+- Linux Lite Forums (https://www.linuxliteos.com/forums)
+-- Forum: General (https://www.linuxliteos.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: On Topic (https://www.linuxliteos.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Thread: Linux Lite 2 Performance Review & Some Queries (/showthread.php?tid=1067)
Linux Lite 2 Performance Review & Some Queries - NRD80V - 11-07-2014
Hi
I have 5 Parameters for Linux Evaluation as a Normal End User Download Size, Live Boot Performance, Installation & Customisation, Functional Performance and Others. Linux Live Scores in these areas are presented below as below benchmarked with two Linux Distros which I am using or recommending others - Fedora & Linux Mint
Fedora Linux Mint Linux Lite
Desktop Environment XFCE Desktop
Download Size 15 10 20
Live Boot 15 20 15
Installation & Customisation 15 17 13
Functional Performance 20 15 17
Others 15 20 15
Total 80 82 80
Fedora Scores Average Marks in all aspects except Functional Performance which is unbeatable. Mint Scores low on the Download Size as it is above 1 GB and is a bit poor compared with Linux Lite on Performance.
Linux Lite is the most resource friendly and eye candy Distribution.
2 Issues with Linux Lite:
Additional Application Installation is not a bit easy. Though the promise is so, I am finding that the Additional Software Installation does not work seamlessly. Further the synaptic package manager is not as effective as I had observed in Mint or Ubuntu.This area is a bleeding issue for the distribution
Installation with 3rd party codecs and multimedia support takes hell a lot of time. This was not the case with Ubuntu or Linux Mint.
2 Best Points
Completely LTS and hence acts like a semi rolling release with two versions we can have 7 years of easy usage without any difficulty.
Easy and Simple to use, best for any one who is just starting into a Linux Distribution
Questions:
I really do not see an advantage for going to Linux Lite as Linux Mint does all these stuffs in a much simpler and established manner.
What drove you to make a distro when Linux Mint is the best Ubuntu Derivative
What was in your mind in having “Additional Software Installer”.
Instead you could have given “Software Customisation Center” - A More Graphical Presentation of the additional applications.
This would have eased the user.
Many Nos example 10, 11, 14, etc., are not working with the Additional Software Installer.
The concept is a bit failing and not working.
Why the synaptic package manager is not functioning in the same manner with Mint or Ubuntu
Yours
VN
Re: Linux Lite 2 Performance Review & Some Queries - bitsnpcs - 11-07-2014
Hello VN,
Welcome to the community
I am a Linux Lite user too and cannot answer the question you ask for the Development Team.
I enjoyed reading your review, experiences so far with LL and your opinion, it differs from my own, but we don't live under communism. (sadly some peoples still do)
I installed the "Restricted Extras" from the "Install Additional Software" GUI, which includes the multimedia codecs.
For the type of use for me I have not experienced any multimedia problems at all or codec problems in LL itself.
I did experience a problem in XFBurn, that is not unique to LL but rather to XFBurn, it needs additional things added to burn mp3 as audio cd, the same occurs in Linux Mint as I read Mint forum posts of many people having the same problems.
I think the Install Additional Software GUI looks very nice.
The Restricted Extras are the only item I need/use from the current Install Additional Software GUI, so I cannot comment on any of the other software, hopefully someone who has installed the particular ones can help.
I have installed quite a few things using Synaptic Package Manager and have not found any problems/faults or malfunctions with this yet, my only difficulty being becoming familiar in how to use it as I had not seen it before as a newbie to Linux.
Linux Lite has been very good to use and a wonderful way for me to begin escaping windows.
I have not tried Linux Mint or Debian itself.
I have seen used a long time back Red Hat, Suse and Mandrake as my first mentor used these on his machines , it gave me the desire to dream I would one day use Linux, one I didn't think was very realistic for some time/until I found Linux Lite and its community of friendly and helpful users and Team.
I am only able to mention these other distros that I have used/use -
1/Ubuntu itself , it was a disaster for me and took the techie over a month to fix the hdd after my accepting its first updates directly after installing as dual boot.
