Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Colin Law]

On 6 February 2013 23:41, Philip Stubbs  wrote:
> On 6 February 2013 23:05, Gareth France  wrote:
>>
>> To the best of my knowledge I wasn't using Adobe Air at the time. And as
>> for Flash, of course I don't choose how others design their sites.
>
>
> But you can choose what software to run on your computer. Have you tried a
> flash blocker?

+1 for Flashblock addon for Firefox.  With that installed when flash
appears on a page it is not run, but shows a flash icon instead.  If
you click it then the flash is run.

Colin

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 06/02/13 23:41, Philip Stubbs wrote:
On 6 February 2013 23:05, Gareth France > wrote:


To the best of my knowledge I wasn't using Adobe Air at the time.
And as for Flash, of course I don't choose how others design their
sites.


But you can choose what software to run on your computer. Have you 
tried a flash blocker? Or a different browser? Or a different version 
of the flash plugin? If you open the same tabs in Chrome, does it 
behave differently? I seem to remember that Chrome comes with its own 
flash plugin, so may well be worth a try. It could be that the new 
machine hits a bug in the flash plugin that the old machine did not.



--
Philip Stubbs


Yes, I can choose not to use flash in much the same way as I can choose 
to drive my car without wheels! It's an unfortunate fact of life that 
some of the websites I use require it. I can try chrome and see how it goes.
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Colin Law]

On 7 February 2013 09:52, Gareth France  wrote:
> On 06/02/13 23:41, Philip Stubbs wrote:
>
> On 6 February 2013 23:05, Gareth France  wrote:
>>
>> To the best of my knowledge I wasn't using Adobe Air at the time. And as
>> for Flash, of course I don't choose how others design their sites.
>
>
> But you can choose what software to run on your computer. Have you tried a
> flash blocker? Or a different browser? Or a different version of the flash
> plugin? If you open the same tabs in Chrome, does it behave differently? I
> seem to remember that Chrome comes with its own flash plugin, so may well be
> worth a try. It could be that the new machine hits a bug in the flash plugin
> that the old machine did not.
>
>
> --
> Philip Stubbs
>
>
> Yes, I can choose not to use flash in much the same way as I can choose to
> drive my car without wheels! It's an unfortunate fact of life that some of
> the websites I use require it. I can try chrome and see how it goes.

Your first priority is to identify what is causing the problem.  If
you install flashblock then you have the ability to choose when you
use flash.  Initially do not use it at all and see if that cures the
speed issues.  Having identified that flash is the problem (if you do)
then you can decide on the best course of action.

Colin

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Rowan Berkeley]

On 07/02/13 09:52, Gareth France wrote:

On 06/02/13 23:41, Philip Stubbs wrote:

On 6 February 2013 23:05, Gareth France mailto:gareth.fra...@gmail.com>> wrote:

To the best of my knowledge I wasn't using Adobe Air at the time.
And as for Flash, of course I don't choose how others design their
sites.


But you can choose what software to run on your computer. Have you
tried a flash blocker? Or a different browser? Or a different version
of the flash plugin? If you open the same tabs in Chrome, does it
behave differently? I seem to remember that Chrome comes with its own
flash plugin, so may well be worth a try. It could be that the new
machine hits a bug in the flash plugin that the old machine did not.


--
Philip Stubbs



Yes, I can choose not to use flash in much the same way as I can choose
to drive my car without wheels! It's an unfortunate fact of life that
some of the websites I use require it. I can try chrome and see how it goes.


Another good thing about Flashblock is that you can exempt chosen sites 
(eg your blog) fromm blocking. I routinely install Flashblock and 
Adblock Plus every time set up Firefox.


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 10:01, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 09:52, Gareth France  wrote:

On 06/02/13 23:41, Philip Stubbs wrote:

On 6 February 2013 23:05, Gareth France  wrote:

To the best of my knowledge I wasn't using Adobe Air at the time. And as
for Flash, of course I don't choose how others design their sites.


But you can choose what software to run on your computer. Have you tried a
flash blocker? Or a different browser? Or a different version of the flash
plugin? If you open the same tabs in Chrome, does it behave differently? I
seem to remember that Chrome comes with its own flash plugin, so may well be
worth a try. It could be that the new machine hits a bug in the flash plugin
that the old machine did not.


--
Philip Stubbs


Yes, I can choose not to use flash in much the same way as I can choose to
drive my car without wheels! It's an unfortunate fact of life that some of
the websites I use require it. I can try chrome and see how it goes.

Your first priority is to identify what is causing the problem.  If
you install flashblock then you have the ability to choose when you
use flash.  Initially do not use it at all and see if that cures the
speed issues.  Having identified that flash is the problem (if you do)
then you can decide on the best course of action.

Colin


Sounds like a plan. I'll give it a go and see what happens.

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[alan c]

On 07/02/13 10:03, Gareth France wrote:

On 07/02/13 10:01, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 09:52, Gareth France  wrote:

On 06/02/13 23:41, Philip Stubbs wrote:

On 6 February 2013 23:05, Gareth France  wrote:

To the best of my knowledge I wasn't using Adobe Air at the time. And as
for Flash, of course I don't choose how others design their sites.


But you can choose what software to run on your computer. Have you tried a
flash blocker? Or a different browser? Or a different version of the flash
plugin? If you open the same tabs in Chrome, does it behave differently? I
seem to remember that Chrome comes with its own flash plugin, so may well be
worth a try. It could be that the new machine hits a bug in the flash plugin
that the old machine did not.


--
Philip Stubbs


Yes, I can choose not to use flash in much the same way as I can choose to
drive my car without wheels! It's an unfortunate fact of life that some of
the websites I use require it. I can try chrome and see how it goes.

Your first priority is to identify what is causing the problem.  If
you install flashblock then you have the ability to choose when you
use flash.  Initially do not use it at all and see if that cures the
speed issues.  Having identified that flash is the problem (if you do)
then you can decide on the best course of action.

Colin


Sounds like a plan. I'll give it a go and see what happens.


I routinely use noscript in firefox. It gives a lot of control, and 
you can disable it when you wish


--
alan cocks

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 10:14, alan c wrote:

On 07/02/13 10:03, Gareth France wrote:

On 07/02/13 10:01, Colin Law wrote:
On 7 February 2013 09:52, Gareth France  
wrote:

On 06/02/13 23:41, Philip Stubbs wrote:

On 6 February 2013 23:05, Gareth France  
wrote:
To the best of my knowledge I wasn't using Adobe Air at the time. 
And as

for Flash, of course I don't choose how others design their sites.


But you can choose what software to run on your computer. Have you 
tried a
flash blocker? Or a different browser? Or a different version of 
the flash
plugin? If you open the same tabs in Chrome, does it behave 
differently? I
seem to remember that Chrome comes with its own flash plugin, so 
may well be
worth a try. It could be that the new machine hits a bug in the 
flash plugin

that the old machine did not.


--
Philip Stubbs


Yes, I can choose not to use flash in much the same way as I can 
choose to
drive my car without wheels! It's an unfortunate fact of life that 
some of

the websites I use require it. I can try chrome and see how it goes.

Your first priority is to identify what is causing the problem.  If
you install flashblock then you have the ability to choose when you
use flash.  Initially do not use it at all and see if that cures the
speed issues.  Having identified that flash is the problem (if you do)
then you can decide on the best course of action.

Colin


Sounds like a plan. I'll give it a go and see what happens.


I routinely use noscript in firefox. It gives a lot of control, and 
you can disable it when you wish


Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is that aside from 
whatever I may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid £300 for to 
run properly to begin with. None of these solutions address the problem. 
They more sort of side step it. I doubt I'm going to find the problem, 
I'll just have to avoid Packard Bell next time I upgrade.



--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Colin Law]

On 7 February 2013 10:17, Gareth France  wrote:
> On 07/02/13 10:14, alan c wrote:
>>
>> On 07/02/13 10:03, Gareth France wrote:
>>>
>>> On 07/02/13 10:01, Colin Law wrote:

 On 7 February 2013 09:52, Gareth France  wrote:
>
> On 06/02/13 23:41, Philip Stubbs wrote:
>
> On 6 February 2013 23:05, Gareth France 
> wrote:
>>
>> To the best of my knowledge I wasn't using Adobe Air at the time. And
>> as
>> for Flash, of course I don't choose how others design their sites.
>
>
> But you can choose what software to run on your computer. Have you
> tried a
> flash blocker? Or a different browser? Or a different version of the
> flash
> plugin? If you open the same tabs in Chrome, does it behave
> differently? I
> seem to remember that Chrome comes with its own flash plugin, so may
> well be
> worth a try. It could be that the new machine hits a bug in the flash
> plugin
> that the old machine did not.
>
>
> --
> Philip Stubbs
>
>
> Yes, I can choose not to use flash in much the same way as I can choose
> to
> drive my car without wheels! It's an unfortunate fact of life that some
> of
> the websites I use require it. I can try chrome and see how it goes.

