1. Submitted by Anonymous, Thursday 20th July 2006

I think if you had done a comparison by installing Ubuntu and Xubuntu on a low end (500Mhz) system with 128Mb RAM there would be a staggering difference in performance. I think it is the best (good quality) distro for slower systems. Hardware detection is superior to many others. Try installing to a Transmeta laptop and see how many smaller distros will choke - not so Xubuntu.

2. Submitted by Scott, Friday 21st July 2006

t says "Ubuntu" in GRUB if you have Kubuntu installed too.

There is no need to have Xubuntu and Ubuntu installed separately. The best way to accomplish having both combined is to install Ubuntu first, then "sudo apt-get remove ubuntu-desktop". Then "sudo apt-get install xubuntu desktop".

Voila! You'll have all of Ubuntu, sans "the bulk" and all the components of Xubuntu.

3. Submitted by Alberto Milone, Sunday 23rd July 2006

Nice review. I have only a doubt about the lack of a means of browsing the network.

Ok Linneighborough is not in the repos but I guess you can install "smb4k"?

4. Submitted by Mike, free-bees.co.uk, Sunday 23rd July 2006

In response to #3:

My point was that there was nothing installed by default to browse the network, which would probably be rather offputting to many users.

5. Submitted by Mike, Sunday 23rd July 2006

Nice review. I've also tried three distribution from Ubuntu family recently: Kubuntu, Ubuntu and Xubuntu. Xubuntu looks like a perfect choice for my old and not so powerfull computer. But on the laptop, which has AMD Turion 64 in it and is very fast I like Kubuntu the most. The desktop in Kubuntu seams to be the most powerfull, configurable and polished of all these 3 distributions.