Comments on: Fair but honest? Xubuntu 8.10

By: Notes from all over « Motho ke motho ka botho

Notes from all over « Motho ke motho ka botho — Fri, 08 Apr 2011 09:06:54 +0000

[...] My own disappointment with Xubuntu aside, things done right in XFCE can be quite effective … as I have learned first-hand. [...]

By: Look out Ubuntu, look out Arch: Linux Mint Debian « Motho ke motho ka botho

Look out Ubuntu, look out Arch: Linux Mint Debian « Motho ke motho ka botho — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 11:50:46 +0000

[...] even if I’m harsher on some days than others, I try — really, I do try — to be honest and fair. If I like it, I say so. If I don’t, I say [...]

By: Reports from the home counties « Motho ke motho ka botho

Reports from the home counties « Motho ke motho ka botho — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 00:20:14 +0000

[...] obligatory (and pointless) downshift to Xubuntu was only a tiny bit better, and as a result it now runs Arch Linux. Arch is [...]

By: Two and a half epilogues « Motho ke motho ka botho

Two and a half epilogues « Motho ke motho ka botho — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 22:55:58 +0000

[...] the boss that he should give me the old desktop so I could rehab and donate it to charity, a la the Sony VAIO I gave away around the turn of the year. However, I think he wanted to sell it to a recycle shop, [...]

By: Qimo does it right « Motho ke motho ka botho

Qimo does it right « Motho ke motho ka botho — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 14:20:57 +0000

[...] detailed my disappointments with Xubuntu elsewhere, and I stand by those assessments. I haven’t actually put Qimo on a Pentium II, but [...]

By: Mark76

Mark76 — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:53:20 +0000

The problem with the Ubuntu spin on the xfce4 desktop is that they’re slowly and inexorably turning it into GNOME jr. It can only be a matter of time until someone on the development team suggests a Systems option on the menubar would be neat.

By: K.Mandla

K.Mandla — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 23:10:26 +0000

I’m sure part of it is just my intolerance for slower performance. I will admit I don’t give Xubuntu much leeway — at least, certainly not enough leeway for a 1.5+ minute boot time and sketchy responsiveness once it’s up.

But a lot of that comes as a result of running faster, lighter distros like Arch or Crux, and knowing that the same machine can be online and ready in under 15 seconds. To each his own, I guess. …

By: thoughtcriminal

thoughtcriminal — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:15:55 +0000

Funny you have such a problem running xubuntu on that machine.
My grandmother is running Ubuntu 8.04 on a 900mhz 256mb machine and it has nowhere near the slowdown you are experiencing. I even turned on some desktop effects and it still runs, although not anywhere near up to my specs.
I have tried nearly ever flavor of ubuntu on my machine (1.8ghz C2D, 1gb ram) and xubuntu is by far noticeably faster than kubuntu or Ubuntu. Only Fluxbuntu was faster (but I don’t like fluxbox), and Geubuntu was a hair slower (now known as OpenGeu, uses enlightenment)

By: Ksennin

Ksennin — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 13:16:42 +0000

YouTube one frame at a time? Oy. Well, so maybe 300mhz/256mb is workable, but as RECOMMENDED specs? I wonder if simply nobody has bothered to update the documentation/webpages in 3 years.

By: Ksennin

Ksennin — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 12:53:38 +0000

The lowest have I installed xubuntu on was 7.10 on a p2-450mhz with 384mb. Firefox worked, but you could not open more than five tags without noticiably bogging down the system, and when I had to remove a 128mb chip for a while, updates at 256mb were quite slow. So I think 450/256 should be the working minimums, and at least 1.0ghz/512mb be the recommended specs. Because, really, if you RECOMMEND xubuntu for a 300mhz processor, and it works like molasses, people are going to get a very bad impression of the os, and of linux in general.