[merlinknight]

Trying to decide if i should run UBUNTU Server or just UBUNTU. Is there any advantage to running Server that XBMC takes advantage of or anything i should think about.

Also wanting to remote into UBUNTU FIT-PC, do i have to have Server installed.

Any Help would greatly be appreciated.

Merlinknight

[topfs2]

Not sure what the status is currently but previously the server used a slightly different kernel which is aimed at server type applications.

An example of that is that it previously waited longer between switching off threads. Upside is one thread applications or apps that do lots of computations spend less cpu time on swithing threads and as such can utilize the cpu better. Downside is that interaction based applications tend to feel less responsive (and if you run an actual desktop ontop with multiple apps you will notice it.).

XBMC is not a thread monster by any means but it do human interaction and considering your more likely to not utilize your CPU fully you'll benefit more from a responsive kernel.

Overall I don't think I would ever recommend server based over normal. If you want to go the bottom->up approach I'd suggest using ubuntu minimal, which is almost the same but with a desktop kernel.

Cheers,
Tobias.

[outleradam]

Good info top. Never knew there was a difference between kernels.

[d1ddyp0p]

I would highly recommend MINIMAL install over Server install for many reasons. It is my understand the TCP/IP stack in the server is slightly modified to fit it's needs which can have adverse effects on XBMC potentially using some plugins and such. MINIMAL can be tweaked to fit your needs and you can remove other things you do not want.

[merlinknight]

Thanks for the reply's.
This is the best group and software out there.
This is why i just made a donation to show my support.

Keep up the great work and looking to try to help support this forum and software in the near future.

merlinknight

[Hannes The Hun]

I would highly recommend MINIMAL install over Server install for many reasons.

that's new to me, I'd like to hear the reasons. the one you gave (different TCP/IP stack or whatever) is simply not true. everything else was covered by topfs2.

especially when there's problems with the integrated NIC it is way more comfortable to use the server image to install the basis for an XBMC standalone client, and it works perfectly afterwards.