Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy Slow)
Hi guys, completely agree with all of this, but first i think is to determine what we want our market to be. Do we want to be out of the box, forget about needed to install something to make it usable (ie: flash, codecs) or do we want to be a bare minimum speedy OS. either way, i like both ideas, but we do need to determine what we wish to be and go for it. Il admit, i am ignorant of the rules or objectives we need to meet to be a ubuntu derivative, and we must adhere to that, But Mr. Ed Hewitt brings up some very valid points, I have been selling linux based computers for years now, and I have a good idea of what people want either way. Jon York From: wiebelh...@gmail.com Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:49:44 -0500 To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy Slow) Ed Hewitt makes some very good points , Something to look at would be the Fluxbuntu project the 7.10 Version was amazing because it was very very slim nothing except the essentials installed but it also retained the availability of all those other apps by using the official repositories. I don't think anyone has to worry about something missing because the people that would be drawn to Lubuntu would certinaly be savvy enough to fetch it for themselves. What's good isn't always golden , I agree with the minilmist idea that Ed Hewitt proposed here. Cheers!. Dallas Wiebelhaus. On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Ed Hewitt edwardahew...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, I'm Ed Hewitt (chewit in IRC). I have just joined the Lubuntu team in Launchpad, I am very keen to give you help with the Lubuntu project. I have been using Xubuntu since 7.10 release, and over the years Xubuntu has been getting heavier and slower after each release. This has been down two things. First, the Ubuntu developers adding more applications and utilies to improve the usability of the operating system. Secondly, Xubuntu is just Ubuntu with Xfce 'bolted on'. No thought has gone into using as little gnome depencies as possible. These two points have made Xubuntu heavy and slow, and not a lightweight distro. It is very close to being as heavy as Ubuntu! My worry with the Lubuntu project is that when it becomes an official Ubuntu distro, it will have loads of extra apps added which will make it slow and heavy like Xubuntu. It will be a waste your time creating a distro which went the same way as Xubuntu. I am writing this message to warn you that it could happen. I want to join the Lubuntu and help decide the best applications to add to the operating systems and ways to make it as light as possible. I have looked at the Lubuntu application list and I am already concerned with the success of the project. It appears Lubuntu will have more applications installed than the Ubuntu install! The best way I see Lubuntu being setup is to carefully follow the way Debian is created, since Debain is very lightweight. I believe it is best to use the Ubuntu minimal install with LXDE added on, then we add a carefully selection of applications. Such as: Web browser - FirefoxEmail - ClawsChat - Pidgin, Xchat Office - Abiword, Gnumeric, ePDFMedia - Totem, Rhythmbox (would like to use VLC, but it uses QT4)GIMP Synaptic Update Manager is a mustGnome network manager (need good network support, however it needs to start on boot up) Some Xfce apps - Notifyd (very nice notification system), taskmanager (but could use lxde task), power manager We want to keep the apps list small, basic apps which most people will use. Video editing, ftp clients and programming apps are not needed on the base install. If we add loads of apps, we will be a heavy distro. With Lubuntu its performance and lightweight first, sadly xubuntu forgot about that. Would like to hear what the whole team thinks and if I can be some help in the development of Lubuntu. -- www.edhewitt.co.uk ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Forum
Thanks! On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 3:16 PM, jon york jr_...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi guys here is the forum location, just a quick and free forum for us, I am a webmaster, and own my own host, so we can discuss that later when we actually have a beta version to release to public, and we are ready to submit for an official variation of ubuntu here is the forum http://lubuntu.forumotion.comhttp://lubuntu.forumotion.com/login.forum?username=Admin have fun guys and girls :P Jon York ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy Slow)
Good eye there David! On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 5:15 PM, David Sugar david.su...@canonical.comwrote: Related to this question is what to do with what is currently the separate lxde blueprint in Launchpad: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-karmic-lxde-ubuntu-desktop I would be happy to see about transferring it to the Lubuntu Team if the Lubuntu team does wish to formally take it over... In any case, yes, I also think the key is finding the right reasonable mix. Ed Hewitt wrote: I think we should go with Firefox. However, OpenOffice would solve the problem of having no presentation software if we went with Abiword Gnumeric. We could use these tweaks to speed up OpenOffice. http://lifehacker.com/software/optimization/speed-up-openoffice-270775.php By going small, we will achieve the objective of achieving a lightweight distro. However, I still think a good out of the box experience, as long as we keep it to a minimal. So by having a few basic utilities (such as synaptic), need a few must have apps (such as web browser, office apps, chat, media player). we can still achieve a user friend lightweight distro. Its all about getting the right balance. Maybe another Lubuntu IRC Meeting could be useful to discuss my points. It would be great to have an application list set in time for Karmic. Could be Lubuntu's first release -- www.edhewitt.co.uk http://www.edhewitt.co.uk ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy Slow)
Yep , but Debian LXDE does have the entire open office suite installed and it weights in at just under 500 megs. On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:25 PM, Andrew Woodhead andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com wrote: It's not copying, it is as you say learning from others. OpenOffice just isn't suitable but will be accessible via reops if you must install it. I personally only use abiword and know a great many users who have the entire suite installed and only use the writer. Its laughable. On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Dallas Wiebelhaus wiebelh...@gmail.comwrote: I agree Abiword is so incredibly fast and small and if someone has not tried it they should give it a spin , it's a brilliant little application! I could foresee someone adding openoffice if they needed that extra functionality but for simple out of the box word processing in a small efficient quick package , abiword can't be beat. We should all take a long hard look at what other small distributions are doing because they like Puppy have already pounded these discussions out , I'm not saying to copy but to learn from from their methodology. On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Andrew Woodhead andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com wrote: OpenOffice in my opinion is far too bulky for a lightweight distro. 0 upgraded, 44 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. Need to get 123MB of archives. After this operation, 412MB of additional disk space will be used. Its just stupidly fat and bloated and doesn't fit with the ethos of Lubuntu. 0.5Gb for office productivity when gnumeric and abiword use a microscopic fraction of this. No way -Andy On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Ed Hewitt edwardahew...@googlemail.com wrote: I think we should go with Firefox. However, OpenOffice would solve the problem of having no presentation software if we went with Abiword Gnumeric. We could use these tweaks to speed up OpenOffice. http://lifehacker.com/software/optimization/speed-up-openoffice-270775.php By going small, we will achieve the objective of achieving a lightweight distro. However, I still think a good out of the box experience, as long as we keep it to a minimal. So by having a few basic utilities (such as synaptic), need a few must have apps (such as web browser, office apps, chat, media player). we can still achieve a user friend lightweight distro. Its all about getting the right balance. Maybe another Lubuntu IRC Meeting could be useful to discuss my points. It would be great to have an application list set in time for Karmic. Could be Lubuntu's first release -- www.edhewitt.co.uk ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop Post to : Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] U-Lite
