EPTRecommend a Linux Distro? - Page 2
| Blogs > writer22816 |
CTStalker
Canada9720 Posts
| ||
|
writer22816
United States5775 Posts
On June 30 2010 00:50 CTStalker wrote: with a piece of shit comp like that the last thing you want to run is KDE 4. anyone recommending xubuntu is off their rocker. What would you recommend then? | ||
|
.Ix
Philippines266 Posts
There. If you're connected to the net a lot of the time, then it should be awesome. and Gnumeric is a light equivalent of Excel. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
| ||
|
pettter
Sweden1032 Posts
On June 30 2010 00:50 CTStalker wrote: with a piece of shit comp like that the last thing you want to run is KDE 4. anyone recommending xubuntu is off their rocker. Uh... Xubuntu runs XFCE, last I checked. Kubuntu is the KDE variant. On June 29 2010 23:33 mgj wrote: I'm sorry, but i have to call bullshit on that one. It's simply not true. If i'm not mistaken, debian only allows critical security patches into stable, thus leaving out any performance improving and new feature patches. When you are on a desktop machine, you want those more than you want security. Now I have to be honest, i have not used debian for a long time. I believe "sarge" was hot when i used it last. Back then, i remember SID using something crazy like 20% less memory with gnome running, compared to stable. Maybe debian have changed their policy about updates to stable, but i doubt it. In the modern kitchen sink programming environment, what do you think the ratio is between 'patches increasing performance' and 'patches adding features'? What is the general resulting performance of successive versions of a particular program suite for this? I'm not categorically saying that this is the case for every program, but in general terms, it is unfortunately true. | ||
|
distant_voice
Germany2521 Posts
Xubuntu vs Lubuntu: Performance We tested Xubuntu LiveCD on a relatively modest 1GB RAM, 2Ghz Single core processor and 128MB video card machine– typical hardware one might be tempted to install Xubuntu on to eek performance out of. Overall RAM usage with 3 tabs open in Firefox, 1 playing a HTML5 YouTube video. Ubuntu Beta 1: 222 MB Xubuntu Beta 1: 215.8 MiB Lubuntu Beta 1: 137 MB As you can see Xubuntu, as we’ve mentioned previously, shows very little lean-ness compared to Ubuntu proper, which begs the question ‘why would you use it over Ubuntu?’. Source: http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2010/03/xubuntu-1004-beta-1-remains-borderline.html | ||
|
CTStalker
Canada9720 Posts
On June 30 2010 01:00 pettter wrote: Uh... Xubuntu runs XFCE, last I checked. Kubuntu is the KDE variant. woops, you're right of course. momentary bout of dyslexia | ||
|
writer22816
United States5775 Posts
On June 30 2010 01:01 distant_voice wrote: since it seems that you didn't read my post I'll simply say it again and back it up this time: Xubuntu vs Lubuntu: Performance We tested Xubuntu LiveCD on a relatively modest 1GB RAM, 2Ghz Single core processor and 128MB video card machine– typical hardware one might be tempted to install Xubuntu on to eek performance out of. Overall RAM usage with 3 tabs open in Firefox, 1 playing a HTML5 YouTube video. Ubuntu Beta 1: 222 MB Xubuntu Beta 1: 215.8 MiB Lubuntu Beta 1: 137 MB As you can see Xubuntu, as we’ve mentioned previously, shows very little lean-ness compared to Ubuntu proper, which begs the question ‘why would you use it over Ubuntu?’. Source: http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2010/03/xubuntu-1004-beta-1-remains-borderline.html I stand corrected, I'll get both and decide tomorrow. Thanks! | ||
|
Futura
Germany33 Posts
| ||
|
Aim Here
Scotland672 Posts
On June 30 2010 00:50 CTStalker wrote: with a piece of shit comp like that the last thing you want to run is KDE 4. anyone recommending xubuntu is off their rocker. Don't you mean anyone recommending Kubuntu is off their rocker? Xubuntu IIRC uses XFCE, which is far more lightweight than either KDE or Gnome Don't know about the distro (I crystallised on Debian a long time ago, and I reckon it would be a decent choice, but I've not bothered checking out the competition lately) , but since the OP plans to use the rather bloated OpenOffice, I'm voting that he tries out the gnumeric spreadsheet before OO.calc, because it's much faster and lighter, and also gets its sums right far more often than Excel. | ||
|
ffz
United States490 Posts
you should just buy a 1gig stick of ram | ||
|
mgj
191 Posts
On June 30 2010 01:00 pettter wrote: Uh... Xubuntu runs XFCE, last I checked. Kubuntu is the KDE variant. In the modern kitchen sink programming environment, what do you think the ratio is between 'patches increasing performance' and 'patches adding features'? What is the general resulting performance of successive versions of a particular program suite for this? I'm not categorically saying that this is the case for every program, but in general terms, it is unfortunately true. "Kitchen sink programming environment" - Heh, i like that one. I think im starting to see where you are comming from. Even big, well established projects like firefox have such problems. Just look how long they postponed doing something about their horrible memory issues. Adding new features is definitely more fun than optimizing performance. I'm still a bit hung up on the whole "old software = faster" tho. If you are using a newer/more-up-to-date repository, there may or may not be performance issues compared to old versions. The difference is, there is the possibility of getting "performance improving patches". In