U can't compare ubuntu studio with windows vista... Ubuntu studio is for music making and stuff like that. Windows vista is just for "do the normal thing" if you know wath I mean...
weird... I've got ubuntu studio and windows XP installed on the same machine in different Hard Drives and I can say without a doubt Ubuntu boots up faster for me personally.
BUT sadly I think most people watching this probably already know... can anybody actually tell me what the technical differences are for media, a.k.a.
ha I did a test with your video and my computer smoked both of those and its like 5 years old running Ubuntu Studio woot! but those are still cool laptops!
I think that splash screen slowed down the computer...lol. I think it's too fancy for just booting up, I'd probably disable it or put the standard ubuntut splash to make the PC boot faster. I mean, look at vista, it doesn't even have a slash screen that says "windows Vista", which is really lame, because every OS prior to vista had it, except vista...lol
My Ubuntu Studio boots very fast - that in the video must have lesser hardware than mine perhaps - however, even if it were a few seconds slower, I'd prefer to use US simply because it's stable when recording (I could never get the same stability from Cubase in WinXP or Vista), and I don't have to worry about bloody spyware and viruses etc...
RELAX! Ubuntu is still the better system for most things. linux never had a good boot time. at least with big distros. it really aint fake. fedora with gnome takes about as long on my laptop as windows vista and takes about the same to get a program started. besides. the boot time on most computers is good enough on both anyway, it how it works after it boots that really counts and as i said before, for most applications and purposes Ubuntu and most forms of linux are better.
Am I the only one that doesn't see the importance of these tests... sure it get you to your porn quicker but why so much importance put on boot up time ?
Why don't they have CPU battle or what system can easily hack into the other.
they are both about as easy to hack, with viruses or physically operating it. i might even go as far as saying that vista is more secure because you need to give it permission to do just about everything. one thing is sure though, they are both more secure than mac osx. i only got viruses once and that was when i was stupidly using aol antivirus. on vista or xp after i gave aol the boot i never got one, linux as well, but several emacs at school died because of a virus.
you clearly haven't used linux before. You are virtually immune to virus in linux, because you have to input the root password to change anything that is system crititical. In windows the permission you give are only for programs which weren't sneaky enough to hide themselves well enough from the verification system. harmless one if you ask me. Real virus can get pass that pretty easily.
clearly havn't used linux before? were you listening? I was using fedora for alittle bit, then got suse but the installation disc had an error that prevented me from installing prgrams which i still don't completely understand. i'll admit, i might have been wrong to say that vista is more secure than linux, but donn't say it can easily be done, if viruses were easy or even of moderate difficulty to make for vista i would already have one, i am on the internet alot as well as P2P.
I feel what you're saying. But you have to understand that the internet is not flooded with viruses, one really need to be an idiot to get one with p2p. Not saying that it was easy to bypass security, but it was possible. if not there wouldn't be a need for windows updates, which fixes vulnerabilities every day, and you can see that there are not rare. But the most dangerous thing is the activeX of internet explorer. with that a hacker can even control the rotating speed of your fans...
Set Ubuntu to auto-login and your comparison falls apart. Compare the price of each OS and it makes the boot up time even more pointless of an issue. Rather laughable waste of YouTube bandwidth.
U can't compare ubuntu studio with windows vista... Ubuntu studio is for music making and stuff like that. Windows vista is just for "do the normal thing" if you know wath I mean...
wannie424 2 months ago
name of song please
wannie424 2 months ago
I can't even get Ubuntu Studio to install.
thebighat99 1 year ago
weird... I've got ubuntu studio and windows XP installed on the same machine in different Hard Drives and I can say without a doubt Ubuntu boots up faster for me personally.
BUT sadly I think most people watching this probably already know... can anybody actually tell me what the technical differences are for media, a.k.a.
Why does linux use AUDIO JACK ?
FlamingCuntLips 2 years ago
ha I did a test with your video and my computer smoked both of those and its like 5 years old running Ubuntu Studio woot! but those are still cool laptops!
lewisvz 2 years ago
i don't understand why the linux took so much time. Maybe you haven't told it not to boot all those unecessary processes (bluetooth, DHCP, etc...)
Xbox360Hackerz 2 years ago
that was an older version of ubuntu, the latest version has loads of speedups and boots in about half the time for me as the old one did.
