Re: Ubuntu installed in 6 mintues and booting in 15 to 20 seconds

In article <6MlWl.38425$ >, 7 says...
>
> Ubuntu installed in 6 mintues and booting in 15 to 20 seconds

And then if you have an Intel graphics chipset, such as those on most
laptops and netbooks, you spend 2 hours trying to get the graphics
performance to around 50% of what it was in 8.10 and STILL spend ages
trying to get windows network shares browsing working properly.

But at least they've fixed the hard drive load cycle bug.


--
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams

7 wrote:
>
> Conor wrote:
>
> > In article <6MlWl.38425$ >, 7 says...
> >>
> >> Ubuntu installed in 6 mintues and booting in 15 to 20 seconds
> >
> > And then if you have an Intel graphics chipset, such as those on most
> > laptops and netbooks, you spend 2 hours trying to get the graphics
> > performance to around 50% of what it was in 8.10 and STILL spend ages
> > trying to get windows network shares browsing working properly.
>
> Get smart. Use Linux HCL (Hardware Compatibility List) by searching in
> google to choose vendors that are supported.
>
> As for windowps networking, just run smb4k. I also use konqueror
> and put web links on my management web page to servers with URLs
> like smb://.... Its a lot quicker

So adding all this up it will be a lot more than 6 minutes to get it to
work properly.

In article <6XrWl.13393$2>, Will Kemp says...

> Ah, is that what the problem is? Graphics performance, ey? I switched
> from Fedora 10 to Ubuntu 9.04 beta a couple of months ago and there were
> quite a few things about Ubuntu that seemed better than Fedora - but
> performance wasn't one of them. It made my 2GHz Core II Duo with 4GB RAM
> system work like a 386 (i'm exaggerating slightly!). X kept freezing up,
> too.
>
It's only with Intel chipset graphics. Something to do with them trying
to be clever and introducing cutting edge drivers that don't work.
There's some workarounds which involve either regressing drivers,
changing to XGA or doing a kernel update to a BETA version.

>
> > But at least they've fixed the hard drive load cycle bug.
>
> Have they? That was another thing that pissed me off about Ubuntu - the
> hdd would spin down constantly and then i'd get this pause when i tried
> to do something that needed to access it. I never had that with Fedora
> and i'm now not having it with Fedora again!

LOL.

--
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams

In article <_esWl.38560$ >, 7 says...

> Get smart. Use Linux HCL (Hardware Compatibility List) by searching in
> google to choose vendors that are supported.
>
I was and the Intel 945 chipset is. The problem is Ubuntu chose to use
broken drivers when they moved to 9.04 that try to implement a new
acceleration mode. In 8.10 and below, there's never been an issue.

> As for windowps networking, just run smb4k. I also use konqueror
> and put web links on my management web page to servers with URLs
> like smb://.... Its a lot quicker

I use Gnome. The problem is that the Ubuntu team didn't put wins in
eithe nsswitch.conf or smb.conf as a protocol so you need to add it
manually. Until you do, you cannot access windows network shares
without knowing the target IP and share name.



--
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams

In article <>, johannes says...

> So adding all this up it will be a lot more than 6 minutes to get it to
> work properly.

Indeed. Takes me about 30-40 minutes on a X2 4800+ with 2GB RAM desktop
and about the same on a 1.73 Ghz Core Duo lappy with 2GB RAM.

And then you spend another couple of hours implementing the fixes to
get everything working properly as it did in previous versions.

The problem with Ubuntu that doesn't exist in
Suse/Mandriva/Fedora/Debian etc is that in a rush to meet their self
imposed 6 month release schedule, they let some really whopping show
stoppers through which are usually caused by an omission in a config
file. Other distributions will hold back a release.

Ubuntu sadly is the epitomy of shitty quality control. Even going with
a LTS release doesn't guarantee anything as both the hard drive load
cycle bug and the windows network browsing bug came into being with
8.04 LTS.


--
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams

7 wrote:

> Conor wrote:
>
>> In article <6MlWl.38425$ >, 7 says...
>>>
>>> Ubuntu installed in 6 mintues and booting in 15 to 20 seconds
>>
>> And then if you have an Intel graphics chipset, such as those on most
>> laptops and netbooks, you spend 2 hours trying to get the graphics
>> performance to around 50% of what it was in 8.10 and STILL spend ages
>> trying to get windows network shares browsing working properly.
>
>
> Get smart. Use Linux HCL (Hardware Compatibility List) by searching in
> google to choose vendors that are supported.
>

One side of freetards mouth - "Linux is great at hardware support and
everything just works."

Other side of freetards mouth - "Don't buy any hardware unless you make sure
it's one one of the several 'Hardware compatibility Lists' that are out on
the web or you'll have problems."

Rick wrote:

> On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 13:05:14 +0100, Conor wrote:
>
>> In article <>, johannes says...
>>
>>> So adding all this up it will be a lot more than 6 minutes to get it to
>>> work properly.
>>
>> Indeed. Takes me about 30-40 minutes on a X2 4800+ with 2GB RAM desktop
>> and about the same on a 1.73 Ghz Core Duo lappy with 2GB RAM.
>>
>> And then you spend another couple of hours implementing the fixes to get
>> everything working properly as it did in previous versions.
>>
>> The problem with Ubuntu that doesn't exist in
>> Suse/Mandriva/Fedora/Debian etc is that in a rush to meet their self
>> imposed 6 month release schedule, they let some really whopping show
>> stoppers through which are usually caused by an omission in a config
>> file. Other distributions will hold back a release.
>>
>> Ubuntu sadly is the epitomy of shitty quality control. Even going with a
>> LTS release doesn't guarantee anything as both the hard drive load cycle
>> bug and the windows network browsing bug came into being with 8.04 LTS.
>
> From what I've read, the network browsing bug is a Gnome bug, as was the
> bug that wouldn't allow remotely managing users, and some other admin
> tasks.
>
>

And since Ubuntu uses gnome it really doesn't matter does it? The bottom
line is that someone who installs Ubuntu and wants to browse the network
won't be able to. It's broken plain and simple and Canonical released
Ubuntu with this bug that was obviously never tested. Because it's a gnome
bug vs a XYZ bug is of little consequence to the user who can't browse the
network.

On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 11:51:36 GMT
7 <> wrote:

> So may be Linux boot
> could be improved further if a secondary boot area with a single
> contigious flat file could be created that was constructed after
> booting that minimized head thrashing by storing the needed files
> contigiously in duplicate in that boot area.

That would be the hibernation file then?

In article <> , Rick
says...

> From what I've read, the network browsing bug is a Gnome bug, as was the
> bug that wouldn't allow remotely managing users, and some other admin
> tasks.

It isn't. I posted a fix on the forums. It was a misconfiguration of
the smb.conf file if you want it system wide or nsswitch.conf if you
want it Gnome specific.


--
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams

In article <> , Rick
says...

> As a simple warning, IMO, you should remove comp.os.linux.advocacy from
> the group lists in your post, or your groups will be spammed with an
> incredible amount of annoying drivel.

I'm aware having gone in there in the past as pro Linux. If anyone
wants to see why Linux died the death on netbooks, they merely have to
ask a question in COLA where they'll be flamed to death.


--
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams