- Status
Just to note: the WUI install can be done from the CD (or USB stick). The wubi.exe file is on the CD and will install from the CD, so it is not necessary to download the CD and then download the Wubi.exe file and install from the internet. I also seem to recall there was a procedure in earlier releases where if the ISO was included in one of the "Ubuntu directories", Wubi would read from the HDD rather than the CD. I presume this still works for 11.10. I may be mistaken, but I believe the ISO was placed in a sub-directory - "install" under the primary directory - "ubuntu". This is the fastest way to install other than from the USB stick, which is also quite fast.
mitch074
Splendid
- Mar 17, 2006
- 2,965
- 544
- 22,040
@mirage_59: Canonical does try to establish partnership to distribute Ubuntu preinstalled; at a time, HP actually sold PCs with Ubuntu as the OS. However, Microsoft kicked back and made it so that not only was the hardware forced to be different than the Windows-equipped hardware, it was also uninteresting financially (when, through options, you made a Ubuntu-based PC identical to a Windows PC, the former was more expensive). On top of that, the "open source" HP PCs were always hidden away in a corner of their website, right under a huge banner with HP RECOMMENDS WINDOWS VISTA. And now, they're completely gone.
Currently, asking any hardware maker to sell you a PC with no OS will get you at best the following answer: "you don't want Windows? Well, I can offer you a rebate equal to a Windows license, and you'll get Windows free". Who, apart from real enthusiasts, will delete a free OS? Case in point: in France, where selling a PC with the OS as a separate product is law, several hardware makers will reimburse you for the price of the Windows license, if:
- you refused the Windows license and can prove it (good luck to you if the PC was preactivated: get a camera running, unpack the PC inside the store in front of the seller - if he accepts!!)
- you return the PC IN WHOLE to the manufacturer (the bill's on you) and wait for up to six weeks for the cleared up machine to be returned to you
- and then wait an extra year for the refund to get to you.
That's the worst-case scenario: some hardware makers reimburse the shipping costs and only need a couple weeks to return the PC and the refund.
@gaia: WoW's stability depends mostly on the graphics driver's stability; I personally had trouble with a RadeonHD 4850 that would hang the PC, until I changed the motherboard (I was using an Athlon64 X2 3800+ on an Nvidia chipset; going to an AMD chipset solved ALL stability problems). After that, merely forcing WoW to OpenGL improved performance enough that I could play my paladin healer in Raid 10 easily - 25 was a bit choppy (but that was before Cataclysm; I stopped playing then, not because of performance problems, but I didn't enjoy WoW anymore).
@fb39ca4: Wine makes use of OpenGL to emulate DirectX; many DirectX features are supported in OpenGL, but Wine depends on the OpenGL driver to report what features it does support. If one feature is missing, Wine will either stub it (leading to missing effects or textures) or implement it in software (slow performance). Case in point, a HUGE performance improvement for Ati/AMD users was when, having gotten a report that their driver didn't properly advertise its supported features, AMD fixed it in the Catalyst 9.10 release (I think that was the one), and suddenly all rendering bugs in WoW were gone, as well as the frame rate going up 40% - actually, all that was missing from WoW on Wine when I stopped was the hardware accelerated mouse cursor (disabled by Blizzard in the Windows build of WoW) - but even then you could patch Wine to get it anyway. I do know that when Blizzard enabled it in Cataclysm, there was much rejoicing.
In short, if you're having a graphical problem with an app under Linux, be it running natively or through Wine, report it to the driver's maker: Nvidia don't really care, AMD may actually fix it, and Intel can accept patches as their Linux drivers are (at least, for most) open source;
Currently, asking any hardware maker to sell you a PC with no OS will get you at best the following answer: "you don't want Windows? Well, I can offer you a rebate equal to a Windows license, and you'll get Windows free". Who, apart from real enthusiasts, will delete a free OS? Case in point: in France, where selling a PC with the OS as a separate product is law, several hardware makers will reimburse you for the price of the Windows license, if:
- you refused the Windows license and can prove it (good luck to you if the PC was preactivated: get a camera running, unpack the PC inside the store in front of the seller - if he accepts!!)
- you return the PC IN WHOLE to the manufacturer (the bill's on you) and wait for up to six weeks for the cleared up machine to be returned to you
- and then wait an extra year for the refund to get to you.
That's the worst-case scenario: some hardware makers reimburse the shipping costs and only need a couple weeks to return the PC and the refund.
