Comments on: More fodder for the revolution

By: Danny

Danny — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 03:38:51 +0000

I’m not sure about the default software on most recent versions. They do a pretty good job of keeping it updated. I’ve set up a few pentium machines in the 200 MHz range with puppy. It needs at least 128 MB ram to run, so that can be a problem. The best thing about puppy is the automatic persistent mode thing, and being able to save you LiveCD settings to HD or USB drive. I usually have people just run Puppy off the CD, and use their HD only for file storage and custom settings. The CD is faster than most older hard drives anyway.

Puppy’s impressive on older equipment. It won’t go as far back as DSL can, but it’s better able to handle a Win98 user than DSL.

With Xubuntu, or any ‘buntu’s, I’ve noticed the system seems to run slower if installed from a LiveCD. Not sure why. When I install from alternate CD, systems run quicker.

By: Kadath

Kadath — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 07:21:52 +0000

I’ve noticed that on my machine, Xubuntu is just a bit faster than regular Ubuntu. I think all of the stuff Ubuntu/Xubuntu/Kubuntu run by default (services and daemons and whatnot) are what give Ubuntu and its spinoffs a reputation for being slow, but I’m no Linux guru.

Xubuntu simply *can’t* be as user-friendly as Gnome or KDE, because Xfce doesn’t strive to do that. I think the Xubuntu devs need to understand that, because loading it up with a bunch of Gnome stuff is only going to make it slower, at which point you might as well just install Ubuntu/Gnome and be done with it.

Just my $0.02.

By: K.Mandla

K.Mandla — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 00:05:02 +0000

That shouldn’t be too hard. What’s the default software in Puppy? I’ve never used it; I couldn’t get past the chihuahua on the home page. Ech.

By: Danny

Danny — Sun, 19 Aug 2007 17:05:26 +0000

Our Free Geek Central Florida org has been installing Xubuntu on anything between 400-800 MHz, and anything over 800 MHz gets Ubuntu. We make sure the Xubuntu machines get at least 256 MB memory, and they seem to work just fine. They aren’t speed demons, but they aren’t sluggish either. For someone who can’t afford a computer, it seems to work fine.

Puppy is still MUCH faster on old equipment. I’d like to see a group make an Ubuntu version somewhat like puppy.

“Obsolescence is just a lack of imagination.”

By: Sutekh

Sutekh — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 01:09:37 +0000

I’m in total agreeance with you here. I would definately like to see Xubuntu trim the fat.

Similar to your recent experience, I run Xubuntu Edgy at work on a 2GHz CPU/512MB RAM PC. I’ll admit the experience is not as bad as ‘barely acceptable’, but after logging in I am using over 300MB of my precious RAM, applications aside.

Once I have a couple of applications running, and I try to use lightweight ones, it does start to get bogged down.

I think in future I’ll be using Openbox (plenty of good resources here)

Cheers!!