Hello All
I've recently installed the Kubuntu 9.10 Karamic AMD64 Desktop edition . KDE 4.2.3 looks really Good and awesome now .. !!!!!! Everything went well and the installation is neat from the live cd.

>The problem is after the installation ,its taking huge amount of swap memory and CPU processing and hangs sometimes making me to reboot .I thought i can take advantage of the 64 bit power .I'm not even opening many applications and i even disabled the Kwin .

> My system specification's :- AMD Athlon64 3000+ 1.8Ghz with 512MB of ram .
Clearly the system requirements are met as per the Kubuntu.

> Okay what is the difference between Desktop CD's and Alternate installation CD's for x86 & AMD64?? I've downloaded and installed this Desktop CD for AMD64.

I've installed Ubuntu before 7.10 to 9.04 but never tried the KDE based & 64 bit . I thought its going to be great with all the widgets and glassy look of KDE 4 but it making me go back to gnome.

>>So adding memory will help or do have to change some hardware like processor etc.

>> Or is it because karmic is still a development edition and that's what is causing the problem?

Please suggest me what do i have to do inorder to run the 64bit edition smoothly without hanging .....


Thanks In Advance

The only practical difference is that the alternate install CD is not dependent on proper configuration of your graphics card; the alternate CD also requires less memory to install Ubuntu. Once the system is installed and you reboot into the OS there is no difference. You can try booting up and before opening any programs, just open a terminal and run free -m and top to see how much memory is being used and what is using up your CPU and memory. Then open some programs and see what is hogging the CPU and memory.
Adding more memory would definitely benefit that computer, especially with a 64 bit OS.
That is possible. For what it's worth, I am running Ubuntu (not Kubuntu) Karmic 32 bit on my laptop and the memory usage is about the same as Jaunty was.

When my Jaunty 64 BITS is running including Firefox it already us more than 1 GB
My suggestion if you like to use 64 bit goes at least for 4 GB of RAM

OKay 1GB and above for 64 bit .what about 32 bit or x86 Kubuntu with kde4.3.2.

>Do this edition also requires ram more than 1 GB ???

>>Would you mind suggesting me "the best stable Linux distro with
KDE4.3.2 x86 edition ", other than openSuse11.1 ?
openSuse 11.1(x86 live DVD) ran pretty well but was not able to connect to internet .


Thanks in Advance

Between running and running is a difference .
Test indicate that if people has to wait for a computer response longer than 10 seconds than they said that the computer runs slow.
The minimum requirement for most distros running a GUI 32 bits 512 MB
But at the same time make a swap file of two times you're RAM
I do not mind to suggest you a distro , but in fact the best distro for you is the one that runs good on you're system.
You can only find that out by trying in other words go distro hopping.

I have never used 64 bit Ubuntu, but I currently have Slackware 13.0 both 32 bit and 64 bit editions installed on 2 separate partitions. I really don't see any significant difference between the memory usage on 32 and 64 bit Slackware. So the memory requirements are about the same.
A 32 bit OS can only use up to 4GB memory though; but a 64 bit OS can use a lot more. I forget what the maximum is for a 64 bit OS, but it is a lot. Anyway, increasing the memory from 512mb to 1GB would certainly give you better performance, whether you use 32 bit or 64 bit OS.

I'm not sure about KDE 4.3.2. However Zenwalk 6.2 has KDE 4.2.4. I am mentioning Zenwalk because Zenwalk is much faster and uses fewer resources than Ubuntu. It is also very stable and pretty easy to use. It installs with XFCE desktop, but KDE is available in the Zenwalk repositories.
http://zenwalk.org/

Concerning the output of the command: free -m, consider this example from my system:
Notice the first line says 2010mb total, 1044mb used and 965mb free. But linux caches a lot of stuff in memory for faster access. So to know how much memory is actually being used by the system at present, look at the
-/+ buffers/cache line. It shows that only 378mb is actually being used and 1631 is free. The amount of memory that is cached is under the buffers (314) and cached (351) columns on the far right end of the first line. So 378 used + 314 buffered + 351 cached = (approximately) the 1044mb total that is reported as "used" in the first line.
I just wanted to point this out in case you or anyone else was wondering how to interpret the free -m command.