HiI am a big fan of Ubuntu. It got me really interested in Linux and gave me the push to leave Mac and Windows behind. I had Ubuntu 9.10 running on a Samsung A10 1.1Ghz Duron and loved it, then the laptop died. I then was given an IBM ThinkPad 600 and after running a few ' lightweight' distros have been quite impressed with Xubuntu 9.10 on it.A few people said not to both with Xubuntu, some even said it was more RAM intensive than Ubuntu. So I am beginning to wonder whether my ThinkPad would run better with Ubuntu rather than Xubuntu.I tried Xubuntu with LXDE window manager and didn't like it and didn't find it very fast. I like the Xfce as it is very close to Gnome. Is it more than just RAM that would pose a problem with Ubuntu as opposed to Xubuntu.I know a bit more RAM would help whatever distro I use, but 160MB seems to handle the basics under Xubuntu, but would it be enough for Ubuntu - even though there are reports Xubuntu is more RAM heavy than Ubuntu.According to the specs Ubuntu only requires a 300Mhz and Xubuntu requires 333Mhz, but I have Xubuntu running on a 300Mhz just fine.Ultimately my question is, would Ubuntu run better than Xubuntu? I am trying to squeeze every ounce of power out of this beast.Regards Simon Royal --- Catch me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/SimonRoyal or Skype: Simon-Royal _________________________________________________________________ Do you have a story that started on Hotmail? Tell us now http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/
Hi I am a big fan of Ubuntu. It got me really interested in Linux and gave me the push to leave Mac and Windows behind. I had Ubuntu 9.10 running on a Samsung A10 1.1Ghz Duron and loved it, then the laptop died. I then was given an IBM ThinkPad 600 and after running a few ' lightweight' distros have been quite impressed with Xubuntu 9.10 on it.
Haven't actually tried any lower-spec distributions recently, but I did stumble across Lubuntu recently: http://lubuntu.net/ It's a Canonical-sponsored project based around Ubuntu and LXDE. Might also be worth a look, Peter.
On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:54:52 +0000 Simon Royal <simonroyal@live.co.uk> wrote:
Hi I am a big fan of Ubuntu. It got me really interested in Linux and gave me the push to leave Mac and Windows behind. I had Ubuntu 9.10 running on a Samsung A10 1.1Ghz Duron and loved it, then the laptop died. I then was given an IBM ThinkPad 600 and after running a few ' lightweight' distros have been quite impressed with Xubuntu 9.10 on it.
I have not tried Xubuntu so I cannot comment on whether it would use more or less RAM than Ubuntu. What maybe worth knowing though is that Ubuntu in general is based on Debian. Each flavour of Ubuntu selects a subset of the packages to install as standard and in some cases applies a layer of polish to what you would get if you installed the same set of packages from Debian. With Debian, each of the desktop environments are separately installable and can even be installed alongside each other so you can choose when you log in which environment you get. Obviously having them all installed uses more disk space but should not use more RAM. I can't say if you can do the same directly with the Ubuntu flavours but it may be worth a look as a way of trying alternatives without having to re-install each time. HTH, Steve.
On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 11:30:21PM +0000, Steve Fosdick wrote:
On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:54:52 +0000 Simon Royal <simonroyal@live.co.uk> wrote:
Hi I am a big fan of Ubuntu. It got me really interested in Linux and gave me the push to leave Mac and Windows behind. I had Ubuntu 9.10 running on a Samsung A10 1.1Ghz Duron and loved it, then the laptop died. I then was given an IBM ThinkPad 600 and after running a few ' lightweight' distros have been quite impressed with Xubuntu 9.10 on it.
I have not tried Xubuntu so I cannot comment on whether it would use more or less RAM than Ubuntu.
What maybe worth knowing though is that Ubuntu in general is based on Debian. Each flavour of Ubuntu selects a subset of the packages to install as standard and in some cases applies a layer of polish to what you would get if you installed the same set of packages from Debian.
With Debian, each of the desktop environments are separately installable and can even be installed alongside each other so you can choose when you log in which environment you get. Obviously having them all installed uses more disk space but should not use more RAM.
I can't say if you can do the same directly with the Ubuntu flavours but it may be worth a look as a way of trying alternatives without having to re-install each time.
Yes, you can, I have recently installed (for example) both the KDE and the default Gnome desktops on an Ubuntu 9.10 system. Each has a 'meta package' which installs what's needed for that environment. You get offered the alternatives at login time. -- Chris Green
Simon Royal wrote:
Ultimately my question is, would Ubuntu run better than Xubuntu? I am trying to squeeze every ounce of power out of this beast.
I think you will find regardless of what the minimum requirements say, The Default Gnome desktop environment on Ubuntu would be very slow with 160MB of ram. Xfce (unless something has changed) was always considered a lighter environment in this respect. Other than that and the default packages installed there should be more or less no difference between Xubuntu and Ubuntu, in fact you can by installing the right packages make one like the other.
participants (5)
-
Chris G -
samwise -
Simon Royal -
Steve Fosdick -
Wayne Stallwood