Thats with DSL and Fluxbox. DSL uses a cutdown X server an ancient version of fluxbox
Fluxubuntu is bloatware.

and it was only by 1996 that linux was a) ported to other platforms b) supported multiple cpus and c) started getting commercial support

Wasnt until 98/99 that KDE and Gnome got invented

Until the late nineties linux was nowhere near able to pose a serious threat to windows. Most people didnt even know it existed until redhat came along.

>No modern linux distro will run with a full X server
>in any usable way with 64mb or less of RAM.
First, where did the OP ever mention the amount of memory in the machine? Second, who ever said that a 'modern' Linux distro was required? It's not as if the OP is running a modern version of Windows on that thing...

>Thats a 10+ year old system. Linux didnt even exist in 1996.
Well, I'm having a hard time understanding the meaning of this sentence. Linux did exist in 1996, it did support GUI (XFree86), and it was certainly in a usable state for desktop use at that point. Regardless of that, I don't see why that's a good reason not to use it. You don't necessarily need a brand new computer to run 'modern' operating systems. Heck, I've run a Linux 2.6 desktop environment on a Pentium I and it was perfectly usable.