Tell me one reason, why an ubuntu system should be slower than e.g. SUSE?SE_Newbie wrote:Just out of curiosity! Why does everyone who tries out Linux seem to flock to Ubuntu? IMHO its slower and more bloated than even Windoze. If you really want a speed advantage you need to try a LiveCD distro like Dyne:Bolic, or Puppy Linux. They pretty much configure themselves during boot, they have decent desktop environments(semi-good-looking but nice and light), and they run pretty fast. In fact, Dyne:Bolic claims to run well on systems with as little as 64MB of RAM and while Puppy requires more RAM (I recommend at least 256MB), it runs entirely in RAM. Also, both have ways of saving your own personal settings to a file that can be saved onto your existing Windows drive with no need to repartition or format anything.
If you compare fair, it is not.
Of course e.g. Archlinux (which i use) seems faster, but the reason is obvious: the kernel ticks at a higher rate. But you could do that tweak easily with ubuntu too.
Most people use ubuntu, because of ubiquity - the nice and easy to use setuptool.
And by far is it not (more) bloated (than windows) - ever tried 9.04?
Of course if you are using it on a crappy lowend box, it is not the right choice - then DSL (damn small linux) would be much better.