debian stable, there is not AFAIK. I think you are too quick to dismiss the importance of new features on a desktop machine. Especially since OP said he needs to do a lot of text and spreadsheets. From what i can tell, debian stable is still stuck using OpenOffice 1.x which isn't really a good alternative to MS office 2007. I guess you could install a newer version yourself without using the repository, but that kindda defeats the purpose IMO. I really still believe the main reason to run stable should be for stability and security - NOT performance. Edit: To OP: Ubuntu may feel a little bloated compared to some of the more "hardcore" distro's. However, the documentation and help you can find online for ubuntu is by far the best i've seen for any distro. There are benefits to using the, i believe, most common desktop distro out there. You will need to put in a bit of work in changing the window manager for a massive performance boost, but it's really not hard. There are great how-to's for pretty much any window manager you would want to try out. | ||
|
Aquafresh
United States824 Posts
On June 29 2010 23:01 zatic wrote: Well you have to realize that Linux can not magically make your Firefox go faster on 256 RAM. What Linux offers is the freedom to not use a lot of software to save RAM. I am sure there are a number of modified Debian distributions out there specifically designed to run on old hardware, try Google. You could also get a plain Debian and run a light desktop environment like FluxBox or XFCE. In any case you will have to do some work to make it run fast. Again, Linux is not faster per se but allows you to do without a lot of stuff, but you’ll probably have to make it happen yourself. Edi, reading your Edit: Office 2007 (doesn't run on Linux anyway) and Firefox are just huge pieces of software. They won't run fast on your hardware no matter what OS you have under the hood. This is good advice. As a big FluxBox supporter I would add that you should try a combination of Ubuntu/FluxBox if this is your first Linux experience. I believe there is a lightweight Ubuntu/FluxBox distro called fluxbuntu, but I have no experience with it so I can't say how it is. Simply installing Ubuntu and ditching GNOME for FluxBox will give you a pretty tiny memory footprint as is. Also xfce can look really nice on modest hardware. The latest versions of Firefox will be rough with such little memory available, but there are other browsers out there that can offer modern features on older systems. For example I've used xfce's default browser Midori on embedded devices with good results. If you are feeling up to the task and want a linux learning experience, I would recommend getting the latest Debian distro, (lenny i believe) installing just the bare OS (no Desktop Environment etc) and using aptitude to get what you need. IE x-server, xterm, FluxBox, CPU frequency regulation software (because its a laptop), WiFi management, etc. With this method you would obviously need to put in a lot of effort to get the system you want (if it's your first time), but you will have the advantage of using a desktop environment that you are strongly familiar with since you essentially put it together yourself. EDIT: I come from an embedded systems background so I'm a little bit out of touch when it comes to Linux in the desktop world. Just a disclaimer. Also Links. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluxbuntu Fluxbuntu distro http://www.xfce.org/ xfce desktop environment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_X_Window_System_desktop_environments nice little comparison from wiki | ||
|
TossFloss
Canada606 Posts
I run Debian stable on the following laptop: - Pentium M 1.73Mhz - 766M RAM - Some crappy video card Most of everything runs smoothly. Some Javascript heavy websites like Slashdot lag. I can watch Youtube no problem. Without a ram upgrade, keep your window manager as light as possible. Try: http://www.windowmaker.info/gallery.php | ||
|
TossFloss
Canada606 Posts
| ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
| ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
| ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
Better (x)ubuntu, because it's always easier to dive in without exp. In terms of tech. specs I don't think you can go too wrong with the choice of distro. As others said though - please consider ram upgrade if possible, there's usually some way.. Having such decent graphics with such horrible ram is just.... not allowed xD. If it's possible, it should be quite cheap, and extremely cost-beneficial for your overall performance under any OS. | ||
|
.Ix
Philippines266 Posts
It won't come with OpenOffice and Gimp and all that, but you can install them all after installation anyway. | ||
|
writer22816
United States5775 Posts
On June 30 2010 09:01 .Ix wrote: Peppermint is an ubuntu-based distro with LXDE and openbox with all the drivers and codecs and stuff preinstalled. Kind of like the offspring of Crunchbang and Linux Mint, so you're pretty much getting the best of both worlds. It's MUCH faster than ubuntu or Xubuntu, so that might be a lot better for you. It won't come with OpenOffice and Gimp and all that, but you can install them all after installation anyway. I did some research and went with this in the end. Installed it and its really fast and cool. The one thing is, I don't have a spider solitaire app haha, and the games I find (like KDEgames) aren't for LXDE and therefore require like 400+MB of space. So if anyone uses LXDE system and has a game app, please share  | ||
| ||
