Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 24th Apr 2006 14:01 UTC, submitted by Linoman
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu x64bit.net reviews Xubuntu Dapper Drake Beta, and concludes: "If your system runs slowly using Gnome or KDE then try out Xfce. On the other hand if you think Gnome or KDE is bloated and you wish you could have a desktop that was like either Gnome or KDE. Then Xfce is for you. Xubuntu is a welcomed member of the Ubuntu family. I look forward to Xubuntu 6.06 final." Rejoice over the multitude of screenshots, boys and girls.
Order by: Score:
I don't know...
by mkools on Mon 24th Apr 2006 14:12 UTC
mkools
Member since:
2005-10-11

...about Xubuntu.

If you have such a slow system that you can't even run GNome or KDE then I think you should go for another distro that is specially made for very old hardware, maybe with an even older kernel.

Of course if your system is fast enough for gnome/kde and you still want to run Xfce then it's a welcomed member of the family, the more choiche the better but what's the big deal of adding it as a seperate package which you can simply install with apt-get on Ubuntu or Kubuntu like they do with blackbox which i'm using to run vmware in because of the low memory consumption.

Reply Score: 1

RE: I don't know...
by Babi Asu on Mon 24th Apr 2006 14:29 UTC in reply to "I don't know..."
Babi Asu Member since:
2006-02-11

One should make IceUbuntu or wmUbuntu, that would be the fastest Ubuntu ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: I don't know...
by TaterSalad on Mon 24th Apr 2006 15:25 UTC in reply to "RE: I don't know..."
TaterSalad Member since:
2005-07-06

If you are going that route you can't forget fvwmubuntu, or just fvunbuntu for short.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: I don't know...
by BryanFeeney on Mon 24th Apr 2006 15:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I don't know..."
BryanFeeney Member since:
2005-07-06

Pah, I don't want all that *bloat* on my desktop. I just want to get productive as quickly as possible.

That's why I use twmubuntu!

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: I don't know...
by Adam S on Mon 24th Apr 2006 15:46 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I don't know..."
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

If you weren't such a n00b you'd be interested in bashbuntu. It boots to a shell!

Reply Score: 5

RE[5]: I don't know...
by peejay on Mon 24th Apr 2006 16:36 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I don't know..."
peejay Member since:
2005-06-29

> If you weren't such a n00b you'd be interested in
> bashbuntu. It boots to a shell!

Personally, I run nobuntu on my old machines. No power requirements, no cables to worry about, instant "on" when you flip the switch, and it's never once given me a problem with hardware detection. ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: I don't know...
by g2devi on Mon 24th Apr 2006 16:39 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I don't know..."
g2devi Member since:
2005-07-09

Actually, Ubuntu Server does just that.

BTW, if you're interested in ICEwm or some other window manager without having the bloat of two window managers being installed, you should be able do an apt-get and set yourself up without too much difficulty.

Reply Score: 1

Is it just me
by atezun on Mon 24th Apr 2006 14:25 UTC
atezun
Member since:
2005-07-06

or does Xubuntu not look like Xfce - AT ALL. I remember a few years back when I used Cobind as my primary desktop (Oh do I miss that distro)that Xfce looked a lot cleaner and far more appealing than that; furthermore, what have they done with the dock-like panel?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Is it just me
by Adam S on Mon 24th Apr 2006 14:35 UTC in reply to "Is it just me"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

Is it just me or does Xubuntu not look like Xfce - AT ALL.

No, it doesn't. If they were going to fool with the theme, they should've tried to make an XFCE/Human hybrid rather than a green and orange mess. I love this idea, but once they change the basics of XFCE, what's the point of Xubuntu?

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Is it just me
by negativity on Mon 24th Apr 2006 15:24 UTC in reply to "RE: Is it just me"
negativity Member since:
2006-02-23

Xfce is plenty configurable. They just don't know how to configure it in an optimum way yet. I started using Xfce in its current development version, 4.3. Before this version I would use mainly Gnome, so there's definitely something good in this version.

What's the point of Xubuntu? To be the best lightweight Linux desktop on Earth, but being heavyweight is mainly a question of bloat. :-)

(BTW, you have done a good job with the whole login/rating system on OSnews, to my surprise, thank you.)

