Well I decided to give Ubuntu a Try...

[climhazzard85]

Unfortunately, it didn't work out :(. I resized my XP partition using SuSE's install disc (ubuntu wouldn't do it) and then installed ubuntu. What surprised me, was that Ubuntu was significantly slower than XP has ever been on my machine. The menu's in firefox would lag, OpenOffice lagged horribly, and my printer didn't work (though it was found). Also my monitor was off center with X, to add to the other issues.

Well anyway since it was so slow (mouse would even lag), I decided to erase linux and try to repartition my HD back to the way it was. That was also a feat in itself, I used a SystemRestore cd (gentoo based I believe) and I was able to put my system back to where it was without losing anything fortunately.

I wish ubuntu would have run better, and I really don't understand why it would be so much slower than windows, but it was. My PC isn't terribly slow either, it's a 1.8ghz with 384megs of ram, XP flies and hardly ever slows down.

[aysiu]

Sorry it didn't work out for you. If you're still interested in Linux in general, you may want to give Mepis (http://www.mepis.org/node/1462) a try--it's a live CD and installer CD in one and sometimes it recognizes hardware that Ubuntu doesn't (sometimes vice versa, but apparently not in your case). Best of luck to you whatever you decide to do.

[ngms27]

Sorry it didn't work out for you. If you're still interested in Linux in general, you may want to give Mepis a try--it's a live CD and installer CD in one and sometimes it recognizes hardware that Ubuntu doesn't (sometimes vice versa, but apparently not in your case). Best of luck to you whatever you decide to do.

I have tried Mepis out this afternoon and I have to say it puts Ubuntu in the shade.

JonnyT

[aysiu]

I have tried Mepis out this afternoon and I have to say it puts Ubuntu in the shade. Mepis is just different. I have to say that when I first started out using Linux, Mepis appealed a lot more to me than Ubuntu (in fact, Ubuntu just turned me off completely). Mepis is a lot more automatic, and it includes by default a lot of the proprietary codecs that Windows users take for granted. I think Mepis is a good first distro, and I usually recommend it to people who have tried Ubuntu and find Ubuntu doesn't "just work" and isn't automatic enough.

That said, once I got comfortable with Mepis, I just found it too bloated, slow, and ugly (despite theming and changing icons... the bootsplash, which is not easily modifiable is extremely ugly), and I like the Ubuntu community and available documentation a lot more. Once I found the Ubuntu Guide (http://www.ubuntuguide.org), I realized that not having all those codecs wasn't such a big deal.

[izmaelis]

I think that you have given up too soon. All problems that you have mentioned are not so terrible and hard to solve. Ubuntu works with lots of hardware (just like other, sometimes commertial, OS do) and if you want to add more hardware you must put some work to it.
I hope that you didn't give up on Linux idea after all.

[KingBahamut]

While strictly honorable in concept , It is your choice to make. However Ill say that if you had asked the right questions in these forums , rather than the memorabled "Linux Confuses Me" thread -- Questions/Comments I have about Linux, and Microsoft (Long!) http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=66380 -- I think you probably would be getting a better system and with proper tweaking, a faster one too, based on your hardware. Ive got a Microtel Sempron 1.5ghz proc that I bought from Walmart for 200 bux with Ubuntu properly installed on it, and it hauls donkey hindquarter.

[ounas]

While strictly honorable in concept , It is your choice to make. However Ill say that if you had asked the right questions in these forums , rather than the memorabled "Linux Confuses Me" thread -- Questions/Comments I have about Linux, and Microsoft (Long!) http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=66380 -- I think you probably would be getting a better system and with proper tweaking, a faster one too, based on your hardware. Ive got a Microtel Sempron 1.5ghz proc that I bought from Walmart for 200 bux with Ubuntu properly installed on it, and it hauls donkey hindquarter.

You said it.. Ask the right question, and you shall get the right answer

-Ounas :D

[aysiu]

While I agree that the OP's problems are not that hard to solve, if someone gives up, she gives up. People have different tolerance levels for what "works" for them and what doesn't. Linux isn't for everyone, and Ubuntu isn't for everyone. As long as someone doesn't post in here saying, "I don't understand how anyone can use this piece of crap," I will always say, "Use whatever works for you and happy trails."

Sure, the "Questions/Comments I have about Microsoft/Linux" thread was a little crazy and definitely inflammatory, but this one simply says, "Hey, it didn't work for me," and to that I say, "Fine. Have fun with whatever. Ubuntu works for me and a lot of other people, but it's not for everyone."

[climhazzard85]

While I agree that the OP's problems are not that hard to solve, if someone gives up, she gives up. People have different tolerance levels for what "works" for them and what doesn't. Linux isn't for everyone, and Ubuntu isn't for everyone. As long as someone doesn't post in here saying, "I don't understand how anyone can use this piece of crap," I will always say, "Use whatever works for you and happy trails."

Sure, the "Questions/Comments I have about Microsoft/Linux" thread was a little crazy and definitely inflammatory, but this one simply says, "Hey, it didn't work for me," and to that I say, "Fine. Have fun with whatever. Ubuntu works for me and a lot of other people, but it's not for everyone."

Yeah I don't think linux is crap, I'm not trying to be an ******* just tell my experience. Crap is Windows ME, not linux. ;-).

