XUBUNTU is simply the best so far.

[manilaph]

I've installed Ubuntu 8.10 then Kubuntu 8.10 then now Xubuntu 8.10 and in my personal opinion as a newbie... Xubuntu is the best.

It is like a clone of Ubuntu.. but slightly faster.

Kubuntu was problematic for me and I do not like KDE since it is slower and less user-friendly.

Now my machine is on pure 100% Xubuntu and I am happy with it.

I am on a wired network (not wifi) and so I guess it is an advantage.

[WaeV]

I prefer gnome to KDE, but I'll have to give xfce a try.

[mut4nt]

xubuntu <33

[amgalitz]

I use Xubuntu on my 400mHz celeron file annd Squeezecenter server for when I attach a monitor to it and want a gui. It is nice, but definitely limited compare to gnome or kde for some things. However, the celeron does strain a bit to run it so gnome or kde would likely be UGLY. Usually I ssh into the server and work on it headless. XFCE's small foot print is nice. Even played around with running it remotely in an X window. Poor little thing really stressed over that.

enjoy

cheers

[manilaph]

I am just a simple-user and therefore I could not see the difference between Gnome and XFCE. I just use my computer to surf and do simple office work without the need for wifi.

Although I have a problem with my Epson T10 printer and Genius Scanner.

But I knew about the problems prior to the installation.

Is there a site where you can find a side-by-side comparison of Gnome, KDE, XFCE etc?

KDE (the latest version) is my least liked among the 3.

Is Kubuntu more popular than Xubuntu right now?

[buntunub]

Ubuntu's implementation of XFCE is rather bloated, and they try to make it like a stripped down version of GNOME. Since you dont have any experience with a real XFCE deployment, your likely impressed. My advice to you is that if you like XFCE, then give a real XFCE specialized distro out and you will really see the true power of it.

[manilaph]

Ubuntu's implementation of XFCE is rather bloated, and they try to make it like a stripped down version of GNOME. Since you dont have any experience with a real XFCE deployment, your likely impressed. My advice to you is that if you like XFCE, then give a real XFCE specialized distro out and you will really see the true power of it.

Thank you for the clarification. No wonder it feels like a clone of Ubuntu (Gnome).

Can you please let me know what are the "real XFCE distros" out there? And what is the best.

[wolfen69]

you could also do a minimal install (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/LowMemorySystems) of ubuntu and add xfce4. it requires alot of work to get it set up, but it will be lightning fast. here (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/MinimalCD) are the mini iso's.

[WaeV]

Does xfce work with compiz?

[pcdoctor]

Does xfce work with compiz?

Yep.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qddueXkD8E

[WaeV]

Ubuntu's implementation of XFCE is rather bloated, and they try to make it like a stripped down version of GNOME. Since you dont have any experience with a real XFCE deployment, your likely impressed. My advice to you is that if you like XFCE, then give a real XFCE specialized distro out and you will really see the true power of it.
I like the GNOME layout, but I would like to try XFCE. Is the Xubuntu version of xfce that much slower? Would it be easy to augment xfce to look like gnome?

[rage-against-windows]

Xfce on ZenWalk is "holy-crap" uber fast, but ZenWalk is slackware based, Im too much an old debian nerd to change distros. Its worth a look though if our looking for a fast Xfce desktop.

[manilaph]

what are the usual differences of Ubuntu to Xubuntu in terms of features?

I would remove the default abiword, gnumeric of Xubuntu and install openoffice. Actually... that is all I did so far.

can't really find any functional differences....

i surf with firefox

i download torrents with deluge/transmission

i use the screen capture

i use vlc/mplayer

[jbysmith]

what are the usual differences of Ubuntu to Xubuntu in terms of features?

I would remove the default abiword, gnumeric of Xubuntu and install openoffice. Actually... that is all I did so far.

can't really find any functional differences....

i surf with firefox

i download torrents with deluge/transmission

i use the screen capture

i use vlc/mplayer

Both Gnome and XFCE are using GTK+, so you'll typically be using a lot of the same "non-OS" applications, it's just the core stuff is typically a lot lighter than Gnome, which will give it an edge on slower machines. Functionality wise though you'll need to determine that yourself if it does everything you need it to do. Balance the tradeoff between performance and resource usage and all that. Lighter resource usage will come at a cost of features.

[mkvnmtr]

I have done a few minimal installs and I like xfce4. It is not xubuntu. It does have a lot of goodies you can add and is a very functional desktop. With a minimal install you might have to work a little to get everything working.

[danillo]

Thank you for the clarification. No wonder it feels like a clone of Ubuntu (Gnome).

Can you please let me know what are the "real XFCE distros" out there? And what is the best.

You can get Debian with Xfce + here's a few other: http://www.xfce.org/download/distros

[Ghostryder4u]

Ok where do I start........
I have tried to put linux on my dell latitude l400 which has been a nightmare I have tried the alt installs the usb install tried to get my bios sorted so it would boot from cd or usb which has been a no go.......the only software that has worked well with this lap top is xp.

