It seems it will be disabled in stable release:
Apport is not enabled by default in stable releases, even if it is installed. There are two ways to enable it.
Yesterday I tried Ubuntu 9.10 Beta on a Gateway E4300.
Pentium III 500MHz
HDD 80GiB WD
I must say... It runs.
Of course, Dapper was speedier than Karmic, but having the latest "vital" software pack worth it (mostly Firefox and OpenOffice.org).
I used Dapper Xubuntu on a Pentium Classic 133MHz and 64MiB of RAM... slow but runs Firefox, and I mean ONLY Firefox another app and the system was unusable.
My currently workhorse machine is "NapaValley" HP 530, an Intel Napa based platform.
Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz
HDD 120GiB WD Scorpio SATA150
It works flalessly since the day one... the day that I've installed Ubuntu 8.04 Beta. Since then this OS is still beating, and I pretend to be so until the next Ubuntu LTS... I have an encrypted LVM, so the upgrade in this scenario is critical. I hope that the next LTS will come with a decent Intel video driver.
I bought Intel because of the "strong linux driver support", It's a lie. I hate Keithp because he constantly breaks the X windowing system for no good reason (developing GEM was and is still a bad idea, UXA is another nightmare), and don't follow a good development model, nobody learned anything from the development of the Linux kernel? That's the best example on how to develop software. That and the WiFi... their drivers are updated between eons.
So, in the end... vintage hardware is excellent. You shouldn't measure performance numbers but "usability" feeling of a "vintage" machine. For me, I leave the old hardware (Pentium and 486DX2) for the command line. In that way the latest software is available... not the latest GUI.
My machine is today a "netbook" class, abeit with a speedier processor. I don't know why people complaint about the 945GME, It's a very good chipset. It should be better since a long standing hardware means mature and stable drivers... of course in the intel arena it isn't.
@kuolas: Currently Linux is in FLOSS graphics driver hell (and it was probably worse back in the day, but my (even then old) Pentium II computer had a nVidia graphics card and with their proprietary driver (back then I didn't even knew KDE wasn't the 'Linux user interface') I wasn't noticing it, but it was probably ten times worse...
Hopefully (and probably) with the AMD documentation ATI Gallium3D FLOSS drivers will end this nightmare.
That said computers today are a complete mess. Windows XP sucks and newer Windows versions are too heavy for my liking still, Apple is too expensive and nothing really satisfies me completely about it and Linux is stuck with graphics suckage... What about nVidia binaries? Don't even get me started on their silicon failure rate (which is probably also linked to why they are not going FLOSS)
*sigh* <- that's all I can currently say about it :(
My advice to you is to 'sit it out' and buy a cheap ass ATI card when ou know the Gallium3D drivers are solid ;)
Try this experimental build of Karmic Koala on your P500 laptop:
and feel the huge difference in speed :)
It's an Ubuntu / Puppy Linux hybrid created from Karmic Koala packages.
This is a snapshot of "Karmic Puppy", a puppy built from Ubuntu packages, specifically Karmic Koala 9.10RC. It was built using the 'Woof' build system, on 24th October 2009.
The live-CD 'upup-432.iso' is an example build. It has the 184.108.40.206 SMP
kernel that's used in the latest version of Puppy.
Since this is an experimental build, I'm not really interested in bug reports related to the build itself, only in anything related to the build system.
For example that's what I got with lame:
gcc-4.3.4 + O3 = 1m6.207s
gcc-4.4.2 + O2 = 1m5.916s
gcc-4.4.2 + O3 = 1m5.716s
I repeated the tests five times.
Well not a tremendous boost, but even O2 is a bit faster than an older gcc with O3.
C'mon, tell the truth.
Ubuntu 9.10 is absolutely crap on older hardware. I cannot use it on my T41. I tried the LiveCD and it crashes each time. It's practically the same as it was at the Alpha stage. Imho, the developers didn't care about older hardware and didn't address the issues. What other reason could there be?
Ubuntu has a rep, too, for horrible support for users with ATI cards, the older ones or the new.
What a POS! I'll be installing sidux or Debian, thank you!
Truth is that Ubuntu 9.10 has pretty much the same Xorg stack as in Debian sid, so please keep us posted about your findings.