xubuntu, ubuntu and others.... (rather long message :D)
danjele at gmail.com
Fri Apr 21 06:54:11 UTC 2006
On 4/20/06, Stefan <vstefu at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi there...
> I have a pretty old computer... Celeron 466Mhz, 128 MB RAM, 8.4 GB HDD,
> Matrox 8 MB AGP 2x card on a 440BX chipset. Not really fast then... but back
> in the day, when it was my primary computer (to be read quite some years
> ago), I did manage to play with Windows 98, Visual C 6.0, and much about
> anything... it did run Windows 2000, and Me at various stages in its life.
> Not to mention Red Hat 7.0, 7.1, 7.2 - rather well I might add.
> Now my (dear) sister is using it - and she mainly wants Firefox and
> Gaim, and perhaps XMMS... And yep, you've guessed it - Linux. Well she
> doesn't really WANT Linux, more like I only give her Linux.
> As such I've surfed distrowatch, and the net (to be read google) to find
> a lightweight distro to use on that aging piece of hardware - which still
> runs well considering.... First stop was Ubuntu 5.10... really slow... till
> I put IceWM on it. Next stop was Ubuntu Dapper Drake, Flight 5 - and Gnome
> 2.14 is really a lot lighter than previous versions were. But, again, IceWM
> proves lighter still so that was nice. Then I thought I might try Ubuntu
> Light, or... wait a sec... xubuntu! So I fetched xubuntu Flight 6, new
> install... and... guess what?
> Really disappointed here guys... and when I say really I mean REALLY...
> Flight 5 with IceWM is faster than xubuntu in all respects... and xubuntu
> somehow doesn;t even have the good and thorough menus ubuntu has... in IceWM
> I simply migrated all the Gnome menu entries... in xubuntu... I don't have
> any. (again, the computer is to be used by a really novice Linux user - my
<quote from no subj mail >the Gnome to IceWM migration was achieved
using a python script I found on the net... that worked pretty well...
don't really have the link handy though... </quote>
In a good desktop manager as gnome,kde,**xfce** you do not need to
**port** any menu, you may want to take a look here:
You're comapring then icewm with xfce, i wouldn't consider icewm a
desktop manager, it's really far from it
> And why the sluggish performance? Someone over here said he had an
> Athlon at 1+ Ghz... well... that's simply too fast to be able to make a
> succesfull "light" distro. My Celeron 466Mhz stubles... it takes some good
> seconds to simply display the gdm background... and in its day the Matrox
> was really a damn good 2D card... (hell, it can even run Quake 3 / Wolf)
try to play to Quake with a DSL/Feather install
> The bottom line is - regular Ubuntu with IceWM is faster and more
> convenient than xubuntu, so what is the point behind it? and trust me -
> xubuntu IS slow... too slow to enjoy anything...
yes then you need browser, a file manager .... and to apt-get remove
apt-get install stuff:
try a netinstall, apt-get install icewm and xchat-gnome then run it.
The point of xubuntu is that it gives you an ubuntu flavour without
gnome deps, developer as jani and gauvain are making an amazing on
Ubuntu flavour means, latest:
- apps in general
> I've tried a DSL Live CD - boots faster than xubuntu, and works faster
> than xubuntu - but you might argue that it doesn't really have many things
> on it - true.... but a Knoppix derivate proved really succesful, and so I
> went for "Feather Light Linux", another Knoppix / Debian derivate... this
> one has a (small) 128 MB Live CD and guess what... it works flawlessly! It
> has pretty much everything an average user needs (to be read - my sis)
> including Firefox, Gaim, XMMS, Abiword, and a lot of other things such as
> Rox-filer, and a few window managers to choose from, including IceWM.
nice ... compare now the versions of those apps, and check even what
driver you're using for your MATROX
> Right now? That Celeron is running Feather Light Linux - installed on
> the HDD, and I am really happy with the results. Considering that... in its
> day that old computer did a very good job of running Red Hat 7.2, I was
> expecting a "light" distro to perform much like the old Red Hat - reliable
> and pretty fast... xubuntu doesn't, but Feather Light does! (and it even has
again xubuntu is an ubuntu **DAPPER**, and your sources.list file is
using same mirror as ubuntu **DAPPER** , please do not compare xubuntu
to Red Hat 7.2, install ubuntu | kbubuntu and compare those two to
what xubuntu aims to offer is a distro that 's following the ubuntu
specs while giving you a system suitable for old machines. If you do
not care about ubuntu specs i suggest you Red Hat 7.2.
PS: it would be nice if you could add a subj to your mails, or simply
click on reply
More information about the xubuntu-devel