@gaia: WoW's stability depends mostly on the graphics driver's stability; I personally had trouble with a RadeonHD 4850 that would hang the PC, until I changed the motherboard (I was using an Athlon64 X2 3800+ on an Nvidia chipset; going to an AMD chipset solved ALL stability problems). After that, merely forcing WoW to OpenGL improved performance enough that I could play my paladin healer in Raid 10 easily - 25 was a bit choppy (but that was before Cataclysm; I stopped playing then, not because of performance problems, but I didn't enjoy WoW anymore).
@fb39ca4: Wine makes use of OpenGL to emulate DirectX; many DirectX features are supported in OpenGL, but Wine depends on the OpenGL driver to report what features it does support. If one feature is missing, Wine will either stub it (leading to missing effects or textures) or implement it in software (slow performance). Case in point, a HUGE performance improvement for Ati/AMD users was when, having gotten a report that their driver didn't properly advertise its supported features, AMD fixed it in the Catalyst 9.10 release (I think that was the one), and suddenly all rendering bugs in WoW were gone, as well as the frame rate going up 40% - actually, all that was missing from WoW on Wine when I stopped was the hardware accelerated mouse cursor (disabled by Blizzard in the Windows build of WoW) - but even then you could patch Wine to get it anyway. I do know that when Blizzard enabled it in Cataclysm, there was much rejoicing.
In short, if you're having a graphical problem with an app under Linux, be it running natively or through Wine, report it to the driver's maker: Nvidia don't really care, AMD may actually fix it, and Intel can accept patches as their Linux drivers are (at least, for most) open source;
Linux is crap, they just don't get it. Developers need money, but you want everything to be open source and free, the world doesn't work that way sweetheart, people who are able to write drivers and are first tier programmers don't write stuff for free anymore. The day Linux realises that "free" doesn't work for something as complex as an OS, is the day Linux has a fighting chance.
thenetavenger
Distinguished
- Jun 1, 2006
- 10
- 0
- 18,510
RawTherapee, JPG is slower on Windows?
*RawTherapee being a cross platform tool, CIRCUMVENTS the inherent GPU pipeline of image decompression technology in the WDM/WDDM of Windows 7.
Even if Windows 7 was faster in this test, you can't use tests that are not using the baseline functionality and/or features of the OS.
If the OS has a technology to enhance performance, but the software circumvents the technology, it should NEVER be used in cross platform performance testing.
It would be like using a test tool that disables Ubuntu's disk caching technologies, but uses Windows disk caching technology, and then wondering why it is faster on Windows.
You have to be careful doing cross platform benchmarking. Often software is designed specifically for one platform and then ported to the other platform, using its own internal code optimization that is geared to the originating OS model.
In the Unix-like OS world that follows a set of functionality this is less important, but when you move to NT which uses a completely different OS model, things go wrong rather quickly. The same is true in reverse as well.
At even the very base kernel level operations, dealing with NT's internal objects is far different than dealing with Linux's textual parameter model. If code is optimized for parsing text and dealing with parameters/functions and storing this information on Linux, it would be wasted CPU cycles on NT and even extra work, as NT is already handling this and working inherently with Objects and not generic textual calls. So this is actually adding extra work that NT is already doing for the application.
There are arguments good and bad for both OSes, but clouding this with badly chosen tests shows a significant lack of the OS model and architectural differences that should be part of the debate instead.
*RawTherapee being a cross platform tool, CIRCUMVENTS the inherent GPU pipeline of image decompression technology in the WDM/WDDM of Windows 7.
Even if Windows 7 was faster in this test, you can't use tests that are not using the baseline functionality and/or features of the OS.
If the OS has a technology to enhance performance, but the software circumvents the technology, it should NEVER be used in cross platform performance testing.
It would be like using a test tool that disables Ubuntu's disk caching technologies, but uses Windows disk caching technology, and then wondering why it is faster on Windows.
You have to be careful doing cross platform benchmarking. Often software is designed specifically for one platform and then ported to the other platform, using its own internal code optimization that is geared to the originating OS model.
In the Unix-like OS world that follows a set of functionality this is less important, but when you move to NT which uses a completely different OS model, things go wrong rather quickly. The same is true in reverse as well.
At even the very base kernel level operations, dealing with NT's internal objects is far different than dealing with Linux's textual parameter model. If code is optimized for parsing text and dealing with parameters/functions and storing this information on Linux, it would be wasted CPU cycles on NT and even extra work, as NT is already handling this and working inherently with Objects and not generic textual calls. So this is actually adding extra work that NT is already doing for the application.
