My XP faster than Ubuntu...not for long though

[BGFG]

Is my Gnome desktop slower that my XP desktop ? Yes. Why is that ?
because I know the tricks of the XP trade: Small drive partition - 8 gigs. Regular defrags, Regular crap cleaning, registry defrag and optimization, killed unnecessary processes, Edited system32 and registry to allow removal of windows components I don't want, removed start up entries I don't want.....the list goes on. Hell, Xp even boots faster.

In my opinion why is Gnome behind ? Simply because the effort is spread worldwide and getting programmers to agree across the board is difficult on such a large project. My code is better, this toolkit is better......

But Gnome is coming together quite nicely, Jaunty seems too crisp to be Linux, you know what I mean, we're accustomed to little Linux quirks which are in rapid decline :) feels a bit weird. Tight desktop integration is but a few releases away. Notice how I am only talking about Gnome? I'm not a KDE user. Not because of the bad reviews but when i was picking an OS, I liked the Brown look and stuck with Gnome.

I like the KDE project though, I think it is quite complimentary to the Fedora project, both are about pushing the envelope and innovation. without projects such as these, computing would be nowhere. I plan to use the KDE desktop when I try Fedora. Ubuntu is right behind, Debian's poster-person, stable, friendly, appealing.

Back to my initial thought, stop ragging on our own guys. They're not paid 9 to 5 and develop when they get home from their own jobs, so the status of both projects is an achievement in itself. All I really think is that Linux projects need just a little more time to meet then surpass in some areas. In others, we are light years ahead of the curve. 64 bit how many years now ? :)

Why I still use Xp you wonder ? microdia webcam and Lexmark printer. I'm a performance hound so why not have some fun with windows for how long i need to be there anyway.... Why MY windows is faster than MY Ubuntu ?
Been using Ubuntu under a year now, don't know all the tricks yet. But i will....

[MasterNetra]

Ubuntu is plenty fast for me. If general desktop speed is a big deal for you, you could try turning off effects. (Right-Click > Change Desktop Background > Visual Effects > None)

[smartboyathome]

Also, you are comparing something which came out in 2001(!!!) to something which came out in 2008. It would be more worthwhile to compare Ubuntu to Vista or Windows 7.

[MasterNetra]

Also, you are comparing something which came out in 2001(!!!) to something which came out in 2008. It would be more worthwhile to compare Ubuntu to Vista or Windows 7.

Windows 7 is still in Beta though. Better to wait until its released offically before torching it. Much more satisfying that way. :p

[BGFG]

Also, you are comparing something which came out in 2001(!!!) to something which came out in 2008. It would be more worthwhile to compare Ubuntu to Vista or Windows 7.

Great point :) but it's not really a comparison, it's just so happens that these are the two OS'es I currently use. besides to actually compare with vista or win7 i would be forced to use them. This is not happening.
Hope people don't mistake this for linux criticism though. it's exactly the opposite :)

[Kareeser]

Small drive partition - 8 gigs. Regular defrags, Regular crap cleaning, registry defrag and optimization, killed unnecessary processes, Edited system32 and registry to allow removal of windows components I don't want, removed start up entries I don't want.....the list goes on. Hell, Xp even boots faster.

Ideally, an operating system should run nimbly without minimizing the system partition and tweaking the heck out of it.

I bet you didn't have to touch GNOME :)

[BGFG]

Ideally, an operating system should run nimbly without minimizing the system partition and tweaking the heck out of it.

I bet you didn't have to touch GNOME :)

exactly, I have to trick out Xp to get what it should deliver by defaut. wheras Ubuntu is a second or less behind with no intervention from myself....

Can't wait for 9.10 :)

[kelvin spratt]

I think you want to change jobs and work for Microsoft seeing as you know more than they do about XP.
But seriously XP can be made to boot very fast anybody can do that mine hits the operating screen in 12secs yes its all been tweaked but that's when the speed stops dead as it slowly tries to load the graghic drivers and the rest of the bits and bobs by the time the egg timer has stopped, a relitivally slow ubuntu is on its umteenth web page. and then there is all that time running spyware antivirus cleaning this and cleaning that it all seems a very negitive claim you are making, I'd say from experiance 1hr a week just cleaning I can do a lot in 52hrs a year on linux.

