A comparison of Ubuntu 6.06 and Windows XP
Submitted by srlinuxx on Mon, 06/26/2006 - 11:57.
Last Thursday night I installed my new hard drive and set up my computer so that it would dual-boot between Windows XP and Ubuntu 6.06 (Dapper Drake). Given that Debian (the Linux distribution Ubuntu is based on) had taken me days to install and configure, I figured that this might end up being a weekend-long project. It wasn’t; both Ubuntu and Windows XP were fully functioning after less than 5 hours of work.
Since I had to install both Windows and Ubuntu from scratch, this seemed like a perfect opportunity to compare the two operating systems' basic installation procedures. Thus, I tracked the time it took to carry out all installation tasks for both operating systems, and report the results below.
Partitioning plan
As I'm configuring my computer to dual-boot between two operating systems, partitioning the hard drive is not as simple as if I was installing a single operating system.
»
- Login to post comments
- 1641 reads
Finally 5 official Ubuntu 6.06LTS disks arrived free ?
Immediately tried on DVD/RW, and livecd works.
Where hardware not there; ok was skipped.
Slowly, windown manager appeared and then taskbar and toolbar. Its slower than v5.10 official release.
Freecell(on both v5.10 and 6.06LTS) refuses to move longer stack of cards. Mahjong works better.
Evolution is very slow; reminds me of slow ethernet connections. But network installs dialup modem pretty much the same as v5.10. And Firefox works well. It can compete with WinMe, not XP.
Final analysis is that livecd uses more than 256 mb of memory. Livecd memory management is tricky. Slightly more in the swap file and system slows down to a crawl.
Recommend for livecd 1 ghz cpu minimum, 512 mb of drams especially. For v5.10, its only 500mhz and 256 mb of drams and still runs fast enough.