On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:46 -0500, Dallas Wiebelhaus wrote: For some reason I had forgotten that U-Lite was using LXDE , I thought they were using XFCE , maybe because of the recent alpha screenshots. I just want to make sure that the Lubuntu people are Aware of U-Lite are these two projects related or completely separate? http://u-lite.org/ Shae Smittle, the maintainer and developer of U-lite, is involved with the Lubuntu project. I'll leave it to him to fill in details. Cheers C David Rigby ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy Slow)
This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard repos can be used to install apps if they are needed. If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a minimal install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed off the repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating the system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are fully installable once the installation has completed but the initial base system should be slick and quick On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby c.david.ri...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote: discussion of keep it light or feature complete elided Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between ease of use/fully featured on the one hand and lightweight on the other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest. I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering bundles to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind. The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to install. More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they mean for the final installed system. My $0.02. Cheers C David Rigby ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy Slow)
By the way , Chrome fits in like it's native and is running hella fast on this DE on my test box. I'm about to crank the ram down and see how low I can get. On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Andrew Woodhead andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com wrote: This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard repos can be used to install apps if they are needed. If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a minimal install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed off the repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating the system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are fully installable once the installation has completed but the initial base system should be slick and quick On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby c.david.ri...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote: discussion of keep it light or feature complete elided Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between ease of use/fully featured on the one hand and lightweight on the other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest. I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering bundles to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind. The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to install. More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they mean for the final installed system. My $0.02. Cheers C David Rigby ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy Slow)
Stabilized without hiccups at 128mb ram , that's without youtube lagging out , you can go lower no doubt. On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Dallas Wiebelhaus wiebelh...@gmail.comwrote: By the way , Chrome fits in like it's native and is running hella fast on this DE on my test box. I'm about to crank the ram down and see how low I can get. On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Andrew Woodhead andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com wrote: This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard repos can be used to install apps if they are needed. If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a minimal install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed off the repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating the system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are fully installable once the installation has completed but the initial base system should be slick and quick On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby c.david.ri...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote: discussion of keep it light or feature complete elided Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between ease of use/fully featured on the one hand and lightweight on the other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest. I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering bundles to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind. The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to install. More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they mean for the final installed system. My $0.02. Cheers C David Rigby ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktophttps://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy Slow)
Hi guys, why dont we move this to the forum where it can be easier to document and organize these conversations? also on that topic, in my opinion, we need to divide us into work partners, as right now, there is much discussion and no work being done. I think the first step, is quite simply that a select few people, who know LXDE and ubuntu the best, that they can create a base system that we can work with. this system should be very small, and include nothing but the neccesairy files to run lxde on ubuntu, as well as synaptic. that way, we can all have the same base system to work with, and test things out with. Jon York From: wiebelh...@gmail.com Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 20:41:09 -0500 To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy Slow) Stabilized without hiccups at 128mb ram , that's without youtube lagging out , you can go lower no doubt. On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Dallas Wiebelhaus wiebelh...@gmail.com wrote: By the way , Chrome fits in like it's native and is running hella fast on this DE on my test box. I'm about to crank the ram down and see how low I can get. On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Andrew Woodhead andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com wrote: This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard repos can be used to install apps if they are needed. If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a minimal install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed off the repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating the system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are fully installable once the installation has completed but the initial base system should be slick and quick On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby c.david.ri...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote: discussion of keep it light or feature complete elided Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between ease of use/fully featured on the one hand and lightweight on the other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest. I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering bundles to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind. The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to install. More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they mean for the final installed system. My $0.02. Cheers C David Rigby ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
