Ubuntu vs Crunchbang

[proxess]

Please no more Linux vs Linux threads, it's all a matter of choice.

[~sHyLoCk~]

I've never attempted a standalone compiz system, sorry. I prefer openbox or fluxbox.

Using compiz standalone here. It's quite fast and light. You should definitely check it out.

[Grifulkin]

#! is pretty sweet , im 2 days using it and from ubuntu its easy enough to get used to , i like the minimalistic look and the snappy feel to it, no brown ,and best of all im learning more about linux , heres how i have it looking at the min, still have to look into conky, and lots of other stuff

My laptop. My desktop also uses openbox and it looks a lot nicer.

[ubudog]

My laptop. My desktop also uses openbox and it looks a lot nicer.

Amazing!

[stanca]

Linux versus Linux will always keep GNU Linux community split apart and never united,all because of personal ambition and arogance.

[bobin]

@stanca

Nice conky. could you post the code?

[TeamRocket1233c]

Crunchbang is actually really nice, I have it on my ancient PC and really like it, and the current #! release is actually based on Debian instead of Ubuntu.

However if you want a really lightweight Ubuntu, Lubuntu's a great option, and probably your only option.

Both Crunchbang and Lubuntu will run on 128 megs, although 256 megs or more is recommended for both of them, and they will both run laps around Windows Vista or 7, and even Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Debian, or Fedora on modern, high-performance hardware specs.

Basically, if you want a lightweight Debian with Openbox, Crunchbang's the way to go, if you want a lightweight Ubuntu with LXDE, Lubuntu's the way to go.

Puppy and Tiny Core are also good lightweight distro options.