Feeds

Ubuntu without the 'U': Booting the Big Four remixes

Raring Ringtail without the OS X/Unity stuff

Boost IT visibility and business value

Lubuntu

Lubuntu is the closest thing the Ubuntu family has to a lightweight edition. It's based around LXDE, the Lightweight X Desktop Environment: OpenBox 3.5.0 plus a panel, desktop icons, a file manager and so on. It even has a special netbook launcher.

Lbuntu desktop

Lubuntu's default desktop is simple, clean and comfortably Windows-like

Like Xubuntu, Lubuntu uses Abiword and Gnumeric instead of LibreOffice, but it also replaces Thunderbird with Sylpheed and Firefox with Chromium (the FOSS basis of Google Chrome). Even a decade-old Windows XP box can run Lubuntu quite successfully, and on modern kit, it's very fast and responsive - although you'll face difficulties installing apps that integrate with the desktop, such as Dropbox. However, there's a lot to like - it's simple, fast, clean-looking and efficient.

Ubuntu GNOME

Ubuntu GNOME 13.04 is the first release of the newest member of the *buntu family. It's based on GNOME 3.6 - a version behind the current release, 3.8 - and sports the controversial GNOME Shell. What's more, Fallback Mode isn't installed by default - although a quick "sudo apt-get install gnome-session-fallback" will soon sort that out. Otherwise, you get a similar set of apps to normal Ubuntu.

Ubuntu GNOME desktop1

There's nothing quite like GNOME Shell - whether that's a good or bad thing is open to debate

Although I'm not a fan of GNOME Shell, I have to admit that Ubuntu GNOME looks very polished and smooth, especially for a first release. If you like GNOME Shell's minimalism, go for it. If you're not familiar with it, though, or if you were hoping for anything like the old experience of Ubuntu 10.04 or earlier, I wouldn't recommend it: it's a little feature-sparse if you're used to a traditional desktop. Fallback Mode does look like GNOME 2, but it has almost no customisation and it's dead code walking - it's already been removed from GNOME 3.8.

Rounding up

To compare resource usage, I installed all of them in a VirtualBox VM with the default 8GB of disk and 1GB of RAM. Here's how they fared:

Name RAM used (MB) Disk used (GB)
Lubuntu 119 2
Xubuntu 165 2.5
Ubuntu 229 2.8
Ubuntu GNOME 236 3.1
Kubuntu 256 3.3

Both Ubuntu GNOME and Kubuntu share the dubious distinction of using more memory and disk space than the parent operating system from which they're derived. Xubuntu is slightly lighter-weight than the Real Thing, but if you want something small and fast, the clear winner is Lubuntu.

In summary, Kubuntu and Ubuntu GNOME are fine, if you have a particular preference for KDE or GNOME Shell, but otherwise, we suggest you look elsewhere. Xubuntu has matured nicely into a good, solid option and is less demanding on the system. Meanwhile, Lubuntu is hard on its heels - it's the sleekest, fastest member of the tribe, but still slightly more limited. ®

Bootnote

If you fancy trying some or all of them in a VM before you commit to a bare-metal install, be warned that Ubuntu and Ubuntu GNOME both require hardware-based 3D graphic acceleration to perform well - meaning that they run poorly under virtualisation. To a slightly lesser extent, the same is true of Kubuntu.

To get round this, you'll need a hypervisor that supports accelerated 3D for guest operating systems. One option includes Oracle VirtualBox and - handily - its Guest Additions are FOSS, and are in the Ubuntu repositories, meaning that you won't need to manually update them. Just run:

sudo apt-get install build-essential virtualbox-guest-utils virtualbox-guest-x11 virtualbox-guest-dkms

Once you've done this, reboot the VMs and you'll find they become reasonably responsive - so long as the host machine has hardware OpenGL, of course.

The bigger picture, though, is that none of the big three desktops - Unity, GNOME 3 or KDE 4 - are a good fit if you don't have a decent OpenGL accelerator in your machine, plus the appropriate proprietary drivers. The same applies if you'll routinely be using them over a remote connection.

5 things you didn’t know about cloud backup

More from The Register

next story
Munich considers dumping Linux for ... GULP ... Windows!
Give a penguinista a hug, the Outlook's not good for open source's poster child
The Return of BSOD: Does ANYONE trust Microsoft patches?
Sysadmins, you're either fighting fires or seen as incompetents now
Intel's Raspberry Pi rival Galileo can now run Windows
Behold the Internet of Things. Wintel Things
Microsoft cries UNINSTALL in the wake of Blue Screens of Death™
Cache crash causes contained choloric calamity
Eat up Martha! Microsoft slings handwriting recog into OneNote on Android
Freehand input on non-Windows kit for the first time
Time to move away from Windows 7 ... whoa, whoa, who said anything about Windows 8?
Start migrating now to avoid another XPocalypse – Gartner
You'll find Yoda at the back of every IT conference
The piss always taking is he. Bastard the.
prev story

Whitepapers

5 things you didn’t know about cloud backup
IT departments are embracing cloud backup, but there’s a lot you need to know before choosing a service provider. Learn all the critical things you need to know.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Build a business case: developing custom apps
Learn how to maximize the value of custom applications by accelerating and simplifying their development.
Rethinking backup and recovery in the modern data center
Combining intelligence, operational analytics, and automation to enable efficient, data-driven IT organizations using the HP ABR approach.
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.