 Your first priority is to identify what is causing the problem.  If
 you install flashblock then you have the ability to choose when you
 use flash.  Initially do not use it at all and see if that cures the
 speed issues.  Having identified that flash is the problem (if you do)
 then you can decide on the best course of action.

 Colin

>>> Sounds like a plan. I'll give it a go and see what happens.
>>
>>
>> I routinely use noscript in firefox. It gives a lot of control, and you
>> can disable it when you wish
>>
> Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is that aside from whatever I
> may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid £300 for to run properly
> to begin with. None of these solutions address the problem. They more sort
> of side step it. I doubt I'm going to find the problem, I'll just have to
> avoid Packard Bell next time I upgrade.

I don't think you can blame Packard Bell yet.  If, for example, it
turns out that you are using a buggy or out of date flash plugin (just
one of the possibilities) then that is hardly their fault.  I think it
most unlikely that it is a hardware issue.

Colin

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Simon Greenwood]

On 7 February 2013 10:17, Gareth France  wrote:

> On 07/02/13 10:14, alan c wrote:
>
>> On 07/02/13 10:03, Gareth France wrote:
>>
>>> On 07/02/13 10:01, Colin Law wrote:
>>>
 On 7 February 2013 09:52, Gareth France 
 wrote:

> On 06/02/13 23:41, Philip Stubbs wrote:
>
> On 6 February 2013 23:05, Gareth France 
> wrote:
>
>> To the best of my knowledge I wasn't using Adobe Air at the time. And
>> as
>> for Flash, of course I don't choose how others design their sites.
>>
>
> But you can choose what software to run on your computer. Have you
> tried a
> flash blocker? Or a different browser? Or a different version of the
> flash
> plugin? If you open the same tabs in Chrome, does it behave
> differently? I
> seem to remember that Chrome comes with its own flash plugin, so may
> well be
> worth a try. It could be that the new machine hits a bug in the flash
> plugin
> that the old machine did not.
>
>
> --
> Philip Stubbs
>
>
> Yes, I can choose not to use flash in much the same way as I can
> choose to
> drive my car without wheels! It's an unfortunate fact of life that
> some of
> the websites I use require it. I can try chrome and see how it goes.
>
 Your first priority is to identify what is causing the problem.  If
 you install flashblock then you have the ability to choose when you
 use flash.  Initially do not use it at all and see if that cures the
 speed issues.  Having identified that flash is the problem (if you do)
 then you can decide on the best course of action.

 Colin

  Sounds like a plan. I'll give it a go and see what happens.
>>>
>>
>> I routinely use noscript in firefox. It gives a lot of control, and you
>> can disable it when you wish
>>
>>  Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is that aside from
> whatever I may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid £300 for to
> run properly to begin with. None of these solutions address the problem.
> They more sort of side step it. I doubt I'm going to find the problem, I'll
> just have to avoid Packard Bell next time I upgrade.
>
>
In all honesty, that is the place to start. Packard Bell machines are built
to a price, and it's fairly likely that they need OS-based accelerators to
work properly. I'm not familiar with that processor but there are probably
features that aren't supported by Linux and require Windows-native
software, and the GPU will be integrated and underpowered. I've had similar
problems in the past with more expensive machines and have since learned my
lesson.

s/
-- 
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"TBA are particularly glib"
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Alan Pope]

On 07/02/13 09:52, Gareth France wrote:

Yes, I can choose not to use flash in much the same way as I can choose
to drive my car without wheels! It's an unfortunate fact of life that
some of the websites I use require it. I can try chrome and see how it
goes.



No, you've entirely missed the point. Some sites use flash in a sensible 
way such as youtube and iplayer. Where the primary use of the page is to 
deliver content in the flash player. Other sites use it for purposes 
which are not the primary use. For example tracking your visits or 
presenting adverts on a news website.


Installing flashblock merely inhibits the auto-start nature of flash 
based applications. You can whitelist certain sites/domains (such as 
iplayer and youtube) very easily, whilst leaving flash disabled on sites 
that don't "need" it.


It's a very effective way to prevent flash from eating your CPU.

Cheers,
--
Alan Pope
Engineering Manager

Canonical - Product Strategy
+44 (0) 7973 620 164
alan.p...@canonical.com
http://ubuntu.com/

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

[ubuntu-uk] Running Ubuntu In Live Mode

[Nigel Verity]

Hi
Having got my fingers burnt a couple of times in the past, I now never install 
a new version of Ubuntu, or any other distro, without running it first as a 
live CD or, more recently, from a USB stick.
It seems fairly inevitable that my next laptop will have UEFI embodied. Does 
anybody know how this affects the running of Linux in "live" mode? Is it simply 
that if the distro has been designed to cope with UEFI, its live mode will work 
(and vice versa), or is there more to it than that?
Thanks
Nige  -- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Alan Pope]

On 07/02/13 10:17, Gareth France wrote:

Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is that aside from
whatever I may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid £300 for to
run properly to begin with. None of these solutions address the problem.
They more sort of side step it. I doubt I'm going to find the problem,
I'll just have to avoid Packard Bell next time I upgrade.



The problem is not the computer, the problem is the software you're 
running on the computer.


Cheers,
--
Alan Pope
Engineering Manager

Canonical - Product Strategy
+44 (0) 7973 620 164
alan.p...@canonical.com
http://ubuntu.com/

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Colin Law]

On 7 February 2013 10:31, Simon Greenwood  wrote:
> ..
> On 7 February 2013 10:17, Gareth France  wrote:
> ..
>> Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is that aside from whatever
>> I may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid £300 for to run properly
>> to begin with. None of these solutions address the problem. They more sort
>> of side step it. I doubt I'm going to find the problem, I'll just have to
>> avoid Packard Bell next time I upgrade.
>>
>
> In all honesty, that is the place to start. Packard Bell machines are built
> to a price, and it's fairly likely that they need OS-based accelerators to
> work properly. I'm not familiar with that processor but there are probably
> features that aren't supported by Linux and require Windows-native software,
> and the GPU will be integrated and underpowered. I've had similar problems
> in the past with more expensive machines and have since learned my lesson.

The guy is not talking about just not getting the ultimate out of the
machine, he has problems such as "tonight it ground to a halt, the
hard drive access light went mad and the mouse stopped moving. Then it
moved in jerks and a variety of windows greyed out and came back again
over and over."  That is a software problem of some sort.  Something
is gobbling up his processor or/and his RAM.

Colin

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 10:29, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 10:17, Gareth France  wrote:

On 07/02/13 10:14, alan c wrote:

On 07/02/13 10:03, Gareth France wrote:

On 07/02/13 10:01, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 09:52, Gareth France  wrote:

On 06/02/13 23:41, Philip Stubbs wrote:

On 6 February 2013 23:05, Gareth France 
wrote:

To the best of my knowledge I wasn't using Adobe Air at the time. And
as
for Flash, of course I don't choose how others design their sites.


But you can choose what software to run on your computer. Have you
tried a
flash blocker? Or a different browser? Or a different version of the
flash
plugin? If you open the same tabs in Chrome, does it behave
differently? I
seem to remember that Chrome comes with its own flash plugin, so may
well be
worth a try. It could be that the new machine hits a bug in the flash
plugin
that the old machine did not.


--
Philip Stubbs


Yes, I can choose not to use flash in much the same way as I can choose
to
drive my car without wheels! It's an unfortunate fact of life that some
of
the websites I use require it. I can try chrome and see how it goes.

Your first priority is to identify what is causing the problem.  If
you install flashblock then you have the ability to choose when you
use flash.  Initially do not use it at all and see if that cures the
speed issues.  Having identified that flash is the problem (if you do)
then you can decide on the best course of action.

Colin


Sounds like a plan. I'll give it a go and see what happens.


I routinely use noscript in firefox. It gives a lot of control, and you
can disable it when you wish


Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is that aside from whatever I
may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid £300 for to run properly
to begin with. None of these solutions address the problem. They more sort
of side step it. I doubt I'm going to find the problem, I'll just have to
avoid Packard Bell next time I upgrade.

I don't think you can blame Packard Bell yet.  If, for example, it
turns out that you are using a buggy or out of date flash plugin (just
one of the possibilities) then that is hardly their fault.  I think it
most unlikely that it is a hardware issue.

Colin

This laptop has been under performing from day one. I'd be happy to be 
proven wrong but it just has no guts.


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Running Ubuntu In Live Mode

[Dave Morley]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 07/02/13 10:43, Nigel Verity wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Having got my fingers burnt a couple of times in the past, I now
> never install a new version of Ubuntu, or any other distro, without
> running it first as a live CD or, more recently, from a USB stick.
> 
> It seems fairly inevitable that my next laptop will have UEFI
> embodied. Does anybody know how this affects the running of Linux
> in "live" mode? Is it simply that if the distro has been designed
> to cope with UEFI, its live mode will work (and vice versa), or is
> there more to it than that?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Nige
> 
> 
You will need 12.10 on and the 64bit version is recommended.  Other
than that there are a couple of things you will need to know.

