Comments on: Lubuntu: Floats Like a Butterfly, Stings Like a Bee

By: Factor-H

Factor-H — Sun, 15 Apr 2012 00:46:33 +0000

REALITY CHECK:
I’m testing Lubuntu, not installed, and values are very different.

A test by Phoronix detected the difference between XFCE and LXDE to be only 30K. And THAT makes sense, with reality.
So what do the article say? Nothing. It is based on unknown variables and circunstances, measured with different tools, and (imagine) with a live (not the real world) CD.

Sorry! Having tested BOTH LXDE and XFCE, and using a Debian Mint XFCE
install on a 512M P3… after using full blown Ubuntu without trouble (just deactivated most useless stuff)… I have to say the article has no substance except the promotion of a very good distro.

But mambo-jumbo is not a good method to go trough life.
And is not fair to LXDE. And certainly not to XFCE that offers more for just 30K extra (measured and real)

Check THIS: http://www.phoronix.com/data/img/results/linux_desktop_vitals/2.png

Actually, I’m using the light Chromium browser (and profiler) and this are the results with Lubuntu LIVE in this Aspire-One with 1Giga RAM (It was a pain to add those extra 512M):

-Memory-
Total Memory : 1013380 kB
Free Memory : 27596 kB
Buffers : 52368 kB
Cached : 621268 kB
Cached Swap : 11520 kB
Active : 333192 kB
Inactive : 552984 kB
Active(anon) : 145796 kB
Inactive(anon) : 196588 kB
Active(file) : 187396 kB
Inactive(file) : 356396 kB
Unevictable : 0 kB
Mlocked : 0 kB
High Memory : 127328 kB
Free High Memory : 2496 kB
Low Memory : 886052 kB
Free Low Memory : 25100 kB
Virtual Memory : 1220696 kB
Free Virtual Memory : 1180172 kB
Dirty : 0 kB
Writeback : 0 kB
AnonPages : 204936 kB
Mapped : 63136 kB
Shmem : 129844 kB
Slab : 69052 kB
SReclaimable : 58996 kB
SUnreclaim : 10056 kB
KernelStack : 1904 kB
PageTables : 4928 kB
NFS_Unstable : 0 kB
Bounce : 0 kB
WritebackTmp : 0 kB
CommitLimit : 1727384 kB
Committed_AS : 1336772 kB
VmallocTotal : 122880 kB
VmallocUsed : 17016 kB
VmallocChunk : 89792 kB
HardwareCorrupted : 0 kB
AnonHugePages : 0 kB
HugePages_Total : 0
HugePages_Free : 0
HugePages_Rsvd : 0
HugePages_Surp : 0
Hugepagesize : 4096 kB
DirectMap4k : 909304 kB
DirectMap4M : 0 kB

By: stress testing

stress testing — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 12:28:18 +0000

It’s in reality a great and useful piece of information. I’m glad that you shared this useful information with us. Please stay us up to date like this. Thank you for sharing.

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 28 Dec 2011 20:34:43 +0000

I agree LIGHT is not simply RAM usage.

I have a one year old eee PC 1201N. Unity 3D (even 2D) is not too responsive, meaning there is a lot of CPU overhead required to, for example, view the contents of a folder! I was also uncomfortable with the baseline CPU load eating away at my battery life. I came back to Xubuntu for simplicity: functionality without the flair of a standard Ubuntu.

Remember you BROWSER can be a memory hog as well… just try loading Gmail and Google Docs in two separate tabs ;-)

By: BertN45

BertN45 — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:03:51 +0000

I am running Ubuntu 10.10 on an old Pentium II, 400mHz and 384 mb of memory. It is in daily use by the children of my sister in law. It works well, except the cpu is too slow to display video. For all other application it is good enough. The Chromium browser display a page with a lot of small photos in 1-2 seconds, it plays their music, the cpu load goes up to 50%-60%, but it works. It beats Windows 2000 that we used before, because of the virus and malware software needed. Starting with the first beta of 11.04, I will install either xubuntu or lubuntu, dependent on acceptance by the kids , memory usage and response times. I will drop Ubuntu on that machine, because the new unity desktop will be too slow, even on my three year old laptop with dual core processors, it seems to hold for a second or so, before it starts doing something.

By: gyffes

gyffes — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

While I\’ve long recognized that the Xubu install wasn\’t much lighter than Ubu itself, I\’m fairly astonished at those memory use numbers. I run Xubu on several small/underpowered machines (eee701, ancient fujitsu lifebook, among others) and it\’s been responsive — enough — but I have found myself wondering how I could trim their loads down (esp on the eee, where I\’m using almost 80% of my 4gb hard drive with the base install and a few extras). Does Lubu also offer a smaller base install? Are the installed apps ones I\’d be satisfied using or would I bork the concept by needing to grab bluefish and gimp and and and…?