There are arguments good and bad for both OSes, but clouding this with badly chosen tests shows a significant lack of the OS model and architectural differences that should be part of the debate instead.
[citation][nom]okayashayha[/nom]Linux is crap, they just don't get it. Developers need money, but you want everything to be open source and free, the world doesn't work that way sweetheart, people who are able to write drivers and are first tier programmers don't write stuff for free anymore. The day Linux realises that "free" doesn't work for something as complex as an OS, is the day Linux has a fighting chance.[/citation]
Vendors are obligated to provide drivers for all available OS-es, including Linux. The problem is that some don't... Because it has something like 1.5% desktop usage (but over 40% in the server sector). Give it a few months or so for the community to catch up. This is why Linux is very well supported on older hardware.
Another myth that you can't make money from open-source... Not true. Developers accept donations. But you should also know that a lot of developers don't do it for money, they do it because of different reasons. Beautiful things are created when you do something as a hobby. The sky is the limit. And a lot of Linux distributions are based on VOLUNTARY WORK. Sure, some do it for the fame, others for a (very good) job resume.
Mac OS X is complex too, it's UNIX-based. If you're referring to the GUI, you can make a Linux box as complex or as minimalistic as you want. Google "top 10 linux themes" and check out one of the articles. They pop up every few months or so.
Vendors are obligated to provide drivers for all available OS-es, including Linux. The problem is that some don't... Because it has something like 1.5% desktop usage (but over 40% in the server sector). Give it a few months or so for the community to catch up. This is why Linux is very well supported on older hardware.
Another myth that you can't make money from open-source... Not true. Developers accept donations. But you should also know that a lot of developers don't do it for money, they do it because of different reasons. Beautiful things are created when you do something as a hobby. The sky is the limit. And a lot of Linux distributions are based on VOLUNTARY WORK. Sure, some do it for the fame, others for a (very good) job resume.
Mac OS X is complex too, it's UNIX-based. If you're referring to the GUI, you can make a Linux box as complex or as minimalistic as you want. Google "top 10 linux themes" and check out one of the articles. They pop up every few months or so.
mitch074
Splendid
- Mar 17, 2006
- 2,965
- 544
- 22,040
@vexun11: Crossfire isn't well supported on Linux. Blame AMD's driver.
@adamovera: One thing that had me laughing is your take on the kernel's numbering. The real story between the 2.6.x to 3.x version jump is actually very mundane: the 2.6.x kernel line was celebrating its 10th birthday; by then, then-2.6.40 had changed so much over 2.6.0 that "2.6" was pretty much meaningless. So, Linus Torvalds decided to bump the version number to 3, remove a digit, and keep going as it is; as such, 3.0.0 was followed by 3.1.0 - with "3" meaning mainline kernel version, "1" meaning the second release since the numbering restart, and "0" indicating the security release - if needed.
@adamovera: One thing that had me laughing is your take on the kernel's numbering. The real story between the 2.6.x to 3.x version jump is actually very mundane: the 2.6.x kernel line was celebrating its 10th birthday; by then, then-2.6.40 had changed so much over 2.6.0 that "2.6" was pretty much meaningless. So, Linus Torvalds decided to bump the version number to 3, remove a digit, and keep going as it is; as such, 3.0.0 was followed by 3.1.0 - with "3" meaning mainline kernel version, "1" meaning the second release since the numbering restart, and "0" indicating the security release - if needed.
- Jan 20, 2010
- 17,321
- 8,722
- 79,540
In case anyone cares, the POV-Ray benchmark result is almost certainly due to the extra FPU precision being computed on Linux. Linux sets the CPU's floating point control word to compute this additional precision, by default. Windows disables it, by default. The problem with these defaults is that if your program changes it, it can affect the stability of math libraries. So, it's not a good idea for Linux programs to just switch it off.
In 64-bit mode, however, both platforms use SSE arithmetic, completely sidestepping the matter (unless you explicitly override it). Therefore, if the same benchmark were repeated @ 64-bit, I'm sure you'd see Linux close the gap or even surpass Windows 7.
In 64-bit mode, however, both platforms use SSE arithmetic, completely sidestepping the matter (unless you explicitly override it). Therefore, if the same benchmark were repeated @ 64-bit, I'm sure you'd see Linux close the gap or even surpass Windows 7.
For what its worth, Crysis (1, I don't know about 2) does run in Linux, perfectly, with the WINE compatibility libraries. So does the Left 4 Dead series, World of Warcraft, and a lot of other AAA titles. If you're into older games, it's a blessing, as I've been able to get WINE to run many games I couldn't even get to run under Windows XP, like Vampire the Masquerade: Redemption, Dungeon Keeper II, Lighthouse, etc.