Don't get me wrong, if I came across a computer without a legal version of windows on it, i wouldn't hesitate to throw linux on, it's great for free. But the thing is, it didn't work as well as XP. I really am not as concerned about the printing and monitor problem, as I am the fact that everything just moved so slow, if that was fixable I'd have no problem using linux, as it interests me.

[aysiu]

I really am not as concerned about the printing and monitor problem, as I am the fact that everything just moved so slow, if that was fixable I'd have no problem using linux, as it interests me. Really? Then just use XFCE4, and it'll fly.

[climhazzard85]

XFCE is a nextstep type of interface right? That doesn't sound bad, but the problem with that is OpenOffice and Firefox are still going to be laggy aren't they?

Also it feels kinda like I'd be taking a step back, reverting to such a simple window manager, but I could be wrong there.

[Qrk]

XFCE isn't really a simple window manager. Its very well stocked with features. This is the second time I've said this in almost as many days, but I had similar problems as you did until I installed the nvidia driver for my graphics card. It made a night and day difference. It also isn't hard to do, the ubuntuguide has instructions for the generic driver.

The bottom line is that Ubuntu shouldn't be that slow... something went wrong during the install. I think MEPIS worked better for you because it has closed source drivers included.

[blastus]

I read that KDE 4.0 may be up to 30% faster than previous versions of KDE. It will also have new features that I'm looking forward to...like being able to place panels adjacent to each other. I do find that KDE is slower than Windows XP, particularly it takes a lot longer for applications to load but it doesn't bother me too much. Once an application has loaded (like Firefox, Thunderbird, or OpenOffice), it still is a little slower than Windows XP but not that much.

One thing I should point out about performance is that it can be dependent on the video driver you are using. If you have an NVIDIA card, in Ubuntu you have to install the driver (see the Ubuntu Starter Guide (http://ubuntuguide.org/)) You should read the guide because it answers a number of your questions. Even in Windows XP, I have to install the NVIDIA drivers. I can tell you for a fact that the performance of Windows XP with just the default video driver on my machine is ABSOLUTELY HORRENDOUS. It is much slower than any distribution of Linux I've tried with the default out-of-the-box video driver.

[Stormy Eyes]

XFCE is a nextstep type of interface right? That doesn't sound bad, but the problem with that is OpenOffice and Firefox are still going to be laggy aren't they?

Actually XFCE is inspired by the Common Desktop Environment (http://www.opengroup.org/cde/) that used to rule old-school Unix desktops back in the day. If you want something that resembles NextStep, then try either AfterStep or Window Maker.

[poofyhairguy]

XFCE is a nextstep type of interface right? That doesn't sound bad, but the problem with that is OpenOffice and Firefox are still going to be laggy aren't they?

Also it feels kinda like I'd be taking a step back, reverting to such a simple window manager, but I could be wrong there.


XFCE is far more than a simple window manager. In fact, if you want, I can tell you a way to make it look and work almost exactly like Gnome.

Another solution is to install and use openbox in Gnome. It changes the behavior less than XFCE, but its much faster than the default:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=34239&highlight=openbox

You can give up now....its your choice....but slowness is one thing that can be fixed.

[KingBahamut]

XFCE forever.
=)

[drizek]

It is not normal for any linux distro to be slower than windows. I run ubuntu w/KDE on a 1ghz p3 and 192mb ram and its hardly a speed demon, but its not annoyingly slow either. You have two choices. The first is to use a distro like vector linux which should fly on your hardware. There is also a suse-based distro coming out in a few weeks(maybe days?) called SUPER which will contain a bunch of performance enhancements and still be as easy to use as SuSE(http://www.opensuse.org/SUPER). Or you can try to optimize ubuntu.

If you are going to stick with ubuntu, then it is important to find out why exactly it is so slow. Post all your hardware specs as detailed as you can, that should help. First, i would recommend installing XFCE. I cant say for sure what kind of performance difference this will make, but from my experience it should be at least a litle bit faster.

The most simple solution to app loading speeds is prelink. you might have to install prelink through apt cause i dont think it is included in the standard installation. if you dont know how to use apt, then post here and someone can help you. im not on ubuntu right now so i cant say any details. Anyway, once you have prelink installed, open a terminal and do

sudo prelink -a

this should cut down app load times by a large amount. There are other, more complex ways to optimize performance, but it is pretty complicated. if you really want a speedy system, then i would recommend waiting for SUPER to become reasonably stable because it contains a ton of performance enhancements not found in ubuntu. And probably the greatest thing about it is that it is just as easy to use a regular suse install, and it also contains a lot of codecs(mp3, dvd) out of the box. If you were frustrated with ubuntu, then i would suggest you watch this.

Also, i think it is important to note that firefox sucks. If you are using gnome, you should be using epiphany, if you are using KDE then you should be using konqueror. If you dont like either one of these browsers, you can always run opera. firefox is terrible when it comes to loading performance (for example i have an athlon 3200 and a gig of ram, on a prelinked suse install it takes 5 seconds to load, on a non-prelinked kubuntu install it takes about 7 seconds to load. konqueror loads up in less than a second on both). OOo takes a ton of time to load on both windows and linux and there isnt much you can do about that in ubuntu. In SUPER however, it is preloaded during startup, which means that it launches relatively quickly. For a system such as yours however, unless you absolutely need the advanced features in openoffice, i would recommend using KOffice. KOffice is not quite as powerfull as OOo in a lot of ways, but there is a HUGE performance difference which i think you would appreciate on a system such as yours.