Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 17th Apr 2006 12:02 UTC, submitted by SilentBob4
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu MadPenguin takes a look at Flight 5 of Ubuntu Dapper, and concludes: "All in all, Ubuntu 6.06 is gearing up to be quite an impressive release. Granted, I saw some bugs during my stay on the distribution, but can I really complain? It's not a full release, so it deserves some breathing room. Considering some of the horribly authored software I've looked at over the years, I feel that Ubuntu in pre-release form is more stable than other distros when they reach final release status. It's not quite in the league of Slackware and Red Hat/Fedora in that respect yet, but it's surely getting there in a hurry."
Thread beginning with comment 115626
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
It's about completeness
by henrikmk on Mon 17th Apr 2006 18:57 UTC
Member since:

Interesting comparison.

I run both, OSX Tiger on the Mac Mini and Ubuntu on a Celeron 500 Mhz laptop. My interest in Ubuntu stems from the fact that I crave an open source desktop that would match the elegance and completeness of OSX Tiger. Sorry, but people are forgetting how complete Tiger is compared to a typical Gnome desktop.

Having worked in depth with both (followed Gnome since 1.4, OSX since Jaguar), it's hard to say that Gnome is anywhere near the OSX Desktop for very simple reasons: It's just not complete. At all.

It's easy to sit and compare Beagle, Nautilus and a simple GUI to OSX features like Spotlight, Dashboard or Finder, because these things are visible features. This is of course important, but the things that make a good desktop are the little things, such as proper window management, proper and complete drag'n'drop that work like you expect.
A single and complete sound system (Core Audio).
A single video system that actually works (Quicktime).
OSX sports complete APIs for managing application data with Core Data, hardware accelerated desktop, networking that doesn't flinch or drag down the entire desktop, requiring me to restart X, if a site is unavailable, as with GnomeVFS.

Bugs and incompleteness are the reasons Gnome is not yet on par with OSX, not the major features like Beagle or Nautilus. Anybody can claim features like OSX, I know Windows Vista will soon, but do they work just as well?

I keep running into problems with things that feel incomplete or inexplicably slow in Gnome, which is why I keep returning to OSX.

OSX makes me wonder how tremendous an amount testing the system has undergone.

I think we'll have to wait at least 3-5 years before it can get to the level of completion that the current OSX desktop has. There is a huge amount of polish to be done.

Reply Score: 3

RE: It's about completeness
by dumbkiwi on Mon 17th Apr 2006 19:54 in reply to "It's about completeness"
dumbkiwi Member since:

Perhaps you should try kde. Gnome != linux.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: It's about completeness
by henrikmk on Mon 17th Apr 2006 21:12 in reply to "RE: It's about completeness"
henrikmk Member since:

True, but it's the same lack of completeness. It's just in a different way.

The UI of KDE is a haphazardly put together mountain of features, but I don't want this to get into a Gnome/KDE war.

It's better to emphasize on how much testing and polish goes into each system, because that's the difference between "sort of okay" and "great".

Reply Parent Score: 1