JamesMRaymond 2 years ago
it looks like he had been using it for awhile mine even beet the windows computer running the same OS.
lewisvz 2 years ago
yeah ubuntu studio is a pretty heavy distro and idk if you've installed any extra software or what is running at start by default in each one
aNxello2 2 years ago
I think that splash screen slowed down the computer...lol. I think it's too fancy for just booting up, I'd probably disable it or put the standard ubuntut splash to make the PC boot faster. I mean, look at vista, it doesn't even have a slash screen that says "windows Vista", which is really lame, because every OS prior to vista had it, except vista...lol
regular ubuntu will beat vista though.
joemann797 2 years ago
I don't know about Vista, but I assume that u can shutdown all unnecessary services or startup thingies via mmc just the way u do in XP.
As for ubuntu... same situation i guess, only that it offers 100 times more tweakeable parameters than Vista.
ketamynx 3 years ago
My Ubuntu Studio boots very fast - that in the video must have lesser hardware than mine perhaps - however, even if it were a few seconds slower, I'd prefer to use US simply because it's stable when recording (I could never get the same stability from Cubase in WinXP or Vista), and I don't have to worry about bloody spyware and viruses etc...
dchurch24 3 years ago
lol this is the most depressing shit ive ever seen... rly sad.
this is totaly fake.. ubuntu is MUCH faster than windows vista. its just some stupid non-talking foreign guy trying to make ubuntu look bad (lol)
olelyn 3 years ago
I was intrigued and did my own comparo only to find that the time from power-on to login prompt is pretty much the same for both systems.
imp0cat 3 years ago
RELAX! Ubuntu is still the better system for most things. linux never had a good boot time. at least with big distros. it really aint fake. fedora with gnome takes about as long on my laptop as windows vista and takes about the same to get a program started. besides. the boot time on most computers is good enough on both anyway, it how it works after it boots that really counts and as i said before, for most applications and purposes Ubuntu and most forms of linux are better.
Imprezaman555 3 years ago
Am I the only one that doesn't see the importance of these tests... sure it get you to your porn quicker but why so much importance put on boot up time ?
Why don't they have CPU battle or what system can easily hack into the other.
FlamingCuntLips 3 years ago
they are both about as easy to hack, with viruses or physically operating it. i might even go as far as saying that vista is more secure because you need to give it permission to do just about everything. one thing is sure though, they are both more secure than mac osx. i only got viruses once and that was when i was stupidly using aol antivirus. on vista or xp after i gave aol the boot i never got one, linux as well, but several emacs at school died because of a virus.
Imprezaman555 3 years ago
you clearly haven't used linux before. You are virtually immune to virus in linux, because you have to input the root password to change anything that is system crititical. In windows the permission you give are only for programs which weren't sneaky enough to hide themselves well enough from the verification system. harmless one if you ask me. Real virus can get pass that pretty easily.
pwnZou 3 years ago
clearly havn't used linux before? were you listening? I was using fedora for alittle bit, then got suse but the installation disc had an error that prevented me from installing prgrams which i still don't completely understand. i'll admit, i might have been wrong to say that vista is more secure than linux, but donn't say it can easily be done, if viruses were easy or even of moderate difficulty to make for vista i would already have one, i am on the internet alot as well as P2P.
Imprezaman555 3 years ago
I feel what you're saying. But you have to understand that the internet is not flooded with viruses, one really need to be an idiot to get one with p2p. Not saying that it was easy to bypass security, but it was possible. if not there wouldn't be a need for windows updates, which fixes vulnerabilities every day, and you can see that there are not rare. But the most dangerous thing is the activeX of internet explorer. with that a hacker can even control the rotating speed of your fans...
pwnZou 3 years ago
your ubuntu studio is slower :| ... mine takes very few seconds to go on...
psychodelian 3 years ago
Set Ubuntu to auto-login and your comparison falls apart. Compare the price of each OS and it makes the boot up time even more pointless of an issue. Rather laughable waste of YouTube bandwidth.
guitard00d 3 years ago
Wow, didn't actually expect that.
Katana314 3 years ago
the same happened with me ;)
Midosys242 3 years ago
Apples-to-oranges
Vista was set to auto-login, which isnt very security conscious IMHO.
Set both to require username and password authentication and then re-run your test. They'll have nearly identical boot times.
danscudder 3 years ago 10
@danscudder Then optimize your Linux kernel for your machine, removing non-required drivers from the kernel, then Ubuntu Studio will win.
TheWrinkledCheese 1 year ago
at last... some critic on vista that is actually true
anubis9910 3 years ago