This e-mail maybe be coming a little late, but just wanted to add my two cents, maybe for future list searchers.
I'm running Ubuntu Studio now, but have run vanilla Ubuntu as well and didn't really notice a performance difference. I DID like having lots of audio things preinstalled...I didn't need to waste a lot of time getting my audio-specific hardware up and running, just plug and play, and then start removing unnecessary junk when bored, instead of frantically looking for things when I have a project to get done. Supposedly, Studio is also "optimized" for studio work, but I haven't actually spent the time to look into what exactly that means. If you're already running vanilla, I wouldn't switch over unless you find a very compelling reason to do so.
-Michael
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 10:55 AM, Chris McCormick chris@mccormick.cx wrote:
On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 01:38:58PM +0100, João Pais wrote:
Another note: what window managers do you advise? I find the simple, low-cal approach of fluxbox / enlightenment better as the sugar-puffed gnome etc. Any remarks against using any of these? By the way, one of the things that puts me off of linux is that it takes so much *'%$ time to get going. So, reliability is also a parameter.
Agree about the time thing under Linux. I was a longtime blackbox and then fluxbox addict, but I've gone soft in my old age and use Xfce now. It's about as fast (maybe faster) and configurable as fluxbox but gives you some of the nice features of Gnome and friends, without the bloat. The bloat is actually optional as you can elect to start gnome and kde services on startup, but you don't need them at all to function. Also, you don't have to edit any config files if you don't want to. Additionally, Linux finally got a file browser that doesn't suck (it's about as good as Explorer.exe) in Thunar, Xfce's default file browser.
apt-get install xfce4
Chris.
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list