CD/DVD is more reliable than USB key  you can set the cd/dvd drive to
boot first and it will

Uefi has an annoying habit of trying to speed up the boot process this
means it does a quick scan on boot for a UEFI boot device and
preferably a secure boot instance and continues to boot from it
sometimes before the power has been provided to the usb key so it will
skip it all together.

Once you boot from where ever it will work as normal.  You get the
install or run live option and away you go.

- -- 
You make it, I'll break it!

I love my job :)
http://www.ubuntu.com
http://www.canonical.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlETizcACgkQT5xqyT+h3OhQ/ACgnIdH9lX6gwjq/bIDn5gDP61M
43oAn2kDxWDjv+hfUdOq5dgXDY+c2mJ4
=i/tF
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 10:31, Simon Greenwood wrote:




On 7 February 2013 10:17, Gareth France > wrote:


On 07/02/13 10:14, alan c wrote:

On 07/02/13 10:03, Gareth France wrote:

On 07/02/13 10:01, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 09:52, Gareth France
mailto:gareth.fra...@gmail.com>> wrote:

On 06/02/13 23:41, Philip Stubbs wrote:

On 6 February 2013 23:05, Gareth France
mailto:gareth.fra...@gmail.com>> wrote:

To the best of my knowledge I wasn't using
Adobe Air at the time. And as
for Flash, of course I don't choose how others
design their sites.


But you can choose what software to run on your
computer. Have you tried a
flash blocker? Or a different browser? Or a
different version of the flash
plugin? If you open the same tabs in Chrome, does
it behave differently? I
seem to remember that Chrome comes with its own
flash plugin, so may well be
worth a try. It could be that the new machine hits
a bug in the flash plugin
that the old machine did not.


-- 
Philip Stubbs



Yes, I can choose not to use flash in much the
same way as I can choose to
drive my car without wheels! It's an unfortunate
fact of life that some of
the websites I use require it. I can try chrome
and see how it goes.

Your first priority is to identify what is causing the
problem.  If
you install flashblock then you have the ability to
choose when you
use flash.  Initially do not use it at all and see if
that cures the
speed issues.  Having identified that flash is the
problem (if you do)
then you can decide on the best course of action.

Colin

Sounds like a plan. I'll give it a go and see what happens.


I routinely use noscript in firefox. It gives a lot of
control, and you can disable it when you wish

Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is that aside from
whatever I may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid £300
for to run properly to begin with. None of these solutions address
the problem. They more sort of side step it. I doubt I'm going to
find the problem, I'll just have to avoid Packard Bell next time I
upgrade.


In all honesty, that is the place to start. Packard Bell machines are 
built to a price, and it's fairly likely that they need OS-based 
accelerators to work properly. I'm not familiar with that processor 
but there are probably features that aren't supported by Linux and 
require Windows-native software, and the GPU will be integrated and 
underpowered. I've had similar problems in the past with more 
expensive machines and have since learned my lesson.


s/
--
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"TBA are particularly glib"


This laptop was bought on a 'my laptop only has about a week to live, I 
need a new machine and can't afford to be choosy' basis. I have since 
discovered that a friend as a 99% identical Acer machine. The only 
changes are cosmetic to the casing. She runs Windows 7 on it and has no 
issues so I think you're almost certainly right.


-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Simon Greenwood]

On 7 February 2013 10:43, Colin Law  wrote:

> On 7 February 2013 10:31, Simon Greenwood  wrote:
> > ..
> > On 7 February 2013 10:17, Gareth France  wrote:
> > ..
> >> Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is that aside from
> whatever
> >> I may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid £300 for to run
> properly
> >> to begin with. None of these solutions address the problem. They more
> sort
> >> of side step it. I doubt I'm going to find the problem, I'll just have
> to
> >> avoid Packard Bell next time I upgrade.
> >>
> >
> > In all honesty, that is the place to start. Packard Bell machines are
> built
> > to a price, and it's fairly likely that they need OS-based accelerators
> to
> > work properly. I'm not familiar with that processor but there are
> probably
> > features that aren't supported by Linux and require Windows-native
> software,
> > and the GPU will be integrated and underpowered. I've had similar
> problems
> > in the past with more expensive machines and have since learned my
> lesson.
>
> The guy is not talking about just not getting the ultimate out of the
> machine, he has problems such as "tonight it ground to a halt, the
> hard drive access light went mad and the mouse stopped moving. Then it
> moved in jerks and a variety of windows greyed out and came back again
> over and over."  That is a software problem of some sort.  Something
> is gobbling up his processor or/and his RAM.
>
>
Yes, I agree, and as previously described, I have seen exactly this
problem, and on what would seem to be a more powerful machine. In the first
instance, disable Flash and see if that stops or reduces the CPU load. In
my experience it will. However, it doesn't solve the problem, and this is
where I came to a halt with trying to analyse it. It is likely to be a
combination of the Flash plugin, Compiz and the physical hardware, possibly
one that hasn't been identified before, so to get some progress, it needs
to be documented.

However, I believe my point still stands: for all the work done to maximise
compatibility, there are always going to be machines that don't play for
less obvious reasons, especially at the low cost end of the market, and the
rule still should be that if you want to use a Linux desktop of any kind do
a little bit of homework. There is the official compatibility wiki but if
you get the model number of any laptop and put it into Google, someone will
have attempted to run Linux on it and reported on it.

s/
-- 
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"TBA are particularly glib"
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 10:43, Alan Pope wrote:

On 07/02/13 10:17, Gareth France wrote:

Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is that aside from
whatever I may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid £300 for to
run properly to begin with. None of these solutions address the problem.
They more sort of side step it. I doubt I'm going to find the problem,
I'll just have to avoid Packard Bell next time I upgrade.



The problem is not the computer, the problem is the software you're 
running on the computer.


Cheers,
Without a doubt Alan. But I continue to be amazed by Ubuntu's ability to 
boot up on any given machine and out of the box you've got touchscreen, 
wireless, sound, printers all set up and working. If I had this 
situation back in 2005 when I was on Windows it would just be another 
day in the office. Nothing works on Windows without banging your head on 
the screen for a while, we know this. But I've gotten used to not having 
to worry about this sort of thing so often these days.


In the ideal world Linux should be able to identify whatever it is that 
makes my machine crummy and deal with it. But it sounds like nobody at 
the top of the chain has pinned this one down. I'd actually love one of 
you guys to have a peek at what's going on when this thing is under 
moderate load, perhaps you would spot something I'm missing.


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Screencast a presentation with Impress and webcam

[James Morrissey]

Hi all,

Having asked this question, i thought i'd just provide an account of how i
solved this in case anyone finds it useful.

In the end used a friend's Nikon camera with video capabilities and
captured a video of me giving the talk - i opted for the camera because my
webcam was too grainy although i could have done it using guvcview. I then
used ffmpeg to capture a screen cast of the impress presentation, running
in full screen mode on another workspace/ To do this i used the audio from
the Nikon video for the audio prompts so i knew when to do things like
start slide animations and change slides.

ffmpeg command:

ffmpeg -f x11grab -r 30 -s 1360x768 -i :0.0 -vcodec huffyuv -sameq
screencast.avi

I initially tried to generate the picture in picture effect using kdenlive (
http://www.kdenlive.org/tutorial/kdenlive-picture-picture-transition), but
was having rendering problems. I heard that this was a well known problem
and that a solution was to make your project in kdenlive and export it to
OpenShot, where you could then render it. Doing that i found out that open
shot also had picture in picture capabilities (
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oZwOVoYsUI), and so i actually ended up
doing the whole project in that.

I even went so far as to add some effects, to change the size of the one
picture in the other at different points in the talk. This was done, by
splitting a clip and altering the size of the image at the start and the
end of the clip.

It was all a bit of a fiddle but it worked out in the end. Conference
happened last night in Australia and the video went off without a hitch.

Thanks for all the advice that different people gave me.

All the best,

James.


www.peliteracy.org
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Running Ubuntu In Live Mode

[Colin Law]

On 7 February 2013 11:08, Dave Morley  wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 07/02/13 10:43, Nigel Verity wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Having got my fingers burnt a couple of times in the past, I now
>> never install a new version of Ubuntu, or any other distro, without
>> running it first as a live CD or, more recently, from a USB stick.
>>
>> It seems fairly inevitable that my next laptop will have UEFI
>> embodied. Does anybody know how this affects the running of Linux
>> in "live" mode? Is it simply that if the distro has been designed
>> to cope with UEFI, its live mode will work (and vice versa), or is
>> there more to it than that?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Nige
>>
>>
> You will need 12.10 on and the 64bit version is recommended.  Other
> than that there are a couple of things you will need to know.
>
> CD/DVD is more reliable than USB key  you can set the cd/dvd drive to
> boot first and it will

I thought I had read that, at least on some machines, only USB would
work with UEFI.  Also it /must/ be the 64 bit version of ubuntu 12.10.

