ubuntu/kubuntu is sloooooooow!

Chris racerx at makeworld.com
Mon Aug 13 22:56:48 UTC 2007

On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 01:43:38 +0300
metin <metin at safe-mail.net> wrote:

> What I am comparing default installations of the distros I mentioned. 
> " I am comparing the 
> same applications on different distros. The fact remains true:
> (k)ubuntu is slower.

You said "They have almost the same applications installed."
This means they are not the same. 

You also need to consider the audience to which each distro is designed

Some distros have less bloat and are geared towards the techie-types
why other have so much installed, they are designed for the newb (for
lack of a better word).

So - once all those factors are in check, then and only then can you
make a valid comparison.

I can make the comparison that OpenBSD is far more secure then either
NetBSD or FreeBSD (in that case, we are comparing security) because
that's what OpenBSD is designed for.

I can also make the case that FreeBSD is a better overall desktop OS
then OpenBSD or NetBSD, that too is a valid claim being that while
NetBSD tries to be the OS of just about everything (case in point, yes!
it runs on a toaster) FreeBSD IS the OS you might use for a desktop.

However, with each of the above, there are things installed in one that
may not be in the other. 

If I wanted to compare the speed of Open, Free and Net, I would do so
from a server perspective (LAMP perhaps) and ensure that all 3 OS had
the same settings, hardware, configuration etc.

You have not done such a thing - all you have told us is that x
seems runs slower the y and z - cant you make x faster.

Best regards,
Registerd Linux user number 448639

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list