[citation][nom]Axonn[/nom]And BTW the article is nice and the author clearly pointed out that the gaming aspect needs a ton of work on Ubuntu. To be clear: I know that this is also the fault of game developers / game industry, but sorry, Linux didn't give any reason to this crowd (of which actually I am part of) to use it. Linux' architecture & history simply don't make it an attractive platform, period.[/citation]
Gaming doesn't "need a ton of work"; it worked just fine, beating some Windows titles. Linux doesn't give anyone a reason to use it? Hmmm... better/more file systems, complete control over the OS, single tool to update all programs on the system, amazing customizability, multiple desktops, Logical Volume Management (join partitions on multiple disks into one virtual single partition like the feature that was removed from Windows Home Server), ability to install your OS to a flash drive, no need to verify ownership when changing hardware, cost savings, much less disk space used (OpenSUSE 12.1 64bit only uses 3 GBs of space and that includes office suite and several other major programs), much quicker to install plus everything a regular user needs installed out of the box (no need to hunt for drivers, download an archiver, PDF viewer, java, flash, and all the other stuff you have to do with Windows after install), most distros have things like built-in VPS and VNC servers out-of-the-box, KDe desktop has a touch interface you can toggle and not be stuck with on a desktop (unlike Windows 8), with a separate "home" partition for data you can reinstall the OS without losing any data (or even program settings unless you wish to erase them), etc., etc., etc.
"Linux' architecture & history simply don't make it an attractive platform, "
What on earth about Linux's architecture do you dislike? It seems to perform at least as well as Windows', plus it's open and configurable (can you change the CPU or IO schedulers to match your workload in Windows?). And it's history???? Windows' history includes stealing and being a convicted monopolist. What's so sordid in Linux's history? Lone geek begins coding, gets joined by early Internet geeks and one crazy guy with a beard, 20 years later their software dominates every platform without a pre-existing monopoly (supercomputers, embedded devices, phones, cars, e-readers, routers, servers, stock exchanges, etc.) and it's available for free and completely open in an era when Microsoft and Apple have begun a race to see who can lock down the desktop the most first. That's the kind of story they make movies out of.
This just reads like someone who's upset to hear the product he's using didn't win the test and gave a sour grapes reply.
Gaming doesn't "need a ton of work"; it worked just fine, beating some Windows titles. Linux doesn't give anyone a reason to use it? Hmmm... better/more file systems, complete control over the OS, single tool to update all programs on the system, amazing customizability, multiple desktops, Logical Volume Management (join partitions on multiple disks into one virtual single partition like the feature that was removed from Windows Home Server), ability to install your OS to a flash drive, no need to verify ownership when changing hardware, cost savings, much less disk space used (OpenSUSE 12.1 64bit only uses 3 GBs of space and that includes office suite and several other major programs), much quicker to install plus everything a regular user needs installed out of the box (no need to hunt for drivers, download an archiver, PDF viewer, java, flash, and all the other stuff you have to do with Windows after install), most distros have things like built-in VPS and VNC servers out-of-the-box, KDe desktop has a touch interface you can toggle and not be stuck with on a desktop (unlike Windows 8), with a separate "home" partition for data you can reinstall the OS without losing any data (or even program settings unless you wish to erase them), etc., etc., etc.
"Linux' architecture & history simply don't make it an attractive platform, "
What on earth about Linux's architecture do you dislike? It seems to perform at least as well as Windows', plus it's open and configurable (can you change the CPU or IO schedulers to match your workload in Windows?). And it's history???? Windows' history includes stealing and being a convicted monopolist. What's so sordid in Linux's history? Lone geek begins coding, gets joined by early Internet geeks and one crazy guy with a beard, 20 years later their software dominates every platform without a pre-existing monopoly (supercomputers, embedded devices, phones, cars, e-readers, routers, servers, stock exchanges, etc.) and it's available for free and completely open in an era when Microsoft and Apple have begun a race to see who can lock down the desktop the most first. That's the kind of story they make movies out of.
This just reads like someone who's upset to hear the product he's using didn't win the test and gave a sour grapes reply.
Okay. Look. Linux has approximately 2 real uses:
1. Platform for applaince integrators / manufacturers. Because System-on-Chip vendors use Linux and also because there is a sense of false economy when business believes they can save on licensing while selling open source code after splapping a custom web client ontop of it.