Colin

>
> Uefi has an annoying habit of trying to speed up the boot process this
> means it does a quick scan on boot for a UEFI boot device and
> preferably a secure boot instance and continues to boot from it
> sometimes before the power has been provided to the usb key so it will
> skip it all together.
>
> Once you boot from where ever it will work as normal.  You get the
> install or run live option and away you go.
>
> - --
> You make it, I'll break it!
>
> I love my job :)
> http://www.ubuntu.com
> http://www.canonical.com
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlETizcACgkQT5xqyT+h3OhQ/ACgnIdH9lX6gwjq/bIDn5gDP61M
> 43oAn2kDxWDjv+hfUdOq5dgXDY+c2mJ4
> =i/tF
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
> --
> ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 11:11, Simon Greenwood wrote:




On 7 February 2013 10:43, Colin Law > wrote:


On 7 February 2013 10:31, Simon Greenwood mailto:sfgreenw...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> ..
> On 7 February 2013 10:17, Gareth France mailto:gareth.fra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> ..
>> Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is that aside
from whatever
>> I may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid £300 for to
run properly
>> to begin with. None of these solutions address the problem.
They more sort
>> of side step it. I doubt I'm going to find the problem, I'll
just have to
>> avoid Packard Bell next time I upgrade.
>>
>
> In all honesty, that is the place to start. Packard Bell
machines are built
> to a price, and it's fairly likely that they need OS-based
accelerators to
> work properly. I'm not familiar with that processor but there
are probably
> features that aren't supported by Linux and require
Windows-native software,
> and the GPU will be integrated and underpowered. I've had
similar problems
> in the past with more expensive machines and have since learned
my lesson.

The guy is not talking about just not getting the ultimate out of the
machine, he has problems such as "tonight it ground to a halt, the
hard drive access light went mad and the mouse stopped moving. Then it
moved in jerks and a variety of windows greyed out and came back again
over and over."  That is a software problem of some sort.  Something
is gobbling up his processor or/and his RAM.


Yes, I agree, and as previously described, I have seen exactly this 
problem, and on what would seem to be a more powerful machine. In the 
first instance, disable Flash and see if that stops or reduces the CPU 
load. In my experience it will. However, it doesn't solve the problem, 
and this is where I came to a halt with trying to analyse it. It is 
likely to be a combination of the Flash plugin, Compiz and the 
physical hardware, possibly one that hasn't been identified before, so 
to get some progress, it needs to be documented.


However, I believe my point still stands: for all the work done to 
maximise compatibility, there are always going to be machines that 
don't play for less obvious reasons, especially at the low cost end of 
the market, and the rule still should be that if you want to use a 
Linux desktop of any kind do a little bit of homework. There is the 
official compatibility wiki but if you get the model number of any 
laptop and put it into Google, someone will have attempted to run 
Linux on it and reported on it.


s/
--
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"TBA are particularly glib"


Just to update everyone flash blocker didn't manage 5 minutes before 
both Firefox and system monitor  greyed out simply because I tried to 
close the monitor. As I'm typing this email Thunderbird keeps greying 
out and the text appears on the screen up to 45 seconds after I typed 
it. (So apologies for any spelling mistakes.) Rhythmbox is playing, well 
stuttering. That seems to be the biggest problem, I have noticed flash 
can be a drain but any media playing and it greatly increases the chance 
that the system will halt.
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Simon Greenwood]

On 7 February 2013 11:52, Gareth France  wrote:

>  On 07/02/13 11:11, Simon Greenwood wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On 7 February 2013 10:43, Colin Law  wrote:
>
>> On 7 February 2013 10:31, Simon Greenwood  wrote:
>> > ..
>> > On 7 February 2013 10:17, Gareth France 
>> wrote:
>>  > ..
>> >> Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is that aside from
>> whatever
>> >> I may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid £300 for to run
>> properly
>> >> to begin with. None of these solutions address the problem. They more
>> sort
>> >> of side step it. I doubt I'm going to find the problem, I'll just have
>> to
>> >> avoid Packard Bell next time I upgrade.
>> >>
>> >
>> > In all honesty, that is the place to start. Packard Bell machines are
>> built
>> > to a price, and it's fairly likely that they need OS-based accelerators
>> to
>> > work properly. I'm not familiar with that processor but there are
>> probably
>> > features that aren't supported by Linux and require Windows-native
>> software,
>> > and the GPU will be integrated and underpowered. I've had similar
>> problems
>> > in the past with more expensive machines and have since learned my
>> lesson.
>>
>>  The guy is not talking about just not getting the ultimate out of the
>> machine, he has problems such as "tonight it ground to a halt, the
>> hard drive access light went mad and the mouse stopped moving. Then it
>> moved in jerks and a variety of windows greyed out and came back again
>>  over and over."  That is a software problem of some sort.  Something
>> is gobbling up his processor or/and his RAM.
>>
>>
>  Yes, I agree, and as previously described, I have seen exactly this
> problem, and on what would seem to be a more powerful machine. In the first
> instance, disable Flash and see if that stops or reduces the CPU load. In
> my experience it will. However, it doesn't solve the problem, and this is
> where I came to a halt with trying to analyse it. It is likely to be a
> combination of the Flash plugin, Compiz and the physical hardware, possibly
> one that hasn't been identified before, so to get some progress, it needs
> to be documented.
>
>  However, I believe my point still stands: for all the work done to
> maximise compatibility, there are always going to be machines that don't
> play for less obvious reasons, especially at the low cost end of the
> market, and the rule still should be that if you want to use a Linux
> desktop of any kind do a little bit of homework. There is the official
> compatibility wiki but if you get the model number of any laptop and put it
> into Google, someone will have attempted to run Linux on it and reported on
> it.
>
>  s/
>  --
> Twitter: @sfgreenwood
> "TBA are particularly glib"
>
>
>  Just to update everyone flash blocker didn't manage 5 minutes before both
> Firefox and system monitor  greyed out simply because I tried to close the
> monitor. As I'm typing this email Thunderbird keeps greying out and the
> text appears on the screen up to 45 seconds after I typed it. (So apologies
> for any spelling mistakes.) Rhythmbox is playing, well stuttering. That
> seems to be the biggest problem, I have noticed flash can be a drain but
> any media playing and it greatly increases the chance that the system will
> halt.
>
>
Try starting Firefox and Thunderbird in safe mode. It's Help > Restart with
addons disabled in both, and see how if that improves things.

s/
-- 
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"TBA are particularly glib"
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 11:57, Simon Greenwood wrote:




On 7 February 2013 11:52, Gareth France > wrote:


On 07/02/13 11:11, Simon Greenwood wrote:




On 7 February 2013 10:43, Colin Law mailto:clan...@googlemail.com>> wrote:

On 7 February 2013 10:31, Simon Greenwood
mailto:sfgreenw...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> ..
> On 7 February 2013 10:17, Gareth France
mailto:gareth.fra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> ..
>> Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is that
aside from whatever
>> I may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid £300
for to run properly
>> to begin with. None of these solutions address the
problem. They more sort
>> of side step it. I doubt I'm going to find the problem,
I'll just have to
>> avoid Packard Bell next time I upgrade.
>>
>
> In all honesty, that is the place to start. Packard Bell
machines are built
> to a price, and it's fairly likely that they need OS-based
accelerators to
> work properly. I'm not familiar with that processor but
there are probably
> features that aren't supported by Linux and require
Windows-native software,
> and the GPU will be integrated and underpowered. I've had
similar problems
> in the past with more expensive machines and have since
learned my lesson.

The guy is not talking about just not getting the ultimate
out of the
machine, he has problems such as "tonight it ground to a
halt, the
hard drive access light went mad and the mouse stopped
moving. Then it
moved in jerks and a variety of windows greyed out and came
back again
over and over."  That is a software problem of some sort.
 Something
is gobbling up his processor or/and his RAM.


Yes, I agree, and as previously described, I have seen exactly
this problem, and on what would seem to be a more powerful
machine. In the first instance, disable Flash and see if that
stops or reduces the CPU load. In my experience it will. However,
it doesn't solve the problem, and this is where I came to a halt
with trying to analyse it. It is likely to be a combination of
the Flash plugin, Compiz and the physical hardware, possibly one
that hasn't been identified before, so to get some progress, it
needs to be documented.

