using Windows 2k on my 600x (using it now). Its a third laptop, with nothing really important on it, but i do use it occasionally for web browsing.

Any way to make my 600X seem faster?

I'm surprised nobody has suggested yet to paint some GT-stripes on the palmrest and the lid.
That certainly would make it SEEM faster...

paul*robertson wrote: I'm still using Windows 2k on my 600x (using it now). Its a third laptop, with nothing really important on it, but i do use it occasionally for web browsing.

Windows 2000? And you connect that machine to the internet?!? Well... I'm sure that both you and numerous botnet controllers appreciate such a configuration...

ThinkRob wrote:
Windows 2000? And you connect that machine to the internet?!? Well... I'm sure that both you and numerous botnet controllers appreciate such a configuration...

Is it a serious problem. I dont really want to upgrade to xp.

paul*robertson wrote: Is it a serious problem. I dont really want to upgrade to xp.

It depends: do you care whether malicious software can access anything on your machine, transmit your data to third parties, and monitor anything you do on the computer? If so, then yes.

I love the fact it only uses 5.9GB of the hardrive.

You can add firewalls and AV software to protect from internet problems. Quit browsing porn sites and you will be fine.

Unknown_K wrote:You can add firewalls and AV software to protect from internet problems. Quit browsing porn sites and you will be fine.

I have avast anti virus, dont visit dodgy sites or do internet banking.

paul*robertson wrote:I have avast anti virus, dont visit dodgy sites or do internet banking.

You MUST install a firewall.

What if it's never connected directly to the web? Always behind a router with built in firewall, still need software firewall on the computer?

Unknown_K wrote:You can add firewalls and AV software to protect from internet problems. Quit browsing porn sites and you will be fine.

You should also hope that none of the advertising networks ever run a compromised ad. Or that you never visit one of the many millions of compromised websites that have been exploited and modified to serve malware.

Seriously: don't run Windows 2000. It's not supported anymore, and for a good reason.

My advice is this: either don't connect the machine to any internet-connected network or run something modern. If modern Windows isn't an option, consider upgrading to Linux.

ThinkRob wrote:If modern Windows isn't an option, consider upgrading to Linux.

If the OP is attached to the 600X, another suggestion I have is to upgrade to a newer Thinkpad that has some resemblance to the 600X: the T30. Like the 600/E/X, the T30 was built like a tank, and IMO it's the second toughest "thin and light" Thinkpad that IBM ever made (the 600 Series was #1). It's fast enough to run modern Windows, and yet old enough to feel kind of like the 600 Series. The T2* wasn't as tough, and the T4* was even worse.

Or try Windows FLP...the best Windows-based thing for older ThinkPads...