Because it\’s all well and good to be small and light, but if one can\’t do what one needs on the machine(s), there\’s less point than ever in the wealth of distros.

By: ilithium

ilithium — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Oh dear, yet another Linux distribution for poor old distrowatch to keep track of. I\'ve written a simple guide on how to choose a linux distribution based on a decade\'s experience. Take a looksie.

By: balboos

balboos — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

If for no other reason, Lubuntu delights me in that it is a move in the opposite direction of Window$ – which never seems to be satisfied in its hunger for resources.

Now – away from the preachy sounds of the preceding paragraph, I will note that I\’ve seen systems (sans monitor) for a little over US$100 with enough RAM to easily handle the big \”U\”, itself.

By: smino

smino — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

This is ridiculous. I just recently switch from running XP to Linux Mint (ubuntu with lots of goodies and proprietary codecs) and I love it. What took me so long to switch over was the fact that there were too many distro to choose from and I did not want to miss out on any of them. I think Ubuntu needs to rethink how to deploy distributions. Perhaps one DVD, with all flavours included, just different scripts for the install. Example: You boot up the DVD and choose EDUBuntu, Light, Server, Mint package, ...

You almost need a phd to understand the differences between the distro\'s. Windows users are faced with 3 choices now Home, Pro, and Ultimate (even though it is the same software, different switches are turned on for different flavours). If we want the linux desktop to rule, we need to simplify what get\'s rolled out.

I love Linux Mint, but I cold live with a Ubunutu install that asks me \"Do you want to install all codecs needed to watch movies even if they are proprietary(not freeware).\" YES. Would you like the Video Producer\'s package (audio and video programs for editing movies).
Cad packages
Sound packages
Photo packages
Game packages
Security & Forensic Tools (if there is not enough room on DVD then \"requires internet acccess to install)
and so on...
Even options for vmware, google products like google earth, skype, sketch 3d (if they ever make a linux version)

Perhaps a screen on first boot with these options...
Of course for the advanced users, there would be an option to customize what you want installed!

If we could bring down every Distro to its roots with install packages

By: webmanaus

webmanaus — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Would you believe a friend asked me to get their old laptop working for them just the other day, however, it only has 16MB RAM…. used to run windows 95 apparently! Will be interesting to see what I can do with that, but I guess Lubuntu won\’t do the trick for this one…

By: jedduff

jedduff — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I agree with a number of comments above regarding having one cd to load/choose release from. The great thing about computing these days is the ability to truly work in the cloud, basics such as video/music/pics are a must but other than that it doesn\'t need to be local, and with the distro\'s out today all peripherals are picked up and can be utilized. With that said, having a fast base operating system is a must which Lubuntu is very exciting to hear about.

Any talk of a timeline on when it will be released?

By: csmart

csmart — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

gyffes: On any of the Ubuntu versions you can do a command line (base) install and then install only the packages you want. This means you can install a base Ubuntu, install Xfce and the programs you want and it will be lighter than Xubuntu because you aren\'t adding all those GNOME components.

smino: Due to the very nature of free software, there are always going to be lots of different versions. Choice is good thing because it helps foster innovation within the industry, plus you get to try lots of different things to see what suits you best. Imagine if there was only ONE desktop (like with Windows) - that would be horrible because it wouldn\'t suit everyone. Users could just use one of the big names like Ubuntu, Fedora, etc - they don\'t have to try everything. Once you get past the overwhelming amount of choice, you\'ll never want to go back to limited options.

webmanaus: No, I doubt it ;-) There are plenty which will though - Damn Small Linux, Puppy Linux, Tiny Core, etc.

jedduff: Actually the Ubuntu Network Installer disk _does_ give you the choice of which desktop you want, but few use it and even fewer know about it. Perhaps what we need is _yet another_ distro which is the \"Ubuntu Choice Edition\" ;-)

Chris

By: masinick

masinick — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

gyffes asked about the size of Lubuntu. I have not yet installed a Lubuntu variation, but I do seem to recall seeing either a note or a size of the proposed Lubuntu ISO image, and I do believe it was, unlike the other Ubuntu variations, smaller, not only in system usage requirements, but I believe the image itself was also smaller, on the order of 400 MB instead of the 600-700 MB found in other Ubuntu variations.