However, I believe my point still stands: for all the work done
to maximise compatibility, there are always going to be machines
that don't play for less obvious reasons, especially at the low
cost end of the market, and the rule still should be that if you
want to use a Linux desktop of any kind do a little bit of
homework. There is the official compatibility wiki but if you get
the model number of any laptop and put it into Google, someone
will have attempted to run Linux on it and reported on it.

s/
-- 
Twitter: @sfgreenwood

"TBA are particularly glib"



Just to update everyone flash blocker didn't manage 5 minutes
before both Firefox and system monitor  greyed out simply because
I tried to close the monitor. As I'm typing this email Thunderbird
keeps greying out and the text appears on the screen up to 45
seconds after I typed it. (So apologies for any spelling
mistakes.) Rhythmbox is playing, well stuttering. That seems to be
the biggest problem, I have noticed flash can be a drain but any
media playing and it greatly increases the chance that the system
will halt.


Try starting Firefox and Thunderbird in safe mode. It's Help > Restart 
with addons disabled in both, and see how if that improves things.


s/
--
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"TBA are particularly glib"


I've switched to chromium to see what difference that makes. I'll try 
restarting thunderbird and see what happens
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Simon Greenwood]

On 7 February 2013 11:59, Gareth France  wrote:

>  On 07/02/13 11:57, Simon Greenwood wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On 7 February 2013 11:52, Gareth France  wrote:
>
>>   On 07/02/13 11:11, Simon Greenwood wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7 February 2013 10:43, Colin Law  wrote:
>>
>>> On 7 February 2013 10:31, Simon Greenwood  wrote:
>>> > ..
>>> > On 7 February 2013 10:17, Gareth France 
>>> wrote:
>>>  > ..
>>> >> Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is that aside from
>>> whatever
>>> >> I may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid £300 for to run
>>> properly
>>> >> to begin with. None of these solutions address the problem. They more
>>> sort
>>> >> of side step it. I doubt I'm going to find the problem, I'll just
>>> have to
>>> >> avoid Packard Bell next time I upgrade.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > In all honesty, that is the place to start. Packard Bell machines are
>>> built
>>> > to a price, and it's fairly likely that they need OS-based
>>> accelerators to
>>> > work properly. I'm not familiar with that processor but there are
>>> probably
>>> > features that aren't supported by Linux and require Windows-native
>>> software,
>>> > and the GPU will be integrated and underpowered. I've had similar
>>> problems
>>> > in the past with more expensive machines and have since learned my
>>> lesson.
>>>
>>>  The guy is not talking about just not getting the ultimate out of the
>>> machine, he has problems such as "tonight it ground to a halt, the
>>> hard drive access light went mad and the mouse stopped moving. Then it
>>> moved in jerks and a variety of windows greyed out and came back again
>>>  over and over."  That is a software problem of some sort.  Something
>>> is gobbling up his processor or/and his RAM.
>>>
>>>
>>  Yes, I agree, and as previously described, I have seen exactly this
>> problem, and on what would seem to be a more powerful machine. In the first
>> instance, disable Flash and see if that stops or reduces the CPU load. In
>> my experience it will. However, it doesn't solve the problem, and this is
>> where I came to a halt with trying to analyse it. It is likely to be a
>> combination of the Flash plugin, Compiz and the physical hardware, possibly
>> one that hasn't been identified before, so to get some progress, it needs
>> to be documented.
>>
>>  However, I believe my point still stands: for all the work done to
>> maximise compatibility, there are always going to be machines that don't
>> play for less obvious reasons, especially at the low cost end of the
>> market, and the rule still should be that if you want to use a Linux
>> desktop of any kind do a little bit of homework. There is the official
>> compatibility wiki but if you get the model number of any laptop and put it
>> into Google, someone will have attempted to run Linux on it and reported on
>> it.
>>
>>  s/
>>  --
>> Twitter: @sfgreenwood
>> "TBA are particularly glib"
>>
>>
>>   Just to update everyone flash blocker didn't manage 5 minutes before
>> both Firefox and system monitor  greyed out simply because I tried to close
>> the monitor. As I'm typing this email Thunderbird keeps greying out and the
>> text appears on the screen up to 45 seconds after I typed it. (So apologies
>> for any spelling mistakes.) Rhythmbox is playing, well stuttering. That
>> seems to be the biggest problem, I have noticed flash can be a drain but
>> any media playing and it greatly increases the chance that the system will
>> halt.
>>
>>
>  Try starting Firefox and Thunderbird in safe mode. It's Help > Restart
> with addons disabled in both, and see how if that improves things.
>
>  s/
>  --
> Twitter: @sfgreenwood
> "TBA are particularly glib"
>
>
>  I've switched to chromium to see what difference that makes. I'll try
> restarting thunderbird and see what happens
>
>
Chrome does perform a lot better, and I've actually switched to Opera as an
email client as recent versions of Thunderbird have just plain struggled
especially when starting up.

s/
-- 
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"TBA are particularly glib"
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 12:02, Simon Greenwood wrote:




On 7 February 2013 11:59, Gareth France > wrote:


On 07/02/13 11:57, Simon Greenwood wrote:




On 7 February 2013 11:52, Gareth France mailto:gareth.fra...@gmail.com>> wrote:

On 07/02/13 11:11, Simon Greenwood wrote:




On 7 February 2013 10:43, Colin Law mailto:clan...@googlemail.com>> wrote:

On 7 February 2013 10:31, Simon Greenwood
mailto:sfgreenw...@gmail.com>>
wrote:
> ..
> On 7 February 2013 10:17, Gareth France
mailto:gareth.fra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> ..
>> Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is
that aside from whatever
>> I may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid
£300 for to run properly
>> to begin with. None of these solutions address the
problem. They more sort
>> of side step it. I doubt I'm going to find the
problem, I'll just have to
>> avoid Packard Bell next time I upgrade.
>>
>
> In all honesty, that is the place to start. Packard
Bell machines are built
> to a price, and it's fairly likely that they need
OS-based accelerators to
> work properly. I'm not familiar with that processor
but there are probably
> features that aren't supported by Linux and require
Windows-native software,
> and the GPU will be integrated and underpowered. I've
had similar problems
> in the past with more expensive machines and have
since learned my lesson.

The guy is not talking about just not getting the
ultimate out of the
machine, he has problems such as "tonight it ground to a
halt, the
hard drive access light went mad and the mouse stopped
moving. Then it
moved in jerks and a variety of windows greyed out and
came back again
over and over."  That is a software problem of some
sort.  Something
is gobbling up his processor or/and his RAM.


Yes, I agree, and as previously described, I have seen
exactly this problem, and on what would seem to be a more
powerful machine. In the first instance, disable Flash and
see if that stops or reduces the CPU load. In my experience
it will. However, it doesn't solve the problem, and this is
where I came to a halt with trying to analyse it. It is
likely to be a combination of the Flash plugin, Compiz and
the physical hardware, possibly one that hasn't been
identified before, so to get some progress, it needs to be
documented.

However, I believe my point still stands: for all the work
done to maximise compatibility, there are always going to be
machines that don't play for less obvious reasons,
especially at the low cost end of the market, and the rule
still should be that if you want to use a Linux desktop of
any kind do a little bit of homework. There is the official
compatibility wiki but if you get the model number of any
laptop and put it into Google, someone will have attempted
to run Linux on it and reported on it.

s/
-- 
Twitter: @sfgreenwood

"TBA are particularly glib"



Just to update everyone flash blocker didn't manage 5 minutes
before both Firefox and system monitor  greyed out simply
because I tried to close the monitor. As I'm typing this
email Thunderbird keeps greying out and the text appears on
the screen up to 45 seconds after I typed it. (So apologies
for any spelling mistakes.) Rhythmbox is playing, well
stuttering. That seems to be the biggest problem, I have
noticed flash can be a drain but any media playing and it
greatly increases the chance that the system will halt.


Try starting Firefox and Thunderbird in safe mode. It's Help >
Restart with addons disabled in both, and see how if that
improves things.

s/
-- 
Twitter: @sfgreenwood

"TBA are particularly glib"



I've switched to chromium to see what difference that makes. I'll
try restarting thunderbird and see what happens


Chrome does perform a lot better, and I've actually switched to Opera 
as an email client as recent versions of Thunderbird have just plain 
struggled especially when starting up.


s/
--
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"TBA are particularly glib"


I don't like switching too often to be honest. I've only just got things 
how I want them! Can opera receive RSS feeds? I have two linked to my 
supplier that tell me when products go in and out of stock, From my 
perspective I get an ema

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Colin Law]

On 7 February 2013 11:59, Gareth France  wrote:
> ...
> I've switched to chromium to see what difference that makes. I'll try
> restarting thunderbird and see what happens

When it is running slow is it using Swap memory?  You can see that
using System Monitor or top in a terminal.  I ask because earlier I
think you said the disk light was going mad, which is a symptom of
swapping.  With 4GB of RAM it should not need to swap.

Colin

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 12:08, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 11:59, Gareth France  wrote:

...
I've switched to chromium to see what difference that makes. I'll try
restarting thunderbird and see what happens

When it is running slow is it using Swap memory?  You can see that
using System Monitor or top in a terminal.  I ask because earlier I
think you said the disk light was going mad, which is a symptom of
swapping.  With 4GB of RAM it should not need to swap.

