Is Arch really faster than Ubuntu

Discussion in 'all things UNIX' started by linuxforall, May 19, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. No, not trolling. Seriously.

    IMHO it's reasonable expectation, even in a non-LTS release, for Xorg not to hard-lock after an external monitor is plugged in. Guess what happens when you do that on my netbook on 9.10?

    What, despite my (hopefully) even-handed analysis of the two distros? ;)
     
  2. dan_maran

    dan_maran Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Posts:
    1,053
    Location:
    98031
    This is a little silly, as stated in one of the very first posts, 'what's the point?'

    Comparing Arch to Ubuntu is not helpful in anyway, again as stated it's 'two distinct user groups'.

    And as for the Arch users trolling the Ubuntu forums, what about the Ubuntu users trolling the entire internet?

    As a user of both distributions, I find that Arch works best on my Thinkpad but Ubuntu works well on my desktop... I guess I just don't get it, if this is supposed to stop the trolling it won't, If this discussion is supposed to sway user opinion it won't, just seems silly. Everyone likes something different for some reason or another deal with it.
    The reality is that ANY distribution can be tweaked to fly, just takes a little know how. And I guarantee that the persons stating Arch is flying are not running stock as this article clearly states.

    Let it be and move along there are more important things in life :)
     
  3. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,137

    Using dual monitors here since Hardy and no hard lock here, as for hard locks, even Windows does that on some configurations, its very nature of software and you know that well.
     
  4. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,137
    Ubuntu users trolling the net? Thats a first, usually Ubuntu user is a meek, defensive and sometimes downright ashamed character hesitating to even mention the U word in exalted Linux company of do it yourself distros. He or she would be made to feel ashamed for using a novice distro and would be coaxed into using a compile yourself disto as rights of passage into Linux nerdhood :)
     
  5. Eice

    Eice Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Posts:
    1,413
    I never knew this existed. Now I'm tempted. :D

    Is th install process anything like Arch? I did manage to get Arch working, but that was only with the help of the install guide, and I don't see anything similar on Ubuntu's website.

    Thanks.
     
  6. Ocky

    Ocky Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Posts:
    2,713
    Location:
    George, S.Africa
  7. Eice

    Eice Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Posts:
    1,413
  8. Beavenburt

    Beavenburt Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2006
    Posts:
    566
  9. Because (in Ubuntu's defense) it combines stability and up-to-dateness better than Debian. Debian Testing is generally up to date, but tends to have rather a lot of broken stuff in it in my experience. And let's not talk about sid.

    (There is an exception to the rule of course - sidux, which is sid with a prebuilt desktop environment and most of the broken packages replaced. It generally works fine. If you know what you're doing and don't dist-upgrade every day, anyway.)
     
  10. Pedro

    Pedro Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Posts:
    3,502
    In my experience, which is most if not all of Squeeze's time, 2 perhaps 3 bumps. Some things can get broken, no doubt, but not "a lot". And its always solvable, even if google is needed. A bit of kung fu and you're good to go.
     
  11. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,137
    Actually sidux works very well and is a viable alternative for those looking for lighter and probably a bit faster distro than Ubuntu.
     
  12. steve161

    steve161 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Posts:
    681
    Location:
    New York
    It doesn't look like the Arch fanboys took the bait over on the Ubuntu Forums. Everyone actually seems to be agreeing with you. I know, give it time.
     
  13. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,137
    Ha ha so you do go there steve, whats your handle there? I was expecting that I would be needing a serious flame coat but looks like it worked out OK, this test doesn't make Arch bad in anyways but the pretension that use Arch as its faster and not bloated like Ubuntu should end once for all. Use what suits you and what works for you, I would never ever recommend Arch to a new user who is just testing linux waters, that would send him back to Windows for good.
     
  14. steve161

    steve161 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Posts:
    681
    Location:
    New York
    The same, and yes, there are a lot of "Archies" over there.

