I measured startup times (cold boot) for openelec and xbmcbuntu. This is from pressing the power button to the display of the xbmc interface. On my system it was 25 seconds for openelec and 27 seconds for xbmcbuntu.

So, sorry to say, but there seems to be no reason for me to not use 'the real thing'.
Or is there?

as long as you're happy, we're happy.. the choice is entirely yours

openelec and xbmcubuntu are really two different beasts. Measuring bootup times wouldn't be the way I'd be deciding between the two.

For my Fusion system Openelec works near perfectly (except Suspend...) but XBMCBuntu not. It was very slow with a high CPU load. Playing HD-files didn't work at all. So for me the choice is easy... OPENELEC

Anyone that has tried to maintain an Ubuntu based XBMC for an extended period will understand the fundamental difference in real world ease of maintenance between a full blown distro and a firmware like distro.

For me EVERY version of Ubuntu broke something that had a different solution each and every time.

Each has their merits but if like me you value your time OpenELEC wins hands down.

i have tried both and decided to stick with openelec as i have no linux experience so having the linux desktop as well as xbmc doesn't really benefit me plus i find openelec simple to use no mucking around

and i have learnt how to access the openelec machine from a windows one either through typing the ip address or using a ftp program like filezilla

plus openelec with the nightly builds i use get's updated with bugfixes or whatever a lot more often than the live cd versions so that is also a benefit

and finally the speed of installation is great takes like 2-3 minutes


i am sticking with openelec