Colin

The problem I've got is that when it starts to run slow I'm not able to 
call up a terminal or the system monitor. I was very lucky to get the 
screenshots I did. I'll try to keep an eye on it and see if I can catch 
it mid spasm next time.


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[James Tait]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 07/02/13 12:08, Colin Law wrote:
> On 7 February 2013 11:59, Gareth France 
> wrote:
>> ... I've switched to chromium to see what difference that makes.
>> I'll try restarting thunderbird and see what happens
> 
> When it is running slow is it using Swap memory?  You can see that 
> using System Monitor or top in a terminal.  I ask because earlier
> I think you said the disk light was going mad, which is a symptom
> of swapping.  With 4GB of RAM it should not need to swap.

This sounds bang on the money to me and mirrors my own experience.
Firefox and Thunderbird use up quite a lot of RAM, but my laptop has
6GB and I still have the same problem periodically.  I haven't yet
managed to narrow it down, though, so I've been unable to offer any
useful information.

JT
- -- 
- ---+
James Tait, BSc|xmpp:jayte...@wyrddreams.org
Programmer and Free Software advocate  |Tel: +44 (0)870 490 2407
- ---+

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlETn9cACgkQyDo4xMNTLiZeigCfbqjEfu6d4XB38FgMkatOEhcW
JVIAmwTJbbEf8TWSR3pMYvMFqDxEvxkn
=vIWd
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Simon Greenwood]

On 7 February 2013 12:06, Gareth France  wrote:

>  On 07/02/13 12:02, Simon Greenwood wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>  I don't like switching too often to be honest. I've only just got things
> how I want them! Can opera receive RSS feeds? I have two linked to my
> supplier that tell me when products go in and out of stock, From my
> perspective I get an email every time they send out an entry on the feeds.
>
>
It does, it pretty much feature matches Thunderbird out of the box.
However, as you say, it's a pain to change and we should be able to get to
the bottom of the problems that you're seeing.

s/

-- 
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"TBA are particularly glib"
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 12:37, Simon Greenwood wrote:




On 7 February 2013 12:06, Gareth France > wrote:


On 07/02/13 12:02, Simon Greenwood wrote:






I don't like switching too often to be honest. I've only just got
things how I want them! Can opera receive RSS feeds? I have two
linked to my supplier that tell me when products go in and out of
stock, From my perspective I get an email every time they send out
an entry on the feeds.


It does, it pretty much feature matches Thunderbird out of the box. 
However, as you say, it's a pain to change and we should be able to 
get to the bottom of the problems that you're seeing.


s/

--
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"TBA are particularly glib"


It does seem to be behaving better with chromium and thunderbird 
extensions disabled but it's early days yet.
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 12:08, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 11:59, Gareth France  wrote:

...
I've switched to chromium to see what difference that makes. I'll try
restarting thunderbird and see what happens

When it is running slow is it using Swap memory?  You can see that
using System Monitor or top in a terminal.  I ask because earlier I
think you said the disk light was going mad, which is a symptom of
swapping.  With 4GB of RAM it should not need to swap.

Colin


I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right now!
Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Colin Law]

On 7 February 2013 12:21, Gareth France  wrote:
> On 07/02/13 12:08, Colin Law wrote:
>>
>> On 7 February 2013 11:59, Gareth France  wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>> I've switched to chromium to see what difference that makes. I'll try
>>> restarting thunderbird and see what happens
>>
>> When it is running slow is it using Swap memory?  You can see that
>> using System Monitor or top in a terminal.  I ask because earlier I
>> think you said the disk light was going mad, which is a symptom of
>> swapping.  With 4GB of RAM it should not need to swap.
>>
>> Colin
>>
> The problem I've got is that when it starts to run slow I'm not able to call
> up a terminal or the system monitor. I was very lucky to get the screenshots
> I did. I'll try to keep an eye on it and see if I can catch it mid spasm
> next time.

Start top running in a terminal and leave it running.  If you can keep
the top few lines visible at the bottom of the screen then even
better.

Colin

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[James Tait]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 07/02/13 13:12, Colin Law wrote:
> On 7 February 2013 12:21, Gareth France 
> wrote: Start top running in a terminal and leave it running.  If
> you can keep the top few lines visible at the bottom of the screen
> then even better.

Or, and I realise this means running another process on a system
that's already struggling, maybe give conky a try:

  apt://conky-std
  https://help.ubuntu.com/community/SettingUpConky

JT
- -- 
- ---+
James Tait, BSc|xmpp:jayte...@wyrddreams.org
Programmer and Free Software advocate  |Tel: +44 (0)870 490 2407
- ---+

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlETtLoACgkQyDo4xMNTLib/OwCcDZNr0Z7J///yDiYKRlFefzkq
bdYAoPVbjCg+9p+1zqHEP9Z1fDnDu6et
=mVCr
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Alan Pope]

On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:

I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right now!
Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used



Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.

Using swap just means there's a chunk of space on disk which is set 
aside to swap stuff into, or stuff has been swapped into it.


Swapping is the act of throwing stuff out to disk or pulling stuff in. 
Intensive swapping will slow the machine down and cause things to become 
very sluggish.


I would open a terminal (as others have suggested) and have it running 
"vmstat 5" which will print a line every 5 seconds like this:-


rocs ---memory-- ---swap-- -io -system-- cpu
 r  b   swpd   free   buff  cache   si   sobibo   in   cs us sy 
id wa
 1  0 894156 2244868  50860 16368166   12   94566   60  164 23 
 5 72  0
 0  0 894152 2242432  50876 163712060 639 1047 3910 11 
 2 87  0
 2  0 894148 2247616  50884 163718400 635  980 3671  9 
 2 88  0
 0  0 894148 2247588  50900 163718400 065  939 3379  8 
 2 90  0
 0  0 894148 2247260  50908 163690800 012  834 3111  7 
 2 91  0
 0  0 894148 2185816  50928 169877600 0   147 1093 4012 11 
 2 88  0




Ignore the first line, but when things go bad you'll see the numbers 
change. The "si" and "so" columns indicate swapping, if they're 
repeatedly non-zero then you're doing some swapping. "bi" and "bo" can 
mean just general disk IO (like the normal stuff applications do). "us" 
is cpu time spent running applications and "sy" is system time. You may 
also see high "cs" (context switches) as the processor is under load, 
flipping between one task and another, and rarely getting any real work 
done.


vmstat and top are very good for diagnosing this stuff, don't bother 
with gui tools, they just make it worse :)


Cheers,
--
Alan Pope
Engineering Manager

Canonical - Product Strategy
+44 (0) 7973 620 164
alan.p...@canonical.com
http://ubuntu.com/

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 14:18, Alan Pope wrote:

On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:

I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right now!
Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used



Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.

Using swap just means there's a chunk of space on disk which is set 
aside to swap stuff into, or stuff has been swapped into it.


Swapping is the act of throwing stuff out to disk or pulling stuff in. 
Intensive swapping will slow the machine down and cause things to 
become very sluggish.


I would open a terminal (as others have suggested) and have it running 
"vmstat 5" which will print a line every 5 seconds like this:-


rocs ---memory-- ---swap-- -io -system-- 
cpu
 r  b   swpd   free   buff  cache   si   sobibo   in   cs us 
sy id wa
 1  0 894156 2244868  50860 16368166   12   94566   60 164 23 
 5 72  0
 0  0 894152 2242432  50876 163712060 639 1047 3910 11 
 2 87  0
 2  0 894148 2247616  50884 163718400 635  980 3671  9 
 2 88  0
 0  0 894148 2247588  50900 163718400 065  939 3379  8 
 2 90  0
 0  0 894148 2247260  50908 163690800 012  834 3111  7 
 2 91  0
 0  0 894148 2185816  50928 169877600 0   147 1093 4012 11 
 2 88  0




Ignore the first line, but when things go bad you'll see the numbers 
change. The "si" and "so" columns indicate swapping, if they're 
repeatedly non-zero then you're doing some swapping. "bi" and "bo" can 
mean just general disk IO (like the normal stuff applications do). 
"us" is cpu time spent running applications and "sy" is system time. 
You may also see high "cs" (context switches) as the processor is 
under load, flipping between one task and another, and rarely getting 
any real work done.


vmstat and top are very good for diagnosing this stuff, don't bother 
with gui tools, they just make it worse :)


Cheers,
I can see just by using system monitor that there is no current swap 
activity. I'm waiting for it's next attack so I can see what's going on. 
If nothing happens in the next day or two I'll restart thunderbird with 
the extensions and then if still nothing I'll go back to firefox. I want 
to take things one step at a time to see if I can isolate what's causing it.


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Colin Law]

On 7 February 2013 14:18, Alan Pope  wrote:
> On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:
>>
>> I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right now!
>> Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
>> Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used
>>
>
> Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.

It is unusual though to see half a gig in swap when less than half of
the RAM is is use, is it not?  For example mine has been on all day
and is still showing zero swap (I have 4GB RAM).  Does it not mean
that at some point something has been using a lot?

