lproven at gmail.com
Sat May 5 13:51:01 UTC 2007
On 05/05/07, JD <jdangler at atlantic.net> wrote:
> I just found this version of Ubuntu last evening
> Has anyone here given this a try? It certainly looks interesting.
> The screenshots show it as being configured with fluxbox (although I didn't
> notice fluxbox in the list of packages).
> If anyone here has given this a go, I'd appreciate your feedback.
> Also, if anyone here has used xubuntu, I'd appreciate feedback on that front
> as well. I have a laptop from my company that I am going to setup Ubuntu on
> and would like (at least) to use Fluxbox with, but my skills at configuring
> Fluxbox are not very good, so having a release of Ubuntu that includes would
> probably enlighten me quite a bit.
What do you want to know about Xubuntu?
I've played with it a little bit. I have tried it on both low-CPU and
low-RAM machines. It seems to offer little improvement over vanilla
GNOME Ubuntu except on really quite low-end kit. It was not noticeably
faster on my P3-750 320MB RAM Thinkpad, so I reverted to ordinary
Ubuntu (with "apt-get install ubuntu-desktop").
However, on a testbed machine, a PII-350 with 192MB RAM, Ubuntu took
around nine hours - 9h - to install and something like 10min to boot.
On it, Xubuntu was noticeably quicker and was fairly usable.
However, I find Xfce a lot less customisable than GNOME, where I can
quickly & easily drag & drop stuff around the place to get the desktop
just how I like. With Xfce, I was much more constrained.
It's not bad but I wouldn't personally use it in preference.
Also, it uses the same apps as Ubuntu - Firefox, OpenOffice and so on.
So aside from the desktop, it's not much lighter at all. For that
reason, I'm peripherally involved in Ubuntu Lite, which currently uses
IceWM, Kazehazake (sp?), AbiWord, Gnumeric, Sylpheed and other
lightweight apps as well. The idea is to target a box of Windows-98
level spec - Pentium 1, 128MB or less RAM and so on.
If anything, I'd say that Xubuntu suits a Windows 2000-level machine
rather than a Windows XP-level one. I.e., fast P2 or slow P3 (but at
least a 100MHz FSB), 128-256MB RAM. Win2K wants 256MB or more not to
Ubuntu/Kubuntu & XP really want a fast PIII or better - gigahertz
class - and 512MB or more of RAM.
But all this is rather subjective. Some people are quite happy running
really slow machines, and some people get impatient on less than a
3GHz multi-core box with several gig of RAM.
Liam Proven · Blog, homepage &c: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk · GMail/Google Talk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 · Mob: +44 7939-087884 · Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AOL/AIM/iChat: liamproven at aol.com · MSN/Messenger: lproven at hotmail.com
Yahoo: liamproven at yahoo.co.uk · Skype: liamproven · ICQ: 73187508
More information about the ubuntu-users