    I like the theory behind Arch, and it sounds like a great distro, but I honestly do not have the time or patience anymore for it. It has gotten to a point for me that, while I really liked Opensuse, I just didn't feel like navigating kde4 and their package manager. I'm familiar with Ubuntu and, until it fails me, I'm staying with it.
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2010
  15. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,137

    Well at least you see my POV for posting this unlike some others, sad part is that when a new Ubuntu user is confused about his or her install, Arch boys will chime in and suggest to use Arch instead. Can you imagine a Windows user, that too not much tech savvy try Arch, that will be end of Linux distro for good.
     
  16. steve161

    steve161 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Posts:
    681
    Location:
    New York
    I have not seen that but I'm sure it happens. Unfortunate, because it does a disservice to how far linux has come as a viable alternative to windows for the average user. I have been using linux since Ubuntu 7.04, and I am not so sure I can install Arch.
     
  17. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,137

    You definitely can install Arch, there are some good tutorials and even scripts and then there is the Arch based Kahel which makes it as easy to install as Ubuntu. Question is unless you wish to try out different, why abandon Ubuntu. I have been on Ubuntu since Warty.
     
  18. steve161

    steve161 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Posts:
    681
    Location:
    New York
    Posted by steve161:

    I concur.
     
  19. Beavenburt

    Beavenburt Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2006
    Posts:
    566
    I pointed him to testing because it's what I prefer. You won't find more stable than Debian Stable however, so he could go with that and use backports for newer packages if he so wished.

    While sidux is nice and fast I wouldn't use it as full time distro. sid is called unstable for a reason.
     
  20. Eice

    Eice Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Posts:
    1,413
    TBH I'm a bit wary of Debian, mostly because I don't understand it: namely why there are 17 CD ISOs up for download, and the structural differences between stable, testing, and unstable.

    That aside, having to choose between stability and updatedness doesn't really appeal to me either. I don't mind if I have to tweak around to get stuff working, but I do if the crashes and errors are beyond my control.
     
  21. Beavenburt

    Beavenburt Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2006
    Posts:
    566
    An ubuntu minimal install is identical to a Debian netinstall, which is 1 cd by the way, check my link. Either is a good choice if you want a customised system.

    Both are way easier than Arch imo. For instance Deb / ubuntu will automatically add start up daemons whereas Arch will not. So if you install say cups, gdm, hal or such you'll have to manually add the daemon to rc.conf. Deb / ubuntu will do it automatically. You need a tweakers mindset for Arch I think.

    On topic, there is a speed difference in that Arch is slightly faster than ubuntu on my machine.
     
  22. NGRhodes

    NGRhodes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    2,381
    Location:
    West Yorkshire, UK
    I found that the amount of time spent setting up Arch and continous maintenance negate any potential performance gains. I have nothing against Arch (only issues i have are around security update notification and unsign repositories) as it is a good, unique distro, just as I use my machines to get stuff done rather than playing/tweaking (those days are over).
    Gentoo is even worse, amount cycles and real time spent compiling will never be gained back.

    Cheers, Nick
     
  23. Pedro

    Pedro Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Posts:
    3,502
    The CDs collection is only for those who want it. As Beavenburt says, you can choose the netinstall, or the first CD for the desktop you want. For KDE and XFCE it's usually on the bottom of the list - like 'debian-testing-i386-kde-CD-1.iso' - and the one without a desktop name is GNOME.
    It was weird for me at first. It started out as a trial. I wanted Stable, but i wanted some programs updated, so i tried Testing.
    It never crashed on me, but some program updates can break something. Nothing major; for instance, there was an update for wicd that rendered it useless. A trip to bugs.debian.org and i found the problem reported, and a solution. The maintainer made a mistake. I just had to remove some files.

    If you don't think it's for you, don't feel bad. Ubuntu is just fine, and it does have it's advantages. I just prefer to update my way through whole versions without reconfiguring anything, or burning CDs, among other things.
     
  24. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,137
    For those looking for easier Arch, try Kahel OS, its based on Arch but its far easier to install and run.
     
  25. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,325
    Location:
    US
    Good grief, I thought all Linux fanboys were supposed to play nicely together ... the enemy is Microsoft.

    Just goes to show you, once the human ego gets involved, "My _fill in the blank_ is better than yours".

    Sheesh.

    Acadia
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.