2/ Knoppix live cd which I used a few times under guidance /someone walking me through fault finding a windows computer. Also the only game I have ever played was on this live cd.
3/ Xiaopan (live cd). I did not have issues. I had some newbie instructions from China in the snail mail.
Re: Linux Lite 2 Performance Review & Some Queries - gold_finger - 11-07-2014
(11-07-2014, 11:16 AM)NRD80V link Wrote: Why the synaptic package manager is not functioning in the same manner with Mint or Ubuntu
Can you be more specific about problems you encountered with Synaptic? I used to use Ubuntu a few years ago and currently still use Mint in addition to LL and have not experienced any difference whatsoever in Synaptic performance between them. In addition, over the years I've periodically tested and used more distros than I can possibly recall -- Synaptic performed no differently in any of them.
(11-07-2014, 11:16 AM)NRD80V link Wrote: Installation with 3rd party codecs and multimedia support takes hell a lot of time. This was not the case with Ubuntu or Linux Mint.
Again, can you be more specific? What types of codecs are you referring to and what process did you use to install them. Like bitsnpcs, the only thing I've ever needed to do is install the "Restricted Extras" package.
(11-07-2014, 11:16 AM)NRD80V link Wrote: Additional Application Installation is not a bit easy. Though the promise is so, I am finding that the Additional Software Installation does not work seamlessly.
One thing I've run into on LL installations is that a few of the included repositories (needed for installing some of the "additional" programs) seem to be pointed to incorrect address, which causes error message and failure of install attempt. Is that the problem you ran into? (That repo problem also causes error messages when refreshing Synaptic. Is that the issue you had with Synaptic too?)
Re: Linux Lite 2 Performance Review & Some Queries - Valtam - 11-07-2014
(11-07-2014, 06:01 PM)gold_finger link Wrote: One thing I've run into on LL installations is that a few of the included repositories (needed for installing some of the "additional" programs) seem to be pointed to incorrect address, which causes error message and failure of install attempt. Is that the problem you ran into? (That repo problem also causes error messages when refreshing Synaptic. Is that the issue you had with Synaptic too?)
Which ones?
Re: Linux Lite 2 Performance Review & Some Queries - Coastie - 11-07-2014
(11-07-2014, 11:16 AM)NRD80V link Wrote: ... What drove you to make a distro when Linux Mint is the best Ubuntu Derivative ...
I have had none of your problems with Linux Lite. Even using a software center before installing any software, I researched on the internet. So not having a software center any more has not been a problem.
I tried for a while Linux Mint 16 Xfce waiting for 17 Xfce. Waiting for 17 Xfce, I got the feeling that Xfce was the "unwanted step child” from the Mint forums and web site and offered nothing over Linux Lite. I have installed and tried for several months Manjaro Cup of Linux Edition (without Compiz). I have tried on live DVD SolydX, Makulu Linux Xfce 6, PCLinuxOS Mate, MEPIS MX-14, AntiX, and others. I could not disagree to disagree with you more that Linux Mint is the best Ubuntu Derivative. I believe Linux Lite is the best Ubuntu derivative available. As others have https://www.linuxliteos.com/forums/index.php?topic=1088.0
Re: Linux Lite 2 Performance Review & Some Queries - gold_finger - 11-07-2014
(11-07-2014, 06:39 PM)Valtam link Wrote: Which ones?
Don't remember exactly, would have to reinstall to know for sure. Might have time to test out on VM later to see if same thing happens again. Will let you know when confirm.
Two that I know caused problems were:
deb http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main
deb http://dl.google.com/linux/talkplugin/deb/ stable main
I think there were one or two more -- Wine and/or Skype might have been one of them, but can't remember.
Was never a problem to me, because I don't use those things and just deleted the repos. But when installing for someone else who I thought might like to use them, I had to fix the problem. Was a simple fix -- just changed wording at end from either "stable" to "trusty", or vice versa. Don't recall which was correct. Same basic fix was needed for Skype if I remember right.