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Is it just me
by Adam S on Mon 24th Apr 2006 15:28 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Is it just me"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

I didn't mean to imply I have a problem with Xfce, because I definitely don't. See my previous reviews of Cobind etc. I have been a big fan for awhile. It's just that Xubuntu doesn't really look like Xfce, it looks like a custom version. I just wish they had better integrated, which appears to be what you're hinting at for future versions.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Is it just me
by BryanFeeney on Mon 24th Apr 2006 15:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Is it just me"
BryanFeeney Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, this is a screenshot from the Xfce site:
http://www.xfce.org/images/screenshots/snap_VI.jpg

and this is a screenshot from the Ubuntu review
http://www.x64bit.net/site/board/index.php?s=e9dae175ce40770f099fdc...

It seems to me the only thing they've changed is to add the launcher menu and change the style. The launcher arguably makes it easier to find programs, and changing the style makes sense: it's a Ubuntu variant, so they might as well throw in the Ubuntu branding.

Of course, this is all the new Xfce, version 4.4. Possibly the argument is that Xfce is changing. It's got a lot of the paraphenalia that Gnome and KDE now have, including its own library (the impressive Xfce Foundation Classes), and is on it's way, despite itself, to being a full-fledged desktop environment.

Reply Score: 1

Nice mini review :-)
by negativity on Mon 24th Apr 2006 15:19 UTC
negativity
Member since:
2006-02-23

Tell you what, I have been using Xfce 4.3, the soon to be world rocker, for months, and I have never used half of the apps that he mentions in the review. It just goes to show that we have plenty of options, thank you. :-)

Reply Score: 1

screenies
by chrishaney on Mon 24th Apr 2006 15:20 UTC
chrishaney
Member since:
2005-11-15
Off-topic
by TaterSalad on Mon 24th Apr 2006 15:23 UTC
TaterSalad
Member since:
2005-07-06

This is completely off topic but when I went to click on the link to read the comments to this article I saw the soup nazi appear. I cracked up in my cube. I saw the janitor and thought it was funny, but OSNews raised the bar with the soup nazi error screen.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Off-topic
by setuid_w00t on Mon 24th Apr 2006 20:44 UTC in reply to "Off-topic"
setuid_w00t Member since:
2005-10-22

Darn, I wish I could have seen the soup nazi error screen. I guess I will just have to wait until the next time OSNews goes down. That shouldn't be too long.

Reply Score: 1

Xfce theme
by negativity on Mon 24th Apr 2006 16:03 UTC
negativity
Member since:
2006-02-23

Here's an example of Xfce with a custom theme:
http://www.xfce-look.org/content/show.php?content=38188

Reply Score: 1

I cant even log in...
by RMSe17 on Mon 24th Apr 2006 17:34 UTC
RMSe17
Member since:
2006-03-06

The livecd comes up with the standard login prompt, and I have no idea what to put for username/password..
I tried root/root and xubuntu/xubuntu and ubuntu/ubuntu and they dont work.. blank also doesnt work..
*sigh*

Reply Score: 1

RE: I cant even log in...
by negativity on Mon 24th Apr 2006 18:14 UTC in reply to "I cant even log in..."
negativity Member since:
2006-02-23

They messed that up -- newbies! :-)

Login: ubuntu
Password: (nothing -- just press enter)

Reply Score: 1

Review???
by setuid_w00t on Mon 24th Apr 2006 20:49 UTC
setuid_w00t
Member since:
2005-10-22

"I installed ____ and here are some screenshots of ____" does not constitute a useful review.

Reply Score: 3

*buntu vs debian and bloat
by walterbyrd on Tue 25th Apr 2006 12:26 UTC
walterbyrd
Member since:
2005-12-31

I'm just asking:

1) Other than ease of install, is there an advantage to using *buntu instead of straight-up debian?

2) How does KDE or Gnome slow down the system? Obviously they require more disk space, because they have more built-in apps/features. I suppose they might use more memory. But, the load on the video should be about the same as xfce - I would think.

Reply Score: 1

RE: *buntu vs debian and bloat
by negativity on Tue 25th Apr 2006 13:05 UTC in reply to "*buntu vs debian and bloat"
negativity Member since:
2006-02-23

"1) Other than ease of install, is there an advantage to using *buntu instead of straight-up debian?"

The main Debian version is the stable one. It's "stable" for a reason, which is that the packages have been thoroughly tested and now updates are mainly due to security reasons. The problem is that the stable version of Debian gets old too fast. One year in Linux time is plenty of changes, and Debian stable can't keep up with it.

