Has anybody installed Xubuntu on an older system? Is it noticibly faster than Ubuntu? I have a few PII systems lying around and I'm debating what I want to put on them...
Xubuntu
I tried to install it on a Pentium 233MMX with 64MB Ram, but it wouldn't install. However, Ubuntu did install on it, so I'd say that its one of those things that you might want to wait on.
It worked for me on a PII laptop.
xubuntu is basically nothing but ubuntu with xfce desktop environments...
yes it is faster and really meant for old computers and leess ram which cannot handle gnome or kde..
i have tried it on my 450mhz p3.. it works fine ...
yes it is faster and really meant for old computers and leess ram which cannot handle gnome or kde..
i have tried it on my 450mhz p3.. it works fine ...
Well, i've got it running on a 7 year old box with a 450 MHz processor, 128 MB RAM, the text-based installer is a lot more competent than that of other distros that i've tried. It managed to work with all my hardware (including my netwrok card and the integrated audio setup, which didn't work in most other distros).
It left me rather happy, and XFCE is rather nice.
It left me rather happy, and XFCE is rather nice.
I setup Xubuntu, but it isn't noticeably faster on a PIII(FreeBSD 6.0 boots faster with GNOME by a longshot). On a machine that can do so much more Xubuntu seems to limit its potential. Besides, XFCE in basis has the same interface as GNOME when it comes to the desktop with larger toolbars, but lacks the tools and customization of the control panels. If anything Fluxbox on Debian should be better if you want easy package management and a light interface.
Ya! Xubuntu will be bit faster than Ubuntu..
I tried it and the results were good on a PIII Computer.
Ubuntu was also good but Xubuntu was better.
I tried it and the results were good on a PIII Computer.
Ubuntu was also good but Xubuntu was better.
well... I've download xubuntu, I think i'll compare it to free bsd and maybe fluxbox on debian. (Woo broadband connection 
) Thanks for the info.
) Thanks for the info.Actually i wanna using Ubuntu also,
but since i dunno how to setup my modem driver to connect internet,
i supposes to pending it hehe,
oh yeah my modem is a kind of CDMA phone modem, so there is a
cable driver before reach to install CDMA Modem,
can someone help me here ?
thanks
but since i dunno how to setup my modem driver to connect internet,
i supposes to pending it hehe,
oh yeah my modem is a kind of CDMA phone modem, so there is a
cable driver before reach to install CDMA Modem,
can someone help me here ?
thanks
| Philip wrote: |
| Actually i wanna using Ubuntu also,
but since i dunno how to setup my modem driver to connect internet, i supposes to pending it hehe, oh yeah my modem is a kind of CDMA phone modem, so there is a cable driver before reach to install CDMA Modem, can someone help me here ? thanks |
It'll help to start a new thread instead of asking your question in a thread about something else.
| Donutey wrote: | ||
It'll help to start a new thread instead of asking your question in a thread about something else. |
uhh ehehh... well than it;s still about ubuntu hehe
any why dont some one help me ? ??
Yes Xubuntu is faster than Ubuntu. I tested It, Practically on a p4...
Go for It....................................
Go for It....................................
xubuntu is awsome, even if you dont NEED the speed. I am using it on a laptop with 2 gigs of RAM just because I like it so much. I was a big fan of the color orange but after installing ubuntu i got sick of it on my screen really fast. Xubuntu is a nice color change (yes i know you can change the themes but still)
anyway, the interface is alot like gnome, just got fatter panels (looking into changing that myself) and some mundane tasks are a bit more tedious because they didnt bloat it with all sorts of bells and whistles.
anyway, the interface is alot like gnome, just got fatter panels (looking into changing that myself) and some mundane tasks are a bit more tedious because they didnt bloat it with all sorts of bells and whistles.
why bother with xubuntu if the only difference from the more tested ubuntu is the window manager used? Personally i would just get ubuntu and just use fluxbox or blackbox x window.
| TheGeek wrote: |
| why bother with xubuntu if the only difference from the more tested ubuntu is the window manager used? Personally i would just get ubuntu and just use fluxbox or blackbox x window. |
One example:
I'm thinking about GTK+ as the best GUI engine around. I am programming GTK applications in my Windows XP for now, but I have Ubuntu with GNOME installed on my computer also. Both the XFCE and GNOME use the GTK+ engine, but XFCE is much faster. So, for me the Xubuntu is perfect choice because I may install my business apps on a much older PC than some OS with GNOME or WinXP, contributing in lower prices for my customers.
On my relatively slow laptop(few years old) I installed ubuntu. A few months later I installed XFCE via the synaptic package manager, making it worthless for me to download Xubuntu and test it. From what I've seen Ubuntu with XFCE takes less time booting then GNOME but after it's booted and ready to go, they both seem to run at the same speed. So, Im assuming that xubuntu would be better to install on an older computer, but it shouldn't be to different if you install GNOME.
| Kyoushu wrote: |
| So, Im assuming that xubuntu would be better to install on an older computer, but it shouldn't be to different if you install GNOME. |
Xubuntu team declares their base Xfce installed without the majority of GNOME dependencies. Afaik, that is a kind of speeding up the graphical interface like Xfce, try to be focused only on the native Xfce apps.
In your case of Xfce, I suppose you have some GNOME dependencies run maybe.
 |