Our SponsorsContact us for information about sponsoring our project. |
Back to our roots?It seems most people think we should tend towards a slimmer install and that will create a proper contrast between our project and Lubuntu. This is what I propose: Packages to include: But this could be it. It should be extremely lightweight. What do you think? Which programs should be included? I would make the following as an initial proposal: Web Browser - Firefox or Epiphany What does everyone think about this list? Any further suggestions? |
User loginTwitter UpdatesWho's online
There are currently 0 users and 13 guests online.
Who's new
|
What do you think?
well sence you ask................I kind of like it as is
eveything in hear now is nice and light and works well with this old lappy...........a dell inspiron-2100 made for win ME
700Mhz CPU 128RAM ATI mobilaty
Kazehakase is way lighter than firefox acualey runing and seams to use the same plugin's as firefox.......after adding mediabuntu to the repos I get all flash and whatnot playing just fine in Kazehakase.
a youtube vid in firefox will run the CPU up over 70% as seen by top and the same vid in Kazehakase will stay below 40%
xubuntu was far more system hungry and forget eneything elce Gnome and KDE ubuntu vareants wont run in a useable maner.
both VLC and gxine will run on this old box but realey why include sutch things in the istallation cd as all can be had later with synaptic and sence we seame to be using hardy repos it's all thare to be had.
alsaplayer works fine (was that default or did I add it?)
all in all I like it as is .............good work :)
VINNY
Mozilla/Pidgin/vlc
I think that you guys should have Mozilla Firefox (possibly thunderbird too?) and Pidgin with vlc as a media player. I need certain firefox addons to do things and When I use any IM client besides pidgin is just feels icky. VLC is a big one for me because it can open pretty much every file type. I couldn't use WMP when I had windows b/c of all the files I opened. The only other real important thing is FrostWire but I might do that myself.
Vote for epiphany or arora,
Vote for epiphany or arora, firefox is too heavy.
Why not include by default a media player? People using light distros also watch videos sometimes you know? Maybe vlc for that, or any other player that you consider appropiate.
I hope Lxdm makes it instead of gdm.
I think Empathy is a better alternative than pidgin, although it still needs some plugins.
Is synaptic going to be the default for package management?
Google Chrome is nearly
Google Chrome is nearly complete on Linux, I think that if it's released in time it would be much more suiting for a lightweight distro like this, and if you don't want Chrome please pick Epiphany, Firefox & The gecko engine don't belong in a lightweight distro like this, which means Epiphany (which has recently switched to webkit from Gecko) would be right at home. Also, even though I prefer Pidgin, I'd like to recommend Empathy as the IM Client, it seems to be quite a bit more lightweight than Pidgin, and just as user-friendly. Anyway those are just some ideas on my part, I wish you good luck and hope for the best!
Merge U-lite into Lubuntu
To be honest, I agree with one of the previous posters who mentioned about collaborating more with Lubuntu. While U-lite is definitely a laudable effort, there really is no need for yet another distro that essentially does what Lubuntu does. Even thought U-lite collaborates with Lubuntu development, this could be done at a more integral level. Spri is another relatively new distro with IceWM that also aims to be lightweight and yet does pretty much the same thing. wattOS is yet another one! It would be best if all the effort were directed towards Lubuntu to create a solid lightweight distro, instead of having multiple distros which have minimal differences among them. If there's one thing that Linux suffers from, it's fragmentation and duplication of development effort.
I have gotten this several
I have gotten this several times. U-lite has used LXDE since Ubuntu Hardy. Furthermore, U-lite was created even before Xubuntu. (First version released for Ubuntu 5.04, note this is for our original Ubuntulite project, which became U-lite). Who is reinventing the wheel?
Reinventing the Wheel
Indeed, Shae, you were the FIRST to create a minimal Ubuntu/LXDE distro (older even than Xubuntu, as you said). It's an awesome concept we should all be grateful for.
But it's so easy now for anyone to "build their own" minimal Ubuntu from the minimal iso, add LXDE, and whatever software they please. I built my own ultralight Ubuntu in a single day with very little effort. And I don't consider myself even an intermediate Linux user. My homemade mixture has exactly what I want and nothing that I don't. The closest thing to it is probably Masonux (yet another minimal Ubuntu/LXDE project), which actually runs better than my homebrew.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like both projects - Lubuntu and U-Lite - have gotten stuck on the same snag: Choosing what applications to include. So we wait for months on end while a few people debate about which web browser to use, which office suite, which music player, etc. Why not let users choose and install their own? You can offer a "U-Lite for Newbies" version that has newbie-friendly apps pre-installed (for those who don't want to choose their own or don't yet know which ones are better for them), and a "bare essentials" version of U-Lite that simply allows users to install their own favorites.