With Ubuntu, we get new releases every 6 months or so, which guarantees that we have somewhat updated packages in a "stable" release, which is maintained with security patches as well.

With Ubuntu Dapper, we will get the best Linux distro to date, because it will have plenty of updated packages which will be maintained with security patches for more than 3 years (people say 5, but in Linux time that's too old. :-)

Thus, Ubuntu is generally more up to date than Debian. If you use Debian unstable, you can get updated packages, but if you break your distro with the unstable packages, few experts will want to help you to fix it.

There are other differences as well, but let's keep it at this for now.


"2) How does KDE or Gnome slow down the system? Obviously they require more disk space, because they have more built-in apps/features. I suppose they might use more memory. But, the load on the video should be about the same as xfce - I would think."

First thing is that depending on the theme that you use, you may get a slower experience. The theme that I use that comes with the development version of Xfce is very simple and fast, thus I choose to use it.

Also, Gnome and KDE are more integrated. Xfce has a very modular approach, which has changed a little to more integrated with the latest version, though. But even so, Xfce is very modular. It means that unless you open all the Xfce windows at once, you will use only the resources that you have open, which are quite few.

Finally, Xfce has a long history of trying to appeal to the low resources systems. All this baggage Xfce brings with itself in every release, which means that if you have a slow system, you probably can use it. But if you have a fast system, Xfce will fly. :-)

Which means that the differences in speed are inherent the development model of each project.

Reply Score: 1

RE: *buntu vs debian
by da_Chicken on Tue 25th Apr 2006 15:46 UTC in reply to "*buntu vs debian and bloat"
da_Chicken Member since:
2006-01-01

Other than ease of install, is there an advantage to using *buntu instead of straight-up debian?

There are cases when Debian is easier to install than *buntu, it all depends. In general, I'd say that there are both advantages and disadvantages to using *buntu instead of Debian proper.

It is noteworthy that *buntu supports officially only a small subset of the packages that Debian supports, and only officially supported *buntu packages receive security updates. This means that if you're using lots of packages from *buntu's universe, your system may be open to several critical security vulnerabilities. Debian "testing" has its own special security team that concentrates on fixing any known security problems in "testing" as fast as possible.

When *buntu has just been released it usually has many packages that are newer than their equivalents in Debian "testing". However, *buntu's package repository is frozen for six long months and after a month or two has passed since the latest *buntu release, Debian "testing" has usually caught up with *buntu and it is also likely to introduce some newer packages when compared to *buntu. But this varies. Lately Debian "testing" has been kept quite up-to-date while *buntu's release date has been delayed.

In conclusion: Most of the time Debian "testing" has newer packages than the latest stable *buntu release and it also receives much more comprehensive security support than *buntu.

Reply Score: 1

alessandro
Member since:
2006-04-25

...and get rid of metacity. The best of both worlds...

Reply Score: 1

ati
by gfx1 on Wed 26th Apr 2006 11:27 UTC
gfx1
Member since:
2006-01-20

It seems that the ati driver is broken again in this version, I was able to use the radeon one by changing the text from ati to radeon in xorg.conf in 5.10 but this is pretty disappointing to put it mildly...

Edited 2006-04-26 11:28

Reply Score: 1

RE: ati
by negativity on Wed 26th Apr 2006 13:02 UTC in reply to "ati"
negativity Member since:
2006-02-23

I think the Xorg version of this Xubuntu beta is a little older than the one in the Ubuntu beta. I have a version that's working the my Radeon + Dual Head setup, and I don't want to update it because I fear that it might break. On the other hand, I didn't even expect that they would fix the Xorg code in time for Dapper.

If you install Xubuntu on your harddisk, you can update the packages and see if the latest Xorg version works for you.

Reply Score: 1

XFCE4.4 Beta is cool
by buff on Wed 26th Apr 2006 15:07 UTC
buff
Member since:
2005-11-12

I have been running XFCE4.4 beta on FC5 and it is very cool. Compared to running the default Gnome desktop it is about 100MB RAM less in size and the UI responds quicker. Version 4.4 has the CDE feature where you can minimize windows to icons. I wasn't really crazy about Thunar file manager and just stuck with Nautilus 2.14. I will have to try out Xubuntu sometime it looks promising.

An easy way to install the latest XFCE beta is to use the installer from os-cilattion. You just run the installer and a simple wizard steps you through the installation.
http://www.os-cillation.com/index.php?id=30&L=5

Reply Score: 1