>________________________________ > From: "asmo.koski...@arkki.info" <asmo.koski...@arkki.info> >To: Matt Johnson <johnson...@yahoo.com> >Cc: "edubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com" <edubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com> >Sent: Friday, 7 September 2012, 11:14 >Subject: Re: Desktop choice/performance > > >> What are folks' experiences of running Unity (2d?) versus the fallback >> mode in an LTSP deployment? Have people experienced a performance hit from >> moving from Gnome 2 on 10.04 to Unity 2d on 12.04? Realistically, should >> we expect to be running fallback mode to achieve a similar level of >> performance to our current install? > >I think is is not question about desktop environment (Unity 3D vs. >LXDE/XFCE) but question about thin vs. fat client. You should go for fat >client, if your desktop hardaware can do that. Fat client gives to you the >best desktop performance whatever desktop you are using, even KDE can fly >in fat client.
Hi there, Thanks for taking the time to post the links etc. I will look at the alternative install through ltsp-pnp, but will probably wait for it to hit 12.10. Like David on this list, we use local apps effectively across the 64 clients. I too am suitably impressed and amazed at how slick that is. We plan to branch out into fat clients in this new move to 12.04 as some workstations will handle that admirably. My question really is about desktops - i.e. what people have found in terms of performance moving from 10.04 Gnome 2 to 12.04 Unity 2d using the same clients and server. I guess it doesn't really matter, as if there is a drop in performance, we can use 'fallback' (which I believe is still Gnome?) as described. Thanks all, and thanks for all the hard work to make this such an exciting and impressive option for schools. -- Matt -- edubuntu-users mailing list edubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/edubuntu-users
