Ubuntu Qs: laptop/32vs64
Last response: in Linux/Free BSD
I want to dual boot my laptop with ubuntu and vista. Why does ubuntu recommend 32bit? Compatibility?
I am mostly just using ubuntu for school (openoffice/gimp/browser), but am worried that I read that there are no controls for battery saving, and since I use my laptop in class I cant always get a power outlet. Is there any way to get vista like power saving?
For the use I described above, would narwhal or lynx be better for me?
I am mostly just using ubuntu for school (openoffice/gimp/browser), but am worried that I read that there are no controls for battery saving, and since I use my laptop in class I cant always get a power outlet. Is there any way to get vista like power saving?
For the use I described above, would narwhal or lynx be better for me?
More about : ubuntu laptop 32vs64
I would recommend Vista Home Basic 32-bit and xubuntu 10.04.2 LTS for laptop dual-boot, along with EasyBCD
Ijack said:
Just as a matter of interest, where do they make that recommendation?http://www.ubuntu.com/download/ubuntu/download
Under the download options it says "32-bit (recommended)" for some reason.
Related ressources
- Intel Core i3 2120 OR Core i5 2400? Please suggest! - Forum
- First build, budget home box: Comments? - Forum
- Help with my build - Forum
- Trying to build a budget Gaming PC. Does it work? - Forum
- Is This Setup Feasible? - Forum
chamaecyparis said:
I would recommend Vista Home Basic 32-bit and xubuntu 10.04.2 LTS for laptop dual-boot, along with EasyBCDany reason 11.04 over 10.04? Is it just because LTS?
EarpWJ said:
any reason 11.04 over 10.04? Is it just because LTS?The major reason is contained in ubuntu documentation on Maverick Meerkat
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MaverickMeerkat/ReleaseNotes --
§Linux kernel 2.6.35
"With 10.10 we have also dropped support for i586 and lower processors, as well as i686 processors without cmov support."
Something all potential *buntu users should be made aware of, especially if desiring to install these distros on older hardware.
chamaecyparis said:
The major reason is contained in ubuntu documentation on Maverick Meerkathttps://wiki.ubuntu.com/MaverickMeerkat/ReleaseNotes --
§Linux kernel 2.6.35
"With 10.10 we have also dropped support for i586 and lower processors, as well as i686 processors without cmov support."
Something all potential *buntu users should be made aware of, especially if desiring to install these distros on older hardware.
Thanks for the help so far all!
So if my laptop has a core2duo T9300 2.5ghz, this shouldn't matter to me? Any reason then for me not to go with narwhal?
If you havent noticed I am a noob to ubuntu, only tired it out for about a week before.
No, it should not matter. However, if quickness in your laptop is a priority, I would suggest going with the new peppermintTwo @ http://peppermintos.com/download/.
Based on lubuntu 11.04, it is focused on Cloud Computing. However, do not let this put you off.
I take out what I do not want (apt-get remove whatever) and add what I want (apt-get -f install whatever).
It is worth checking out!
Alternatively, you may choose to go with Xubuntu 11.04, "Natty Narwhal." Again, the reason I recommend the Desktop Environments LXDE (peppermint) and XFCE (xubuntu) is speed on a laptop. See the below, FYI.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_environment
I hope it is also seen why stating your system specs up front is helpful.
Best wishes!
Based on lubuntu 11.04, it is focused on Cloud Computing. However, do not let this put you off.
I take out what I do not want (apt-get remove whatever) and add what I want (apt-get -f install whatever).
It is worth checking out!
Alternatively, you may choose to go with Xubuntu 11.04, "Natty Narwhal." Again, the reason I recommend the Desktop Environments LXDE (peppermint) and XFCE (xubuntu) is speed on a laptop. See the below, FYI.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_environment
I hope it is also seen why stating your system specs up front is helpful.
Best wishes!
Ijack said:
So they do. Probably because they know that will work on most any PC whereas 64-bit will only work on certain processors.I don't know of any current desktop PC which doesn't have a 64-bit CPU (there may be some weird ones, but I haven't seen them), but there are a lot of netbooks which can only run 32-bit.
So to answer the original question about 32-bit vs. 64-bit;
Your processor, the Intel Core 2 Duo T9300, is one of Intel's 64-bit processor. So really, to take advantage of the full speed capabilities of your processor, you should use a 64-bit OS. I don't think there's much of a power difference in 32- and 64-bit either, since it's the same processor anyway. And in reference to your question about operating systems, I suggest Linux Mint (http://www.linuxmint.com/). It's an Ubuntu-based distro that is very customizable and, in my opinion, more user-friendly than the default Ubuntu install.
Your processor, the Intel Core 2 Duo T9300, is one of Intel's 64-bit processor. So really, to take advantage of the full speed capabilities of your processor, you should use a 64-bit OS. I don't think there's much of a power difference in 32- and 64-bit either, since it's the same processor anyway. And in reference to your question about operating systems, I suggest Linux Mint (http://www.linuxmint.com/). It's an Ubuntu-based distro that is very customizable and, in my opinion, more user-friendly than the default Ubuntu install.
!