[BGFG]

I think you want to change jobs and work for Microsoft seeing as you know more than they do about XP.
But seriously XP can be made to boot very fast anybody can do that mine hits the operating screen in 12secs yes its all been tweaked but that's when the speed stops dead as it slowly tries to load the graghic drivers and the rest of the bits and bobs by the time the egg timer has stopped, a relitivally slow ubuntu is on its umteenth web page. and then there is all that time running spyware antivirus cleaning this and cleaning that it all seems a very negitive claim you are making, I'd say from experiance 1hr a week just cleaning I can do a lot in 52hrs a year on linux.

Colour me confused, but are you defending Ubuntu from my praise ? :shock:

[deepclutch]

remove all unwanted applications(use synaptic) installed-which starts upon boot.yeah ,I know you will be saying upstart does parallel startups of services.still :p
Ubuntu takes around 20sec to boot to GDM on my system. :)

[timberjack]

Ideally, an operating system should run nimbly without minimizing the system partition and tweaking the heck out of it.

I bet you didn't have to touch GNOME :)

Self explanatory :lolflag:

[Johnsie]

Both operating systems are relatively easy to tweak and improve speed. By default Ubuntu comes with very few services running so may appear faster, but you can easily do the same with Windows if you want to.

The drivers/hardware you use can also make a difference. If the Windows driver is better than the Linux driver then it might perform better and vice-versa.

I guess it all boils down to which software applications or hardware you want to use on your computer. I dual boot because that gives me more choice of what I can use. Restricting myself to only one operating system would limit what I can and cannot do with my computer.

[bakedbeans4life]

As others have said, XP is a legacy OS as far as Microsoft are concerned.

I know from experience that XP with service pack three (with all the relevant updates and drivers) is a little faster than most Linux distros running many Open Source games (Nexuiz, Open Arena etc). I would suspect that is also true of many of the commercial games that are available for both platforms.

But when you add the overhead of the obligatory anti-virus, firewall, anti-spyware, anti-adware aids etc, this is where things get interesting.

Then into this equation you add the system requirement of Vista? Nuff Said?

[Rumbl3]

ubuntu is faster for me then windows and i do all the tweaks etc. Least loading from boot is faster about the same in normal operations.

[BuffaloX]

If you want superfast have a look at this!

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel_moblin_2&num=1

It's really cool that Intel works on making Linux boot faster, their development can be used by any Linux distro, and should be included in future versions of Ubuntu too. :grin:

[Skripka]

Any distro that starts with "*"- and ends with -"ubuntu", is probably going to be slow....as shown on Phoronix, by Ubuntu getting slower and slower with each iteration.

[Sealbhach]

Jaunty is a big improvement on startup time, especially those moments after login when the desktop is loading... takes hardly any time at all compared to Intrepid.


.

[SunnyRabbiera]

I dunno for me my gnome bootup is much faster then XP, my laptops have higher memory and better processors then my desktop but it still takes over a minute to get the system usable.

[Skripka]

Jaunty is a big improvement on startup time, especially those moments after login when the desktop is loading... takes hardly any time at all compared to Intrepid.


.

Hopefully it will stay that way...what are they on late Alpha stage right now?

[BGFG]

As others have said, XP is a legacy OS as far as Microsoft are concerned.

I know from experience that XP with service pack three (with all the relevant updates and drivers) is a little faster than most Linux distros running many Open Source games (Nexuiz, Open Arena etc). I would suspect that is also true of many of the commercial games that are available for both platforms.

But when you add the overhead of the obligatory anti-virus, firewall, anti-spyware, anti-adware aids etc, this is where things get interesting.

Then into this equation you add the system requirement of Vista? Nuff Said?

I'm actually running SP3 with updated and whatnot :) and used a driver update software to get the latest drivers so the system is pretty peppy.
however, seeing the Xp desktop doesn't mean the system is immediately usable wheras with Ubuntu it is. I also visited this site:
http://ubuntusoftware.info/howto/tweaking-ultimate-edition/

which was a nice guide in disabling some unneeded processes. I'll keep looking into Ubuntu speed tweaks...

[hoboken]

Sorry, but saying ubuntu doesn't need to be tweaked is absurd. Sure, it sometimes works out of the box.. but the most common thing is to have to dig around and get the wifi working. Even after it's all working, I still have to tweak the hell out of it to get it the way I like it, and I bet it's the same with all of you.

Tweaking is a natural and necessary thing if you're a performance hound, whatever OS you choose to use. The advantage ubuntu has is that with tweaking, you can actually customize the OS and make it how you like it.. so the time spent tweaking actually gives results.