Colin

>
> Using swap just means there's a chunk of space on disk which is set aside to
> swap stuff into, or stuff has been swapped into it.
>
> Swapping is the act of throwing stuff out to disk or pulling stuff in.
> Intensive swapping will slow the machine down and cause things to become
> very sluggish.
>
> I would open a terminal (as others have suggested) and have it running
> "vmstat 5" which will print a line every 5 seconds like this:-
>
> rocs ---memory-- ---swap-- -io -system-- cpu
>  r  b   swpd   free   buff  cache   si   sobibo   in   cs us sy id
> wa
>  1  0 894156 2244868  50860 16368166   12   94566   60  164 23  5 72
> 0
>  0  0 894152 2242432  50876 163712060 639 1047 3910 11  2 87
> 0
>  2  0 894148 2247616  50884 163718400 635  980 3671  9  2 88
> 0
>  0  0 894148 2247588  50900 163718400 065  939 3379  8  2 90
> 0
>  0  0 894148 2247260  50908 163690800 012  834 3111  7  2 91
> 0
>  0  0 894148 2185816  50928 169877600 0   147 1093 4012 11  2 88
> 0
>
>
>
> Ignore the first line, but when things go bad you'll see the numbers change.
> The "si" and "so" columns indicate swapping, if they're repeatedly non-zero
> then you're doing some swapping. "bi" and "bo" can mean just general disk IO
> (like the normal stuff applications do). "us" is cpu time spent running
> applications and "sy" is system time. You may also see high "cs" (context
> switches) as the processor is under load, flipping between one task and
> another, and rarely getting any real work done.
>
> vmstat and top are very good for diagnosing this stuff, don't bother with
> gui tools, they just make it worse :)
>
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Alan Pope
> Engineering Manager
>
> Canonical - Product Strategy
> +44 (0) 7973 620 164
> alan.p...@canonical.com
> http://ubuntu.com/
>
> --
> ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 15:12, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 14:18, Alan Pope  wrote:

On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:

I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right now!
Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used


Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.

It is unusual though to see half a gig in swap when less than half of
the RAM is is use, is it not?  For example mine has been on all day
and is still showing zero swap (I have 4GB RAM).  Does it not mean
that at some point something has been using a lot?

Colin

I'd say it's fairly obvious that 'something' is running away with 
itself. It's just a case of pinning down what. Based on the way the 
system is performing at the moment my bet is on Firefox, no doubt thanks 
to flash. However even just now with chromium running 3 tabs but 
disconnected from the net, thunderbird and rhythmbox running it was 
still pausing in the middle of tracks.


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Alan Pope]

On 07/02/13 15:12, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 14:18, Alan Pope  wrote:

On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:


I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right now!
Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used



Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.


It is unusual though to see half a gig in swap when less than half of
the RAM is is use, is it not?  For example mine has been on all day
and is still showing zero swap (I have 4GB RAM).  Does it not mean
that at some point something has been using a lot?



Not necessarily. It means some was _allocated_. Doesn't mean the box was 
swapping heavily. I am not inclined to take those numbers at face value. 
I'd rather see the first 10 lines from top pasted.


Cheers,
--
Alan Pope
Engineering Manager

Canonical - Product Strategy
+44 (0) 7973 620 164
alan.p...@canonical.com
http://ubuntu.com/

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 15:50, Alan Pope wrote:

On 07/02/13 15:12, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 14:18, Alan Pope  wrote:

On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:


I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right now!
Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used



Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.


It is unusual though to see half a gig in swap when less than half of
the RAM is is use, is it not?  For example mine has been on all day
and is still showing zero swap (I have 4GB RAM).  Does it not mean
that at some point something has been using a lot?



Not necessarily. It means some was _allocated_. Doesn't mean the box 
was swapping heavily. I am not inclined to take those numbers at face 
value. I'd rather see the first 10 lines from top pasted.


Cheers,

Ask and ye shall receive.
www.cliftonts.co.uk/top.png

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Colin Law]

On 7 February 2013 15:55, Gareth France  wrote:
> On 07/02/13 15:50, Alan Pope wrote:
>>
>> On 07/02/13 15:12, Colin Law wrote:
>>>
>>> On 7 February 2013 14:18, Alan Pope  wrote:

 On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:
>
>
> I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right now!
> Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
> Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used
>

 Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.
>>>
>>>
>>> It is unusual though to see half a gig in swap when less than half of
>>> the RAM is is use, is it not?  For example mine has been on all day
>>> and is still showing zero swap (I have 4GB RAM).  Does it not mean
>>> that at some point something has been using a lot?
>>>
>>
>> Not necessarily. It means some was _allocated_. Doesn't mean the box was
>> swapping heavily. I am not inclined to take those numbers at face value. I'd
>> rather see the first 10 lines from top pasted.
>>
>> Cheers,
>
> Ask and ye shall receive.
> www.cliftonts.co.uk/top.png

Do you have a vast library of music, possibly on an external drive or
something?  Google shows that, at least historically,
unity-music-daemon and the music lens have been problematic in their
use of resources.

By the way, you can use Ctrl-Shift-C to copy out of the terminal.

Colin

>
>
> --
> ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 16:20, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 15:55, Gareth France  wrote:

On 07/02/13 15:50, Alan Pope wrote:

On 07/02/13 15:12, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 14:18, Alan Pope  wrote:

On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:


I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right now!
Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used


Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.


It is unusual though to see half a gig in swap when less than half of
the RAM is is use, is it not?  For example mine has been on all day
and is still showing zero swap (I have 4GB RAM).  Does it not mean
that at some point something has been using a lot?


Not necessarily. It means some was _allocated_. Doesn't mean the box was
swapping heavily. I am not inclined to take those numbers at face value. I'd
rather see the first 10 lines from top pasted.

Cheers,

Ask and ye shall receive.
www.cliftonts.co.uk/top.png

Do you have a vast library of music, possibly on an external drive or
something?  Google shows that, at least historically,
unity-music-daemon and the music lens have been problematic in their
use of resources.

By the way, you can use Ctrl-Shift-C to copy out of the terminal.

Colin



--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
I wasn't sure about copying from a terminal output that won't sit still. 
Yes my library is very large but shrinking. I used to be a DJ and now 
I've stopped I have a copy of all my music on the hard drive, whenever a 
song I don't like plays I delete it. I don't expect the end result to be 
too big. I did wonder if that might be the cause of the gaps in 
playback. It doesn't however explain why my antique laptop coped with 
that or any of the other related issues that happen even when I'm not 
playing music. Although I understand that the lenses in unity run all 
the time at the moment, I did think perhaps the new approach in 13.04 
might be lighter on the resources.


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Colin Law]

On 7 February 2013 16:25, Gareth France  wrote:
> On 07/02/13 16:20, Colin Law wrote:
>>
>> On 7 February 2013 15:55, Gareth France  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 07/02/13 15:50, Alan Pope wrote:

 On 07/02/13 15:12, Colin Law wrote:
>
> On 7 February 2013 14:18, Alan Pope  wrote:
>>
>> On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right now!
>>> Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
>>> Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used
>>>
>> Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.
>
>
> It is unusual though to see half a gig in swap when less than half of
> the RAM is is use, is it not?  For example mine has been on all day
> and is still showing zero swap (I have 4GB RAM).  Does it not mean
> that at some point something has been using a lot?
>
 Not necessarily. It means some was _allocated_. Doesn't mean the box was
 swapping heavily. I am not inclined to take those numbers at face value.
 I'd
 rather see the first 10 lines from top pasted.

 Cheers,
>>>
>>> Ask and ye shall receive.
>>> www.cliftonts.co.uk/top.png
>>
>> Do you have a vast library of music, possibly on an external drive or
>> something?  Google shows that, at least historically,
>> unity-music-daemon and the music lens have been problematic in their
>> use of resources.
>>
>> By the way, you can use Ctrl-Shift-C to copy out of the terminal.
>>
>> Colin
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
>>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
>>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
>
> I wasn't sure about copying from a terminal output that won't sit still. Yes
> my library is very large but shrinking. I used to be a DJ and now I've
> stopped I have a copy of all my music on the hard drive, whenever a song I
> don't like plays I delete it. I don't expect the end result to be too big. I
> did wonder if that might be the cause of the gaps in playback. It doesn't
> however explain why my antique laptop coped with that or any of the other
> related issues that happen even when I'm not playing music. Although I
> understand that the lenses in unity run all the time at the moment, I did
> think perhaps the new approach in 13.04 might be lighter on the resources.

Did you mention previously that you were using 13.04?

Colin

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 16:36, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 16:25, Gareth France  wrote:

On 07/02/13 16:20, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 15:55, Gareth France  wrote:

On 07/02/13 15:50, Alan Pope wrote:

On 07/02/13 15:12, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 14:18, Alan Pope  wrote:

On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:


I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right now!
Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used


Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.