2. IT people who want an FTP/DNS/SMPT, etc, server but who can't buy a Windows server, can't use an existing Windows server and who can't pirate one.
And maybe a 3rd: security testers who can't afford WinPcap adapters and so have to rely on Back Track for packet injection support on cheap hardware.
For general computing? You have to be completely out of your mind to want to use Linux.
1. Platform for applaince integrators / manufacturers. Because System-on-Chip vendors use Linux and also because there is a sense of false economy when business believes they can save on licensing while selling open source code after splapping a custom web client ontop of it.
2. IT people who want an FTP/DNS/SMPT, etc, server but who can't buy a Windows server, can't use an existing Windows server and who can't pirate one.
And maybe a 3rd: security testers who can't afford WinPcap adapters and so have to rely on Back Track for packet injection support on cheap hardware.
For general computing? You have to be completely out of your mind to want to use Linux.
[citation][nom]nekromobo[/nom]Linux is only free if your time has no value.[/citation]
If you are not trying to play high end games (like Crysis), and just want to surf the web, listen to music, create documents, and manage photos, Ubuntu is free and easier than Windows. If you are tring to run Sony Vegas under Wine to edite AVCHD video, then yes...it gets time consuming. Use the right tool for the right job, as always.
If you are not trying to play high end games (like Crysis), and just want to surf the web, listen to music, create documents, and manage photos, Ubuntu is free and easier than Windows. If you are tring to run Sony Vegas under Wine to edite AVCHD video, then yes...it gets time consuming. Use the right tool for the right job, as always.
mitch074
Splendid
- Mar 17, 2006
- 2,965
- 544
- 22,040
=== DISCLAIMER: definition of Wintard and iDiot ===
people who are retarded AND who are Mac and Windows users; as in, the subset of Windows and Mac users who are retarded; as a corollary, not all Mac and Windows users are retarded - I'm sure even with such precision a Wintard or iDiot will complain that' I'm stigmatising all Windows and Mac users, which I precisely don't.
=== end disclaimer ===
@v3rion: your argument is sound, but incomplete: most Wintards and iDiots will interpret it as "I can't use Sony Vegas on Linux => I can't edit AVCHD on Linux". On Linux, you don't use Sony Vegas because Sony Vegas doesn't exist on Linux. You use Cinelerra or Kino or (insert name of other, free or otherwise, AVCHD editor) that is meant to be used on Linux. It also means that, the day Sony ports Vegas to Linux, you should use it (fat chance of that, but it's because of retarded software editors like that that Wine was created).
The same, you don't use SystemV init on Windows because it ain't a Unix OS, and you don't use FAT32 for your boot partition in OS X because it's tailored for HFS+. It's difficult finding a general purpose app in Linux that doesn't run on these other OSes because, due to freedom concerns, all meaningful Linux apps run on OS X or Windows - either directly, or with a compatibility layer (X for OS X) or through a Cygwin POSIX subsystem for Windows.
people who are retarded AND who are Mac and Windows users; as in, the subset of Windows and Mac users who are retarded; as a corollary, not all Mac and Windows users are retarded - I'm sure even with such precision a Wintard or iDiot will complain that' I'm stigmatising all Windows and Mac users, which I precisely don't.
=== end disclaimer ===
@v3rion: your argument is sound, but incomplete: most Wintards and iDiots will interpret it as "I can't use Sony Vegas on Linux => I can't edit AVCHD on Linux". On Linux, you don't use Sony Vegas because Sony Vegas doesn't exist on Linux. You use Cinelerra or Kino or (insert name of other, free or otherwise, AVCHD editor) that is meant to be used on Linux. It also means that, the day Sony ports Vegas to Linux, you should use it (fat chance of that, but it's because of retarded software editors like that that Wine was created).
The same, you don't use SystemV init on Windows because it ain't a Unix OS, and you don't use FAT32 for your boot partition in OS X because it's tailored for HFS+. It's difficult finding a general purpose app in Linux that doesn't run on these other OSes because, due to freedom concerns, all meaningful Linux apps run on OS X or Windows - either directly, or with a compatibility layer (X for OS X) or through a Cygwin POSIX subsystem for Windows.
[citation][nom]gutb[/nom]You have to be completely out of your mind to want to use Linux.[/citation]
I've never seen people have an active hatred for Linux before. Do you have a line of reasoning to attach to this insult, suggesting people who use Linux are crazy?
