Question about Ubuntu functionality on netbooks

[Noobs*McGee]

Hey Forums,

So, I recently purchased a really nice desktop pc from iBuyPower along with an Asus 1201HAB netbook, replacing my Toshiba Satellite laptop (whose system board died after a faithful four years of virtually flawless operation ) on which I had Windows 7 and Ubuntu 9.10 dual boot.

Having grown quite fond of Ubuntu in the short time I was using it (less than a year), I decided I wanted it on my new desktop, and, if possible, on my netbook as well. I've already installed Ubuntu on my desktop, and it's running great, so now I'd like to get it installed on my netbook as well. I knew about UNR/UNE before my old laptop died, and I thought it might be cool to try it out on my new netbook. However, I put both the UNE and the regular Ubuntu Desktop installers on a flash drive to try out, and when I went to try them out on my netbook (via Live Boot from the flash drive) it was very sluggish.

Which brings me to my question: is this sluggishness inherent to use on a netbook, or does it have something to do with booting from a flash drive? The netbook has pretty decent specs (I think): Intel Atom Z520 Processor @ 1.33 GHz, 1GB RAM, 150GB HDD

Does anyone have any experience with this netbook specifically, or with either or both Ubuntu distros (UNE and Desktop) on any netbook? Do you think the OS with operate more smoothly once installed, and would you recommend one distro over the other?

Any input would be greatly appreciated!

Cheers,
NM

[Noobs*McGee]

Any thoughts?

[CharlesA]

I noticed the same thing on my Asus 1005HA netbook. It seemed like Lucid took almost 2 minutes to go from "loading screen" to desktop. The machine is running a 1.66Ghz Atom with 2GB of RAM.

I tried it in a VM yesterday on my desktop (booted off iso) and it took maybe 20-30 seconds to load.

I don't know if it's cuz it's going off of USB or if it's just the netbook.

Ubuntu 9.10 would boot in about 30-45 seconds.

[GSF1200S]

Its definitely due to using it on a flash drive.

I have Windows XP on my Asus 1005HA-P, and it has gotten amazingly slow in just a few months.. I have a core list of programs installed, Eset Nod32 antivirus (one of the lightest and best), and all I did was use WinSCP and Firefox- still slow.

I used Ubuntu 9.10 Beta 2 a while ago and it was very fast, but I had a network manager bug that made me go back to XP (has been fixed in 10.04). Im installing 10.04 UNE as we speak and I can guarantee the speed will be better than my Windows install.

The only legitimate complaint one could wage that I can think of is that you might lose battery life with UNE. For me, it was the opposite, but I reason this is due to my programs on Windows constantly taxing the hard drive. Ubuntu lasted about 10 minutes longer just sitting idle (yes, I timed it), and that was back on 9.10 b2. I say go for it, or maybe dual boot if you have the space.

EDIT** I will let you guys know the boot time on mine when I get done installing- Im currently trying to help people get 10.04 issues fixed, install, and monitor this thread.. Give me a little time, and Ill report back.

[snowpine]

Live mode performance will always be slower than installed performance. You will have to install Ubuntu to get an accurate benchmark. Also make sure you have the proper graphics drivers installed (GMA500 is not supported "out of the box" by Ubuntu) as that will make a huge difference in perceived performance.

Speaking of benchmarks, I have read that your chip is comparable to a Pentium 4 or Celeron so make sure your expectations are realistic.

[happyt8r]

I have been having the same issue with sluggishness on my Asus Eee 900HA after clean installing 10.04UNE to replace 9.10UNR. Its almost as if its not running in 1.6ghz and running in the 900mhz mode instead. Everything works its just slow.

[bodhi.zazen]

I found a standard installation ran faster then UNE on my netbook.

[GSF1200S]

While plymouth does not work on startup (it works on shutdown), it is quite fast for me. It boots in about 22 seconds (windows took almost a minute). Applications open quickly for me. I dont like the purple or the placement of the min/max/close buttons but thats an easy fix..

[KegHead]

Hi!

I have a Dell mini 9 running standard 10.04.

Specs: 16gb ssd, 2gb ram.

It runs great, satisfied with the performance.

I updated via the terminal.

KegHead

[Noobs*McGee]

Thanks for the replies guys, I appreciate the input. I guess I will give dual booting the new 10.04 with my current XP install. Hopefully it will turn out to be just running from USB that is causing the sluggishness.

@snowpine

Live mode performance will always be slower than installed performance. You will have to install Ubuntu to get an accurate benchmark. Also make sure you have the proper graphics drivers installed (GMA500 is not supported "out of the box" by Ubuntu) as that will make a huge difference in perceived performance.

Speaking of benchmarks, I have read that your chip is comparable to a Pentium 4 or Celeron so make sure your expectations are realistic.

I realize that the Atom processor is not a beast or anything (it is just a netbook after all) but as far as I have read/heard, it is one of the better processors you can get in a netbook, and it runs Windows XP with decent speed & minimal hangups. Given that Ubuntu (esp. UNE) is supposed to be much more lightweight than Windows, I would expect that it would run with at least equal, if not greater speed than Windows. Thus, I don't think my expectations are unrealistic.