Those of us who don't want to wait for however long it might take until Lubuntu or U-Lite is finally released can simply build our own as I did, or pick from among the growing number of minimal Ubuntu/LXDE distros like WattOS, MoonOS, Masonux, etc. It looks from here as though Lubuntu and U-Lite are simply being left behind to endlessly debate over applications and themes and whatnot while these newcomers emerge and grow.
Yes, they are re-inventing the wheel. And yes, you were the first to do this, and yes you have every reason to be proud of that. And we have every reason to be thankful for U-Lite and all your contributions to Linux.
But don't get mad or discouraged about U-Lite just because others have taken your work and run with it. You should be flattered to have your ideas take flight, no matter who is flying the plane.
-Robin
I feel U-lite has and will have something unique to offer.
I agree that U-lite has and can continue to offer a unique benefit to the linux community including L/X/Ubuntu. I think discussing how to be unique, relevant and useful as U-lite is legitimate and the "merge" crowd? detracts from the process. I also believe that friendly participation with other distro's including the ubuntu's is healthy and necessary. FOSS is about sharing and trying to add or integrate giving something back. I personally like the direction U-lite has taken up to now on this topic of how to offer something unique and positive as Lubuntu is being developed. U-lite will have a freedom that Lubuntu will not because it is a corporate sponsored project. Also if you look at the roadmap for Ubuntu, it seems to me that it will probably become less apt to even "run" on low resource computers (PIII, 256mb, 5gb and below). Just a few key aspects (ie control panel-simple gui, stability-use long term kernel, slickness-no papercuts your own unique "branding"- artwork, splashscreens, icons, wallpapers, integrated themes gtk,lxde,support programs) can be enough. Keeping a short list of base applications to cover all main areas as you suggest in the start of the thread will allow more integration to where it feels like it is a package not just a bunch of parts. Warren W. of Mepis quotes "the devil is in the details" and that is especially true for a linux distro to make itself stick out in the crowd. PCLOS does this extremely well in my opinion, splash screens match, themes are tweaked, base programs are methodical, icons-wallpapers-gtk(QT) are matched. A small repository with these unique things along with a few scripts, special gui, artwork will be one way to be unique and get noticed. The base programs should have as many dependencies be in common so as to be natively fast and light. Else where there is a discussion about which network tools to use, my two cents : look at the script puppylinux uses (network wizard) which works well and uses almost no resources. Wireless I like rutilt it is a great little program for wireless that docks in a tray, can be started in the tray, and is very stable and friendly. I recently found bum which is a great gui tool for starting stoping services. Multimedia must be included (someone suggested otherwise) some base (light) program must be there at start up for newbies. As we all learn we will choose something else. The web browser question is equally "loaded" as many options exist all with a avid bunch of followers. Firefox is familiar to many x windows people, opera is excellent for lighter resources and fully compliant, I hear midori is an emerging "lite" option, not to fond of chrome yet and it can be more resource intensive. I would include dillo (latest version) in any case as it is very fast and light but it doesn't load all pages well. Hope this helps.
Fully agree with Shae. What I
Fully agree with Shae. What I would add is that U-lite has to do with ubuntu what Debian_EasyLxde intends to do with Debian. U-Lite should not chase minimalistic roads, which are many times more complicated and difficult to follow. I think that ease of use and lightness are the goals, but also ease!
True
Absolutely, I agree with you. But since Lubuntu has Canonical's endorsement, I believe all development should steer towards it. Lubuntu may be seen as U-lite's successor, because U-lite was the distro which originally brought LXDE integration into an Ubuntu derivative. Hence I believe it's only a natural progression from U-lite to Lubuntu, with you and the other developers incorporating all the new ideas into Lubuntu, now with Canonical's support as well. It's a win-win situation for everyone!
lightweight
I totally agree, U-lite should be so lightweight and fast as possible, otherwise there's no advantage over, let's say Xubuntu.
I like Slitaz also, that's extremely small and fast, but has only very limited choice of screen resolutions, so unless it matches by accident to your hardware.... it is unusable.
comment
the initial proposal sound good to me.
wicd seems better than networkmanager
thats all.
Unfortunately, my experience
Unfortunately, my experience has alway been 100% the opposite.
I think it's good
I think it's good really
although I don't know much about a package being better than another
it's good to ask other persons opinions but you make it
don't let it entirely base on what other people think
your touch is important
as a project leader you decide what is and what isn't
Webbrowser
I've done some work on speeding up my family's older computers, and adding Chromium works wonders. The later releases come with functional Flash too, so no longer is it "behind" Firefox or Epiphany.
