Trying to make Ubuntu run like Arch

**zek725** · October 15th, 2006

Isn't xubuntu-desktop easier? What are the differences?

sudo aptitude install xubuntu-desktop

**K.Mandla** · October 16th, 2006

Originally Posted by zek725

Isn't xubuntu-desktop easier? What are the differences?

Easier, yes ... but it also tends to install a lot of things that can slow me down. For example, without GDM as the desktop manager, the boot process is considerably faster. Granted, you have to log in at the terminal screen and start XFCE manually, but there are ways around that, and the speed difference is considerable.

It's an issue of drive space, too. Too many programs I don't need will take up space on the drive, forcing the head to skip over them when I want to do something else. It's not so much that fragmentation is a problem ... it's the fact that some space is taken up by programs that are "closer to the center," and access times fall, and response times fall, and things ... start ... to ... seem ... slower. ...

In reality, for the average user, there's not much use in tweaking ad nauseum. There are people who do nothing but tinker and tweak, looking for the perfect combination for their machine. I'm one of those people. There's no harm in it. It's a hobby, I guess.

**zek725** · October 16th, 2006

Originally Posted by K.Mandla

Easier, yes ... but it also tends to install a lot of things that can slow me down. For example, without GDM as the desktop manager, the boot process is considerably faster. Granted, you have to log in at the terminal screen and start XFCE manually, but there are ways around that, and the speed difference is considerable.

It's an issue of drive space, too. Too many programs I don't need will take up space on the drive, forcing the head to skip over them when I want to do something else. It's not so much that fragmentation is a problem ... it's the fact that some space is taken up by programs that are "closer to the center," and access times fall, and response times fall, and things ... start ... to ... seem ... slower. ...

In reality, for the average user, there's not much use in tweaking ad nauseum. There are people who do nothing but tinker and tweak, looking for the perfect combination for their machine. I'm one of those people. There's no harm in it. It's a hobby, I guess.

8) Cool! I'll try it.

**jhenager** · October 16th, 2006

Originally Posted by Neobuntu

Yeah, I must go out on a limb and say Linux does not shine as bright on really old hardware (so as not to miss lead).

But what is really old and what are we doing with the old thing?

Good results can come from the time invested but they can never exceed their hardware. Yet, they can pretend to, as a client; given the minimum specs for that.

See Edubuntu.

On a whim I tried loading the Live CD on an original Pentium system. I think it is a 166MHz processor with 128MB of RAM and two 1.5GB SCSI hard disks.
After about 28 hours, it came up to an error message that the trash applet couldn't be loaded. I tried to tell it to ignore the error, but it seemed to just sit there, and I tired of the attempt and powered it off. There are limits to everything, I guess. It was trying, tho....

**K.Mandla** · October 16th, 2006

That live CD definitely has a baseline for technology. It's not impossible to get Ubuntu running on a machine with those specs, though ...

**bionnaki** · December 18th, 2006

thank you for this thread. I am going to install linux on my brother's old compaq machine that runs windows 98 on it. I am unsure of the exact specs (I remember it being a top-of-the-line computer around 1998 or so) but I am sure I can get the machine running well.

**RajivNair** · December 20th, 2006

What i like the most about ARCH apart from the speed, is the concept of rolling release.Ubuntu has to manage at one time packages from 3 different versions comprising of 17000 packages(avg.) while in Arch the repository is divided on the terms of the s/w as extra,current,unstable,community and testing.So once you install it and keep your system updated you really dont have to d/w another ISO and also that Arch offers the latest packages(i'm already running kernel 2.6.19) ,even though it did had little issues with my intel chipset all i had to do was to append a simple command in grub menu.I really wish to see the concept of one single central repository in Ubuntu with latest packages ,and a snapshot can be brought out every 6 months.

**MetalMusicAddict** · December 20th, 2006

Originally Posted by RajivNair

I really wish to see the concept of one single central repository in Ubuntu with latest packages ,and a snapshot can be brought out every 6 months.

I really like that idea.

You can kinda do that now but its a little more manual. Editing your sources.list and all.

**forger** · July 2nd, 2008

You could just install ubuntu-minimal ubuntu-standard and remove all the packages installed along with ubuntu-desktop by purging it.
On the other hand, maybe you would like to use debian, which allows more customizing between packages

Also, let's not forget the wealth of modules and applications ubuntu provides for an all-around use