As noted, any Ubuntu installation can be reduced through judicious use of installation options, but if my memory is indeed accurate, even a default installation of Lubuntu would require fewer memory and disk resources than Xubuntu or Ubuntu.

By: three_jeeps

three_jeeps — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I really do dislike the term \’light\’ to describe an OS. There are many possible dimensions to \’light\’…memory foot print is only one ( and actually tells you very little: static consumption of storage), others include execution time, resource management, communication overhead, etc. From my perspective, light should imply CPU utilization for a given task set…after all, it is the single most used resource in \’the computer.\’ \’Light\’ is an overloaded and misused term that is used to spin a claim about an OS.

The \’Ragu\’ version of distros (its all in there) or the \’Heinz 57 varieties\’ doesn\’t bother me to much except the lack of unanswered questions, usually on the distro website, make it difficult to choose which one of the 57 varities best maps to my current and future needs. Take *buntu for example, if I compare version A to B, I can glean from the website what A has and B does not, and visa-versa (more or less). There is no clue given to address expansion…e.g. I install A, in two months I discover I need something that B does, what is the upgrade path and is it possible? Specifically, I wanted to run a server, but, there are some times that I would need a X environment, what are the ramifications if I consider installing X on the server? or is it more prudent to run ubuntu and install a LAMP pacakge? Or, at a gross level…I run A for 6 months and then discover that B would better suit my needs….what is the best upgrade path to ensure my files and apps are intact in the upgrade? Can I simply install B over A?
It\’s answers to these sorts of questions that make evaluating and choosing a distro more difficult. Getting them takes time (either by diggin or experimentation) and I would think developers, who know this ahead of time, might better help the community in providing this info upfront.
-J

By: tesserid

tesserid — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Will we ever get true independence of desktop environments?

LXDE looks great, but why do we have to have a new distro variant for each desktop environment? Well, I know what the factors are, but there seems to be an inherent lack of flexibility in managing more than one desktop environment. But then, I think that one of the things I like about LXDE is that their design philosophy focuses on independence.

By: anubisg1

anubisg1 — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Quote:
It seems there’s a new Linux distribution every other second these days. Someone takes openSUSE, changes the wallpaper and we get a new distro. It’s ridiculous.
One moment guys... I NEVER CREATED ANOTHER openSUSE BASED DISTRO!

STOP STOP STOP, if you have to attack someone you MUST ask about him, and his toughts. Right now I CREATED the openSUSE-LXDE version.
i just created a live cd with minimal X packages running LXDE on OUR openSUSE. you can have the same result, maybe better, installing openSUSE from DVD (minimal X) than add X11:lxde repo and tune your distro.

so please, delete you attack on openSUSE when you have no idea on what you write, I\'m here to reply on your questions/answers

By: csmart

csmart — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

anubisg1: I wasn\'t referring to anyone or any project in particular in that sentence. It was just a general comment used as an example of what people have done in the past. It has nothing to do with LXDE on openSUSE at all, or anything you or anyone else might have done.

-c

By: justwally

justwally — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I likely don\'t qualify as an actual \"Linux old-timer,\" but people have been worrying about this splitting thing since the days when I was running X11R5 on a MINIX partition on my Atari 1040STe. The cries of \"too many\" have only become more strident as time does what it always does.

The truth of the matter is simple:

Interested and interesting people are thinking and doing interesting things with Linux distributions, and that always serves to provide enough creative critical mass to drive _serious_ innovation. To wit, the Linux Desktop IS a reality.

Stop complaining about creativity and thinking, and start thinking and creating.

By: pittendrigh

pittendrigh — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Montana State Univ Bozeman destroys approx 100 \'obsolete\' computers per year--too old and slow to run the latest Windows. But they do run Ubuntu Linux just fine. Lubuntu, presumably, even better. I\'ve got two student techs working for me at Little Big Horn College, loading Ubuntu onto old boxes. And we give them away for free, on the Crow Reservation, to grateful recipients. If MSU throws out a hundred or more per year, what about Ohio State? Univ of California?

I\'ll have to download Lubuntu and give it a try.

By: justwally

justwally — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

@Pittendrigh

I\'m happy to hear of your efforts. Thank you for all your hard work! I am of the same mindset.

Best regards,
Wally in Seattle
(originally from Kalispell)

By: smauleon

smauleon — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Nice article. That Xubuntu is heavier than Ubuntu surprised me. However, I think there\'s already a Ubuntu derivative for older PCs: Crunchbang Linux.

What about an article comparing Lubuntu and Crunchbang?