Ubuntu 11.10 Review: Benchmarked Against Windows 7
Table of contents
- 1. Ubuntu 11.10 'Oneiric Ocelot', Reviewed
- 2. New Kernel, Login, Email, Backup, And More
- 3. CD And USB Installation Guide
- 4. Wubi Installation Guide
- 5. Unity 4.0 Overview
- 6. The Unity Panel
- 7. The Unity Launcher
- 8. The Unity Dash
- 9. Ubuntu Software Center
- 10. Ubuntu One
- 11. uTouch
- 12. Oneiric: The Dreamy
- 13. Oneiric: The Nightmarish
- 14. Test System Setup And Methodology
- 15. Benchmark Results: Start And Stop Times
- 16. Benchmark Results: File Copy Time
- 17. Benchmark Results: Archiving
- 18. Benchmark Results: Multimedia
- 19. Benchmark Results: System
- 20. Benchmark Results: Unigine, AMD And Nvidia
- 21. Benchmark Results: Games, AMD And Nvidia
- 22. Benchmark Analysis: Windows Versus Linux
- 23. The Oneiric Ocelot Awakens
Three months have passed since the latest version of Ubuntu launched. With its classic desktop gone, Oneiric Ocelot is all Unity. The training wheels are off; no turning back now. Is Ubuntu ready for touchscreens? And how does it compare to Windows 7?
Ubuntu 11.10, code-named 'Oneiric Ocelot', launched last October. Although this is the second version of Ubuntu to employ the Unity graphical user interface (GUI), it is the first that does away with the optional GNOME 2 GUI. Unity was developed in-house by Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu. While we welcomed a change from the aging GNOME 2 desktop, Unity was not without its kinks.
How tepid was the reception? According to DistroWatch's page hit ranking, Linux Mint, a Ubuntu-derivative distribution, has surpassed the popularity of Ubuntu for more than 12 months. This is largely attributed to backlash from users unhappy with Unity.
Merriam-Webster's definition oneiric is “of or relating to dreams”. Today, we see whether the first Unity-only version of Ubuntu is a reimagined dream or a nightmare to be avoided.
First, let's get up to speed on the latest Ubuntu-related news.
Between the complaints about Unity and tablet-oriented speculation, Ubuntu has made some serious waves over the past few months. Canonical even had a presence at CES this year, where it announced Ubuntu TV.
More recently, Ubuntu's founder, Mark Shuttleworth, announced yet another extreme departure from standard UI conventions. While we don't care for Unity's Mac OS X-style global menu in place of the standard menu bar, we're not sure this is the solution:
But all of this is in the future, and some of it may never even happen. Remember Ubuntu Light and “windicators”?
So, we're back to a verdict on where Ubuntu stands today. Is Unity any better than it was in Natty? How is touch input progressing? How does this latest distribution perform? We have another dissection of the user interface, and we also go hands-on with Oneiric using a touchscreen tablet. And while we typically benchmark the previous release and most recent LTS our Ubuntu reviews, this time, we're going to hold Ubuntu 11.10 up against its competition: Microsoft Windows.
All of our Linux benchmarks are also Windows benchmarks. So, for the first time, we get to see how Ubuntu compares to Windows 7. As an added bonus, at the request of our readers, we threw an Nvidia-based graphics card into the gaming tests for comparison to AMD's hardware. Before we get to the benchmarks, though, let's take a look at what makes this version of Ubuntu different from 11.04. We have a lot to cover: Wubi, Unity, the Ubuntu Software Center, Ubuntu One, uTouch, and a slew of new default applications all play a part in our review of Ubuntu 11.10.
- ubuntu ,
- oneiric-ocelot ,
- benchmark ,
- review
Perhaps we can now put to bed that tired old meme about AMD/ATI graphics cards and drivers being unsuitable for Linux?
ah, but does it run crysis (and i mean properly, like more than the 1fps most people will get with WINE)....
the answer is that natively, no, it does not, and this is the main problem most people stuck on windows have got - the lack of native support for games, and yes you can argue that linux is free, so if you have windows for games, it costs nothing to have linux aswell, but most people cant be bothered installing a second OS for the relatively limited benefits.
I was wondering how you would pull benchmarks off, exactly because new stuff (games) won't run in Linux. I expected some tool that would simulate Office use (OpenOffice, mind you) or others chores that can be duplicated on both OSes, like, for instance, Browsers.
Rendering speed for browsers, memory usage, are they affected in any way by the OS running behind them? In this regard, at least the browsers would be up to date, like Chrome, Firefox...
If Ubuntu won't run Photoshop, can Windows run GIMP? That could prove interesting too. Or am I too far off the point here, been under a rock or something?
I liked the - 'which is faster' theory of the article - which comes out to be Ubuntu. Which is then instantly dismissed as - well it can't run A or B so why bother?!
I build my own computers and run all sorts of clustering & private cloud stuff - which if I had to pay Windows licenses for I could not afford to. To say that a free operating system performs faster than something which costs a not insignificant amount of money is a thank you and a BIG thumbs up to the Ubuntu mob!
Great article! I'm personally dissapointed only in the linux gaming area...
Besides that, 7 years after realeasing Ubuntu 2005.05, the latest ubuntu UI still feels laggy vs 3 year old Windows' 7... or am i the only one with that feeling?
That plus the daily updates of the software/bloatware i almost never use or see in action AND the subconscious feeling that there is no one common goal in the thousand app devs' minds, is what still keeps me close to the good old glassy hole in my wall...
PS. My Ubuntu server yesterday kicked tha bucket. /boot was full (of old kernels), did the !important! _security_ update... and spend few hours rummaging through the web with a handful of quirky error messages... For humans, thay said...
I personally enjoy using This version, I use it on a 64bit intel dual core desktop and the live cd version on my REALLYYYYYYY old laptop with 512mb DDR ram. Windows 7 Requires at least 1 GB 32 bit and is very resource hungry - Win7 will simply will not work on it. That said i do feel the same as a lot of people that hardly any type of linux is able to run .exe's easily/properly. I found that using a virtualisation product like virtualbox enables you to run windows on ubuntu and run Win programs that way. The handy unity (Windows integrated interface NOT ubuntu interface referred to in article) means you will hardly notice that the programs are actuyally running in virtual machine. Main reason i use this for is Itunes.
Sorry i went on quite a bit lol.
-Ryan