# Ubuntu versions



## onipar

I was reading another thread and saw this:  "As for slow, i bet you were using 11.04 or 11.10. These are the slowest Ubuntu releases I have seen. Something like Conical's Vista. 10.04 will blow windows away on speed, well general snappiness."

 I didn't want to hijack, so i started a new thread for my question.

I recently installed Ubuntu 11.10.  Am I better off downgrading to an earlier version (such as the aforementioned 10.04)?  And if so, would I have to completely uninstall the current version and reinstall the earlier one?

Or, is it a matter of the new version just being *too* new, and will eventually have updates to speed it up and make it better?  In which case better to just stick with what I have.


----------



## TrainTrackHack

Are you happy with it? If so, don't bother. Really, Ubuntu in general has been (mis)labelled the Vista of Linux and while people calling it that sorta so have a point (it's one of the most software-laden distros out there and at least used to make a lot of the stuff that comes with it artifically necessary through dependencies), I think it's a rather misleading label. I haven't actually tried the recent releases of Ubuntu so I can't really say whether they really are as slow as some make it out to be but if you are happy with the responsiveness and overall speed of the system, I wouldn't bother.


----------



## Troncoso

It depends a lot on the system you run it on. In a lot of cases (not all, before someone tries to be the exception) people who run linux distros is because the machines they put it on have low performance hardware in them. So, naturally, linux is a good choice because it runs a lot faster. Though, where Ubuntu is trying to be the Windows of the linux world, it's getting really heavy and loaded with access software as hack mentioned.

I had no issues with it running slow on my laptop (in sig), but, it's got really powerful hardware in it. I agree with hack. If you aren't having issues with it, keep it. The new addition are nice, at least I think so. And if you really want to speed it up, just google speed up ubuntu, and you'll find tutorials on removing unnecessary software and packages and disables useless settings.


----------



## onipar

Thanks.  To be honest, I've only used it for about an hour so far (I installed it on a new computer I just built for my parents for Christmas).  So I have almost no experience with it.

The computer I just built has a Phenom II X3, Gigabyte 880GMA, 8 GB G SKills RAM, 1 T Seagate HDD, etc.  No GPU because it's not really a gaming machine.  I haven't yet unlocked the extra core or overclocked, but I'll probably do that at some point.

Admittedly, I was fairly surprised to see how much software was already installed in the OS when I first started it up.  Although, a lot of it is stuff I would have downloaded anyway, so it didn't really bother me.

I guess I'll probably just Google "speed up Linux" and uninstall the junk to speed it up, rather than going backwards to an older version.

I *was* advised to go with Wine instead of Ubuntu, but then someone else said since it's for my parents, Ubuntu is really more user friendly.  I don't know which is more true, having never used either...

Thanks


----------



## Dngrsone

As previously mentioned, it's all about the hardware.

I am running 10.04-desktop-AMD64 (the 64-bit version of Ubuntu) on an HP G72 with no real issues.

I tried 11.04 for a short time on an HP DV4, but it was unstable-- periodic crashes, and deviating from the installed configuration caused major slowdowns.

I actually liked the new Unity interface, but it just wasn't mature enough,a nd from the reviews I have read on 11.10, it still has a way to go, so I will stick to 10.04 for the time being.  We will see how 12.04 turns out.

You might also look at some of the other flavors of Ubuntu-- Lubuntu, for example looks and feels a lot like Win 2K, and Mint, I understand, is more streamlined.


----------



## wolfeking

If your happy with your install, there is no major issue with it. 

The reference being made to Vista was more about resource management than anything. 11.04 and 11.10 are a lot more resource hungry than the previous generations of Ubuntu. 
In my personal experience, it is also unstable. I have ran 10.04 on a G61 (15" version of the G71), and it ran snappy and really fast. 11.04 was sluggest and unresponsive on the same laptop. It would not even load CCC in 11. 

Short answer, if your running well, no need. But it will be a lighter OS to go with the current LTS version.


----------



## onipar

Ugh, too many damn choices.  

Yeah, when I said "Wine" earlier, I meant "Mint."  I dunno, I guess I'll let them use it as is and change the OS if it's not working well.  Although, now would be the time for this since there isn't any personal documents or anything that I'd have to save; I can just do a fresh install.

I posted my hardware in my last post.  I didn't see any real problems when I toyed around with it, but again, I really only had about an hour of time with it.

Oh well, I guess time will tell if I should switch it up.  Thanks, all.


----------