It is unusual though to see half a gig in swap when less than half of
the RAM is is use, is it not?  For example mine has been on all day
and is still showing zero swap (I have 4GB RAM).  Does it not mean
that at some point something has been using a lot?


Not necessarily. It means some was _allocated_. Doesn't mean the box was
swapping heavily. I am not inclined to take those numbers at face value.
I'd
rather see the first 10 lines from top pasted.

Cheers,

Ask and ye shall receive.
www.cliftonts.co.uk/top.png

Do you have a vast library of music, possibly on an external drive or
something?  Google shows that, at least historically,
unity-music-daemon and the music lens have been problematic in their
use of resources.

By the way, you can use Ctrl-Shift-C to copy out of the terminal.

Colin


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

I wasn't sure about copying from a terminal output that won't sit still. Yes
my library is very large but shrinking. I used to be a DJ and now I've
stopped I have a copy of all my music on the hard drive, whenever a song I
don't like plays I delete it. I don't expect the end result to be too big. I
did wonder if that might be the cause of the gaps in playback. It doesn't
however explain why my antique laptop coped with that or any of the other
related issues that happen even when I'm not playing music. Although I
understand that the lenses in unity run all the time at the moment, I did
think perhaps the new approach in 13.04 might be lighter on the resources.

Did you mention previously that you were using 13.04?

Colin

I'm not using 13.04. I said I wondered if the new approach to lenses 
might be less resource intensive. I'm on 12.10. As I understand it the 
lenses run all the time at the moment but due to there being 100+ in 
13.04 they will only run when required.


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Raul Landa]

On Thu 07 Feb 2013 16:25:31 GMT, Gareth France wrote:
> On 07/02/13 16:20, Colin Law wrote:
>> On 7 February 2013 15:55, Gareth France  wrote:
>>> On 07/02/13 15:50, Alan Pope wrote:
 On 07/02/13 15:12, Colin Law wrote:
> On 7 February 2013 14:18, Alan Pope  wrote:
>> On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:
>>>
>>> I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right
>>> now!
>>> Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
>>> Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used
>>>
>> Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.
>
> It is unusual though to see half a gig in swap when less than half of
> the RAM is is use, is it not?  For example mine has been on all day
> and is still showing zero swap (I have 4GB RAM).  Does it not mean
> that at some point something has been using a lot?
>
 Not necessarily. It means some was _allocated_. Doesn't mean the
 box was
 swapping heavily. I am not inclined to take those numbers at face
 value. I'd
 rather see the first 10 lines from top pasted.

 Cheers,
>>> Ask and ye shall receive.
>>> www.cliftonts.co.uk/top.png
>> Do you have a vast library of music, possibly on an external drive or
>> something?  Google shows that, at least historically,
>> unity-music-daemon and the music lens have been problematic in their
>> use of resources.
>>
>> By the way, you can use Ctrl-Shift-C to copy out of the terminal.
>>
>> Colin
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
>>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
>>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
> I wasn't sure about copying from a terminal output that won't sit
> still. Yes my library is very large but shrinking. I used to be a DJ
> and now I've stopped I have a copy of all my music on the hard drive,
> whenever a song I don't like plays I delete it. I don't expect the end
> result to be too big. I did wonder if that might be the cause of the
> gaps in playback. It doesn't however explain why my antique laptop
> coped with that or any of the other related issues that happen even
> when I'm not playing music. Although I understand that the lenses in
> unity run all the time at the moment, I did think perhaps the new
> approach in 13.04 might be lighter on the resources.
>

What about looking at disk accesses directly with _iotop_? Maybe you 
could install it and run it to see if some process might be 
reading/writing to the disk even if not inducing a large CPU load. Some 
time ago I had some issues with a defective hard disk and 
tracker-miner. iotop helped me a lot; it can be used with the other 
suggestions in the thread to troubleshoot excessive swapping.


-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 16:55, Raul Landa wrote:

On Thu 07 Feb 2013 16:25:31 GMT, Gareth France wrote:

On 07/02/13 16:20, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 15:55, Gareth France  wrote:

On 07/02/13 15:50, Alan Pope wrote:

On 07/02/13 15:12, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 14:18, Alan Pope  wrote:

On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:

I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right
now!
Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used


Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.

It is unusual though to see half a gig in swap when less than half of
the RAM is is use, is it not?  For example mine has been on all day
and is still showing zero swap (I have 4GB RAM).  Does it not mean
that at some point something has been using a lot?


Not necessarily. It means some was _allocated_. Doesn't mean the
box was
swapping heavily. I am not inclined to take those numbers at face
value. I'd
rather see the first 10 lines from top pasted.

Cheers,

Ask and ye shall receive.
www.cliftonts.co.uk/top.png

Do you have a vast library of music, possibly on an external drive or
something?  Google shows that, at least historically,
unity-music-daemon and the music lens have been problematic in their
use of resources.

By the way, you can use Ctrl-Shift-C to copy out of the terminal.

Colin


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

I wasn't sure about copying from a terminal output that won't sit
still. Yes my library is very large but shrinking. I used to be a DJ
and now I've stopped I have a copy of all my music on the hard drive,
whenever a song I don't like plays I delete it. I don't expect the end
result to be too big. I did wonder if that might be the cause of the
gaps in playback. It doesn't however explain why my antique laptop
coped with that or any of the other related issues that happen even
when I'm not playing music. Although I understand that the lenses in
unity run all the time at the moment, I did think perhaps the new
approach in 13.04 might be lighter on the resources.


What about looking at disk accesses directly with _iotop_? Maybe you
could install it and run it to see if some process might be
reading/writing to the disk even if not inducing a large CPU load. Some
time ago I had some issues with a defective hard disk and
tracker-miner. iotop helped me a lot; it can be used with the other
suggestions in the thread to troubleshoot excessive swapping.


I don't know that program, sounds like it could be an interesting 
experiment. Thanks


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Alan Pope]

On 07/02/13 15:55, Gareth France wrote:

On 07/02/13 15:50, Alan Pope wrote:

On 07/02/13 15:12, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 14:18, Alan Pope  wrote:

On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:


I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right now!
Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used



Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.


It is unusual though to see half a gig in swap when less than half of
the RAM is is use, is it not?  For example mine has been on all day
and is still showing zero swap (I have 4GB RAM).  Does it not mean
that at some point something has been using a lot?



Not necessarily. It means some was _allocated_. Doesn't mean the box
was swapping heavily. I am not inclined to take those numbers at face
value. I'd rather see the first 10 lines from top pasted.

Cheers,

Ask and ye shall receive.
www.cliftonts.co.uk/top.png



So no swap problem there. You have gobs and gobs of free RAM.

Cheers,
--
Alan Pope
Engineering Manager

Canonical - Product Strategy
+44 (0) 7973 620 164
alan.p...@canonical.com
http://ubuntu.com/

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Colin Law]

On 7 February 2013 15:55, Gareth France  wrote:
> On 07/02/13 15:50, Alan Pope wrote:
>>
>> On 07/02/13 15:12, Colin Law wrote:
>>>
>>> On 7 February 2013 14:18, Alan Pope  wrote:

 On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:
>
>
> I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right now!
> Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
> Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used
>

 Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.
>>>
>>>
>>> It is unusual though to see half a gig in swap when less than half of
>>> the RAM is is use, is it not?  For example mine has been on all day
>>> and is still showing zero swap (I have 4GB RAM).  Does it not mean
>>> that at some point something has been using a lot?
>>>
>>
>> Not necessarily. It means some was _allocated_. Doesn't mean the box was
>> swapping heavily. I am not inclined to take those numbers at face value. I'd
>> rather see the first 10 lines from top pasted.
>>
>> Cheers,
>
> Ask and ye shall receive.
> www.cliftonts.co.uk/top.png

Was it on a go slow when you took that?

Colin

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] Ubuntu unusably slow

[Gareth France]

On 07/02/13 20:51, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 15:55, Gareth France  wrote:

On 07/02/13 15:50, Alan Pope wrote:

On 07/02/13 15:12, Colin Law wrote:

On 7 February 2013 14:18, Alan Pope  wrote:

On 07/02/13 12:47, Gareth France wrote:


I've just had a peek and apparently it's using swap memory right now!
Memory 1.5Gb of 3.5Gb used
Swap 658.9Mb of 3.7Gb used


Using swap is not a problem. Swapping is the problem.


It is unusual though to see half a gig in swap when less than half of
the RAM is is use, is it not?  For example mine has been on all day
and is still showing zero swap (I have 4GB RAM).  Does it not mean
that at some point something has been using a lot?


Not necessarily. It means some was _allocated_. Doesn't mean the box was
swapping heavily. I am not inclined to take those numbers at face value. I'd
rather see the first 10 lines from top pasted.

Cheers,

Ask and ye shall receive.
www.cliftonts.co.uk/top.png

Was it on a go slow when you took that?

Colin


No, it wasn't

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/