I really want to ship
I really want to ship chromium, but I am not sure if it is "stable" enough yet. I know flash does work, but I do not think things like mplayer plugins work.
Chrommium Midori and Seamonkey
I have tested out the chromium build for Linux.. I wasn't impressed
It doesn't integrate smoothly with the gui and the windows have all sorts of window management bugs since they seem to over ride
Midori would be a better option IMO but overall I think with any webkit browser you are eventually going to have to install a gekko browser for compatibility
Seamonkey 2 might be an option I'm not sure it has been released but it was pretty stable last I checked and it integrates email and chat I think so it might save a bit on footprint http://www.seamonkey-project.org/
-cb88 ArchLinux/Debian/Puppylinux user
lightwight installer is also
lightwight installer is also important
Hello everybody,
I think the softwarecollection is one of the questions. Interesting is also the instller. I had the problem with xubuntu that it runs on my old PC but there wasn't enough RAM to install it.
The installer of ulite should be lightwight and also comfortable for unskilled users.
About the software I think all of them should be light to make ulite really fast, even on old hardware or may be on netbook.
I'm going to put ulite to an test. I'm nosy how it works!
Think about your consumers
Think about who is going to be using your stuff. I'm a K-12 teacher in Memphis and I am currently (as in right this minute) giving ulite a spin (installing). We've got a closet of supposedly dead computers that I plan on reshaping into a FOSS lab. I've been using xubuntu then installing fluxbox on top of it, but I want to try ulite out.
There are LOADS of schools with closets filled with old computers. Could you try to cater to education a bit?
To be honest, I don't know how you would go about doing that, but it's something to think about. What makes a distro educational or not. Edubuntu is just a compilation of educational software. There's nothing special about the distro itself (in fact, I think it's been retired).
Most teachers only use web browsers and many a word processing program. CUPS is nice for printing. Instant messengers tend to be a no-no. PDFs can be cool, too.
Just my 2 cents.
I hope you would be
I hope you would be interested in helping me improve U-lite for the educational setting. I think it would be a great idea!
why a music player at all?
I wouldn't add a media or musikplayer to the standard installation.
If I had a very low computer, can i play music?
I think that if your goal is to make a distro that can run in (even) the oldest, slowest or 'little' machine; the user that has one of this will prefer a good office suite (at least a presentation maker) than a music player… A machine with PentiumII maybe not have the resources to play music at all. Think about this
How about...
Slim instead of GDM or no graphical login at all - autologin speeds up the felt boot time very much.
midori or Kazehakase (once it gets more stable at least)
mplayer ar xine with a simple GUI - no gstreamer
epdfview
wicd
Slim is really nice, but it
Slim is really nice, but it is difficult to package into a redistributable format and have the logout features work in LXDE, or it was the last time I tried.
LXDM should be used instead of GDM, http://wiki.lxde.org/en/LXDM
LXDM login manager should be used instead of GDM, see http://wiki.lxde.org/en/LXDM
Once it becomes stable
Once it becomes stable (currently under heavy development), it probably will.
Why not Become a Lubuntu Contributor?
Why not become a contributor on Lubuntu and retire this project? Why keep two distro's that have the same goals? Isn't that needlessly spreading our resources thin when we could be collaborating more (don't we already do this enough in the GNU/Linux world)?
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu
We need Ulite so that just in
We need Ulite so that just in case Lubuntu heads the Xubuntu way.
Lets not forget what happened to Xubuntu; Learning from its mistake will be wise. So focus should be on as smaller Ram requirement as possible and as fast as possible.
Ulite is anyways dependent on ubuntu and not directly on debian, so that makes it unique in its own way. So its a very good option for light weight category.
- RawThinkTank
I already collaborate with
I already collaborate with Lubuntu.
Package List for ulite
Hello Shae, et. al.,
I would suggest we seek another network manager than the Gnome version. It is heavy and will drag in a lot of dependencies we might want to do without. Rather, something like WICD might do well enough, with other scripts/programs to handle the cases WICD doesn't cover.
Cheers
CDR
Some suggestions
I would prefer to have some more lightweight web browser than Firefox, like: Kazehakaze, Midori or Chromium
Music player: Audacious or Goggles Music Manager (see comparison at http://code.google.com/p/gogglesmm/wiki/MusicManagerComparison)
Office: Abiword and Gnumeric
Text editor: Geany, Medit or Leafpad
web browser
Opera is lighter than Firefox and still its functional and safe
ph0wlteer
and with opera comes a very good email client and a torrent client... etc
the most lightweight music player is my favorite one: mocp :)
Depending packages
Off-topic: you need to think which reasons make people to look for U-Lite
I propose:
ulite-minimal
ulite-functional
ulite-standard