Re: Linux Lite 2 Performance Review & Some Queries - rokytnji - 11-07-2014
Quote:I really do not see an advantage for going to Linux Lite as Linux Mint does all these stuffs in a much simpler and established manner.
What drove you to make a distro when Linux Mint is the best Ubuntu Derivative
No Mint CD.
Quote: Parent Directory -
[ ] linuxmint-17-cinnamon-32bit-v2.iso 24-Jun-2014 12:11 1.2G
[ ] linuxmint-17-cinnamon-64bit-v2.iso 24-Jun-2014 11:32 1.3G
[ ] linuxmint-17-cinnamon-nocodecs-32bit-v2.iso 24-Jun-2014 14:52 1.1G
[ ] linuxmint-17-cinnamon-nocodecs-64bit-v2.iso 24-Jun-2014 13:07 1.3G
[ ] linuxmint-17-cinnamon-oem-64bit-v2.iso 24-Jun-2014 13:51 1.4G
[ ] linuxmint-17-kde-dvd-32bit.iso 20-Jun-2014 16:25 1.3G
[ ] linuxmint-17-kde-dvd-64bit.iso 20-Jun-2014 16:24 1.4G
[ ] linuxmint-17-mate-32bit-v2.iso 24-Jun-2014 19:11 1.2G
[ ] linuxmint-17-mate-64bit-v2.iso 24-Jun-2014 18:14 1.4G
[ ] linuxmint-17-mate-nocodecs-32bit-v2.iso 24-Jun-2014 22:10 1.2G
[ ] linuxmint-17-mate-nocodecs-64bit-v2.iso 24-Jun-2014 22:54 1.3G
[ ] linuxmint-17-mate-oem-64bit-v2.iso 24-Jun-2014 23:40 1.4G
[ ] linuxmint-17-xfce-dvd-32bit.iso 24-Jun-2014 11:59 1.2G
[ ] linuxmint-17-xfce-dvd-64bit.iso 24-Jun-2014 11:56 1.3G
[TXT] md5sum.txt 04-Nov-2014 09:07 1.0K
[TXT] sha256sum.txt 04-Nov-2014 09:07 1.
Mint is a resource Hog. Personal Opinion, (like yours).
As far as your other questions.; I am a AntiX team member. Not a Linux Lite one. So I cannot answer.
Re: Linux Lite 2 Performance Review & Some Queries - Valtam - 11-07-2014
(11-07-2014, 07:52 PM)gold_finger link Wrote: [quote author=Valtam link=topic=1115.msg6796#msg6796 date=1415385546]
Which ones?
Don't remember exactly, would have to reinstall to know for sure. Might have time to test out on VM later to see if same thing happens again. Will let you know when confirm.
Two that I know caused problems were:
deb http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main
deb http://dl.google.com/linux/talkplugin/deb/ stable main
I think there were one or two more -- Wine and/or Skype might have been one of them, but can't remember.
Was never a problem to me, because I don't use those things and just deleted the repos. But when installing for someone else who I thought might like to use them, I had to fix the problem. Was a simple fix -- just changed wording at end from either "stable" to "trusty", or vice versa. Don't recall which was correct. Same basic fix was needed for Skype if I remember right.
[/quote]
Just installed Chrome and Skype from Install Additional Software, no issues here.
Re: Linux Lite 2 Performance Review & Some Queries - Alex - 11-07-2014
I am real newbie to Linux. I tried Mint, Ubuntu, Zorin and three or four others. I found LinuxLite OS the best, lightest, fastest and easiest to use. Fortunately we are free to use what we like.
Re: Linux Lite 2 Performance Review & Some Queries - Wirezfree - 11-07-2014
Hi VN,
I suspect you have been using Linux for a while, and are reasonably comfortable with it.
I think if you take a step back,
and look at Linux Lite from a complete beginners point of view it becomes more compelling
and Linux Lite will evolve with you
Dave