I have today downloaded unetbootin which started to get xubuntu to work but then the laptop would just go to sleep mode. Now yes I tried searching through google about this and people have manged to sort it out by learning how to reprogram bits of code, but I dont want to learn about code or how to fly the space shuttle. I just want a os that is not owned (by microsoft) to work out of the box so to speak that is why microsoft dominate the market it does work out of the box. Unless linux works out of the box it will never dominate the operating system market. Now others have posted about their problems with getting linux to work and spending vast amounts of time learning about code, but I dont have time do to that would you like to know why? I am to busy havin sex with parnters and girlfriends of those men who are learning about linux code and are to busy to enjoy time with their wives and girlfriends. Ok rant over.

[snowpine]

Ok where do I start........
I have tried to put linux on my dell latitude l400 which has been a nightmare I have tried the alt installs the usb install tried to get my bios sorted so it would boot from cd or usb which has been a no go.......the only software that has worked well with this lap top is xp.

I have today downloaded unetbootin which started to get xubuntu to work but then the laptop would just go to sleep mode. Now yes I tried searching through google about this and people have manged to sort it out by learning how to reprogram bits of code, but I dont want to learn about code or how to fly the space shuttle. I just want a os that is not owned (by microsoft) to work out of the box so to speak that is why microsoft dominate the market it does work out of the box. Unless linux works out of the box it will never dominate the operating system market. Now others have posted about their problems with getting linux to work and spending vast amounts of time learning about code, but I dont have time do to that would you like to know why? I am to busy havin sex with parnters and girlfriends of those men who are learning about linux code and are to busy to enjoy time with their wives and girlfriends. Ok rant over.

Hi Ghostryder, I dig your sense of humor, so I will give you some advice:

1. Use the search function at the top right--there are already several threads about the Dell Latitude 400 (including this one: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=593334&highlight=Dell+Latitude+L400 ).
2. Start a new thread about your question, with a descriptive title. (I don't think your question is "Xubuntu is simply the best so far")
3. Upgrade your ram, because googling your computer told me 128mb of ram is the default, not enough for a modern Linux OS.
4. Try a lightweight Linux distro such as DSL or Puppy.

[Ghostryder4u]

Hi ty for your reply have upgraded the ram to 256mb and with xp its not that bad...... So my linux it should be great have tried to get this unetbootin to used dsl but its refusing to load the iso which is odd how good is puppy? I have no knowledge of how to configure linux at all. I have done a search on this forum and google with lots of great ideas if you understand linux I just get this laptop to boot correctly with linux its odd really but thanks for the tips.

[jbysmith]

Hi ty for your reply have upgraded the ram to 256mb and with xp its not that bad..

I tend to agree with the above about Ubuntu possibly being a little heavy for this particular machine, at least in its out of the box state. By default it loads quite a few services and such that you might want to disable since you're working with a small bit of memory to work with. Recommended bare minimum for the default Gnome installation is 384MB.

You'll be hard pressed to get a feeling of performance out of XP as well. It will run, but it'll be pretty heavy on swap file usage. Anything bigger than notepad will slow it to a crawl as Windows beats your hard drive to death working the swap file.

Haven't used Puppy myself, but I did toy with Damn Small Linux a few times. Aptly named, takes almost no memory to run. For a machine with 256MB this or Puppy might be a better choice.

Don't know how comfortable you are with Linux, but another option might be doing it yourself. Say either the Ubuntu minimal installtion that gets you a terminal only, or Arch for example. Once you're done you just have a terminal, but you can build up from there and get only what you need so the resource usage is kept to a minimum. Takes a bit of work but it'll be pretty light, the only bloat is whatever you put in yourself. Install a copy of Lynx or whatever for a terminal web browser so you have access to wiki's and such to help things along. Not hard really, just takes a little patience. Arch for example has an excellent wiki on installing from scratch, just follow along and you'll be done in no time.

[Ghostryder4u]

Thanks for the advice been having a look at puppy as dsl looks like the founders have gone their seperate ways........will get back to you on puppy. I really only want the lap top for web and alittle word processing that is all. Anyway many thanks people.

[Ghostryder4u]

Right people quick update Puppy linux dl and installed with unetbootin (does it all for you perfect) one slight problem though can't connect to the internet using 3 broadband modem yes I am searching for how to's etc..... Would like to thank the people on here for all their advice and help. Have to say puppy gave me warnings about screen reso but it looked perfect to me flawless infact again thanks people.

[trot2millah]

I tried XFCE on my junk old desktop, and it worked fine, but I didn't notice any marked improvements over GNOME on Ubuntu. I would imagine a stripped-down version would be lightning fast, though. Puppy seems like a good one to go with.

[fugazi32]

Ubuntu's implementation of XFCE is rather bloated, and they try to make it like a stripped down version of GNOME. Since you dont have any experience with a real XFCE deployment, your likely impressed. My advice to you is that if you like XFCE, then give a real XFCE specialized distro out and you will really see the true power of it.

Would turning off Gnome services at start-up make Xubuntu boot faster?