Ubuntu 11.04 (Natty Narwhal)

Post by goldins » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 4:00 PM UTC

gorm wrote: post #67

fingerprinter wrote: post #16

I've had it installed on my main machine since late December. There were some rough patches as things were landing during the beta period, but right now this is easily the best desktop I've ever used. My workflow adapted to some of the additions in Unity so quickly that it was absurd. At this point I could never go back to something without Super+#, Super+w, Super+s and the other keybindings found here: http://askubu…

The background with shortcuts on that link was pretty cool: http://i.imgur.com/cbjs0.png

Post by Rusky » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 4:14 PM UTC

MatthewPhillips wrote: post #89

2mur wrote: post #59

I'm not going back to linux on the desktop until it can sleep my laptop reliably. OSX is so nice for that. Just close the lid and go... I can't imagine working any other way now.

It isn't that sleep works reliable on OSX, it's that sleep works reliably on a Mac . You see, when you buy a Mac you know every feature (including sleep) has been tested thoroughly. When you decide to install an OS on a computer you already own, you put the onus to test on yourself . I don't understand why people continue to make this unfair comparison. If you want a linux computer where sleep just works, by a preins…

Post by technomancy » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 4:24 PM UTC

fingerprinter wrote: post #80

xcallemjudasx wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't having all of these different key bindings pointless when GnomeDO can bring them all up?

Sure, it might be if GnomeDo was installed by default and tweaked to do the same thing. But since it isn't, I would hardly call it "pointless", but rather, awesome.

Post by narrator » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 4:43 PM UTC

ra wrote: post #46

mjs wrote: post #43

I find the description of which image to choose confusing. You need the a 64-bit image to handle processes over 4GB, right? Why is the x86 version recommended for "most machines with Intel/AMD/etc type processors and almost all computers that run Microsoft Windows." (That's from the server description, too.)

No. Memory > 4GB is not a reason to use 64bit. If you want to address > 4GB of RAM on 32bit, install the PAE kernel. I think the meta package is called linux-generic-pae. Use 64bit if you want to run applications that will benefit from it. EDIT: If in doubt, use the 32 bit one as it will give you less friction for general purpose desktop use.

Post by postfuturist » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 5:27 PM UTC

reitzensteinm wrote: post #58

ra wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Memory > 4GB is not a reason to use 64bit. If you want to address > 4GB of RAM on 32bit, install the PAE kernel. I think the meta package is called linux-generic-pae. Use 64bit if you want to run applications that will benefit from it. EDIT: If in doubt, use the 32 bit one as it will give you less friction for general purpose desktop use.

He said processes accessing more than 4 gb, not total memory - aren't individual processes are still limited to 4 gb of memory with PAE?