I've never seen people have an active hatred for Linux before. Do you have a line of reasoning to attach to this insult, suggesting people who use Linux are crazy?
mitch074
Splendid
- Mar 17, 2006
- 2,965
- 544
- 22,040
@alcalde: Steve Ballmer hates Linux with a passion. The late Steve Jobs wanted to go thermonuclear on Android, which runs on a Linux kernel (how modified the kernel is is subject to caution, especially now that many Android patches are being integrated upstream).
Now, as for "people who have such an active hatred for GNU/Linux based OSes" : see my previous definition for Wintards/iDiots (same disclaimer). The former really enjoyed Vista Premium (with Bill Gates' autograph) and all its released goodies, the latter wait in line in front of Apple Stores several days in advance to get the latest iThingie (and pray to Steve Jobs before going to bed).
For the record, I did find Win7 the nicest Windows OS since Windows 98 SE (the last to let me exercise my MS-DOS kung-fu), and I do own Apple stuff: a (rockboxed) iPod and a (not yet jailbroken) iPhone 4 - but I mainly use Ubuntu Linux (because it's stable and tinker-free), after a long time with Mandrake/Mandriva (because it was flexible) and Slackware before that (because it was distributed free in a magazine in 1996).
Now, as for "people who have such an active hatred for GNU/Linux based OSes" : see my previous definition for Wintards/iDiots (same disclaimer). The former really enjoyed Vista Premium (with Bill Gates' autograph) and all its released goodies, the latter wait in line in front of Apple Stores several days in advance to get the latest iThingie (and pray to Steve Jobs before going to bed).
For the record, I did find Win7 the nicest Windows OS since Windows 98 SE (the last to let me exercise my MS-DOS kung-fu), and I do own Apple stuff: a (rockboxed) iPod and a (not yet jailbroken) iPhone 4 - but I mainly use Ubuntu Linux (because it's stable and tinker-free), after a long time with Mandrake/Mandriva (because it was flexible) and Slackware before that (because it was distributed free in a magazine in 1996).
I like both platforms but one thing I like about Linux and (dare I say it) OSX is that they never seem to slow down, where windows for me has always needed a format every year or so, everyone I know seems to agree on that. Initially windows 7 has great boot times but eventually that changes...
ojas
Distinguished
- Feb 25, 2011
- 2,924
- 0
- 20,810
Adam, i don't know if you're going to read this seeing that it's been such a long time since this has been up and there're like what, 8 pages of comments, but i was wondering if FreeSpace 2 SCP is a good game to compare both platforms since it runs using OpenGL on windows too.
It's not exactly graphically super intense (i'm getting a steady 85 fps vsync-ed @ 1024x768 everything maxed out on a 9600GT running 600/800/1500) but i think it's more so than the games you've tested with.
You could also do a memory comparison, i.e. which OS handles memory assigned to games better.
It's not exactly graphically super intense (i'm getting a steady 85 fps vsync-ed @ 1024x768 everything maxed out on a 9600GT running 600/800/1500) but i think it's more so than the games you've tested with.
You could also do a memory comparison, i.e. which OS handles memory assigned to games better.
Interesting read, thank you. As well as browser benchmarks, can you please do a comparison of WoW fps in Windows vs. Linux (using Wine)? Or maybe Dungeons and Dragons Online? Also, if you used an SSD in your system can you try implementing these optimizations for Linux: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Solid_State_Drives? Also, maybe you could try running a more lightweight distro with XFCE to see if Unity is the main drag on performance?
Windows still have the upper hand in games... I just wish game developers made games available for linux... and ohh yeah, simplifying all kind of installation in Linux would be huge.
A year ago I set up Ubuntu with WINE and installed Fallout 3 and Dragon Age. Both ran faster on my Ubuntu partition than they did natively on my Windows partition (same system). Skyrim also runs on WINE now. Why not do a benchmark of Windows native VS WINE on Ubuntu for games that work both ways?
You should try running various windows programs with different settings in wine on ubuntu. That might help to see compatibility and other things. You may be able to install silverlight and a web browser in wine which would allow netflix to work. For games like Crysis, install wine with playonlinux for better compatibility. Please try this next time you review ubuntu, i wanna see how it goes
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
News AMD explains the missing RDNA 4 GPUs in its CES 2025 livestream
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 15
-
Question New build wont post Gigabyte B650M Gaming Plus wifi , AMD Ryzen 5 7600X CPU, 32GB T-Force RGB DDR5. Need help!
- Started by Notmiserable
- Replies: 27
-
Discussion PSU recommendations and power supply discussion thread - Tom's hardware- Started by Darkbreeze
- Replies: 2K
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram