Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 19th Jul 2006 21:16 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu "Canonical's Ubuntu 6.06 LTS is an excellent Linux-based operating system - so excellent, in fact, that it not only earned eWEEK Labs' Analyst's Choice designation but has also become our clear favorite among Linux desktop distributions. This latest Ubuntu release, which became available in June, has won our ardor with a tight focus on desktop usability; an extremely active, helpful and organized user community; and a software installation and management framework that's unsurpassed on any OS platform."
Thread beginning with comment 144700
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Oh... my... God....
by arctic on Wed 19th Jul 2006 22:44 UTC
arctic
Member since:
2006-04-19

Do you really call this an article? I would call it "free advertising". The "article" lacks any proof that Ubuntu is better than other distros. No real comparisions, no evaluation done by normal users and a general lack of technical knowledge by the reviewers.

I read it and there were some issues mentioned where I thought: Well, this works immediately with this or that distro but not Ubuntu, but still they consider Ubuntu the champ. Did they get paid by Canonical or what? And that Ubuntu makes software installation easier than any other distro is plain nonsense. Linspire has Click'n Run, Mandriva has Kiosk, Fedora has Pirut, Novells Enterprise Desktop has a new and nice frontend for installing software. There are many options and they all work, unless the user lacks a brain.

There is a reason why I will never consider Ubuntu the best distro for the desktop: Too many bugs, no package-installation options, bad swap setup with the default partitioner, crippled language support, incompatibility with Debian, inability (!) to launch a safe init 3 session for recovery tasks (there is only the stupid "rescue terminal" in init 5 mode, how stupid is that) and: sudo. Sudo is a plain disaster and forcing the crappy sudo approach on users is a no-go imho. (No, you cannot restore a complete (!) root environment in Ubuntu).

"We found Ubuntu's default GNOME 2.14.2 desktop environment complete and easy to use."

Aha... and why? Please explain it. You can't? You don't want to? If you won't/can't do it, then please do not publish anything at all.

The three pages are not worth reading. Really.

Edited 2006-07-19 22:47

Reply Score: 5

RE: Oh... my... God....
by leech on Wed 19th Jul 2006 23:24 in reply to "Oh... my... God...."
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

Granted, the article may be pretty worthless, I didn't actually read it. But I want to comment on your comments themselves.

Have you used Click N Run? It doesn't have a whole log of software in there, it is user friendly, but somehow seemed flaky to me (this was in the freespire beta, so maybe it's just a unstable version I tried.) All the distros you named, with the exception of Fedora Core, are not completely free distros either, like Ubuntu. Suse's package manager was broken during the 10.1 release (from what I've read, when I first tried to download and install Suse, the installer was broken too!)

All Distributions have their share of bugs. I don't know why you'd say Dapper has crippled language support, I think that it has some of the very best. I do agree with the slight incompatibility with Debian, though it is only slight. Most .debs will work without any problems.

I have never had issues with not being able to create a full root account, all it's missing is the password, and then if you'd really like, you can take your user name out of the sudoers file.

Default Gnome is very usable, I hate the way other distributions (I'm looking at Mandrake and Suse here) screw with the menus on both KDE and Gnome. Why make it so that you have to go to Internet -> Web Browsers -> Firefox, when you can just go Internet -> Firefox.

The best of breed approach works much better than having a DVD ISO that installs everything by default, and if you want to go into individual package installation, it takes longer to do that then it does to remove the stuff you don't want later. Especially since most new users won't even know what half of the software does.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Oh... my... God....
by BluenoseJake on Wed 19th Jul 2006 23:38 in reply to "Oh... my... God...."
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

"The three pages are not worth reading. Really."

Then don't read the 3 pages, seriously.

"We found Ubuntu's default GNOME 2.14.2 desktop environment complete and easy to use.

Aha... and why? Please explain it. You can't? You don't want to? If you won't/can't do it, then please do not publish anything at all. "

If you don't share their opinion then fine, but the reviewers liked how Gnome was setup in Ubuntu, it's an opinion, it is not right or wrong. Just because you disagree with it does not make it wrong.

"Sudo is a plain disaster and forcing the crappy sudo approach on users is a no-go imho. (No, you cannot restore a complete (!) root environment in Ubuntu). "

Then turn sudo off, I did, and now I can log in as root, or when I have an admin task when I am a normal user, I enter root's password instead of my own. all you have to do is open a root terminal and use passwd to set roots password, and low and below, it works. Then after you do that, just:

Open System --> Administration --> Login Screen Setup

Click on the security tab

Check Allow root login

and voila, instant root environment. So there is a way, and it's not too hard. Feel free to do some research before you post such nonsense

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Oh... my... God....
by arctic on Thu 20th Jul 2006 08:39 in reply to "RE: Oh... my... God...."
arctic Member since:
2006-04-19

"If you don't share their opinion then fine, but the reviewers liked how Gnome was setup in Ubuntu, it's an opinion, it is not right or wrong. Just because you disagree with it does not make it wrong."

Please tell me, where Ubuntus Gnome is better/different from Archs, Debians or any other systems Gnome? Gnome is Gnome. Period. And what they did is telling me that Ubuntus Gnome is superior without giving me ANY example what makes it superior to other distros Gnome. I have tested 6.06 and I am not impressed at all.

"and voila, instant root environment. So there is a way, and it's not too hard. Feel free to do some research before you post such nonsense"

I guess you don't know enough about the fine details in the underlying system in Ubuntu and Debian and don't even know what I was referring to. It is not about enabling a root login but about the way root works in Ubuntu. Use a pure Debian system for a while and perform some administrative things as root there, then try to recreate that in Ubuntu. Chances are that you will get stuck somewhere. ;) No, I am not talking nonsense but I speak from experience. Ubuntu has the sudo solution built into the underlying system so much that you cannot get fully rid of it and this blocks some administrative possibilities for a normal root acount.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: Oh... my... God....
by djst on Thu 20th Jul 2006 08:44 in reply to "Oh... my... God...."
djst Member since:
2005-08-07

Do you really call this an article? I would call it "free advertising". The "article" lacks any proof that Ubuntu is better than other distros. No real comparisions, no evaluation done by normal users and a general lack of technical knowledge by the reviewers.

You want proof and comparisons? I can only provide you with the little things, but if you sum things up, it makes a huge difference:

1) On the two Dell laptops I've installed Linux on, Ubuntu has been the only distro that automatically configures the dedicated sound volume buttons to work out of the box. OpenSuSE couldn't, and neither could the latest beta of Freespire I downloaded a couple of days ago.

2) Similar to the point above: Ubuntu is the only distro that configured the touch pad to support scrolling out of the box.

3) This may be specific to Freespire, but since that's the latest distro I have to compare Ubuntu with, it's definitely a huge step backwards that I saw no out of the box support for hibernation and suspend to RAM. Ubuntu automatically presents me with these options when shutting down the computer.

4) Finally (and this is strictly my personal opinion), I'd choose Gnome >=2.14.x over KDE >=3.x any day. I admit I'm very curious about KDE 4, but until that happens, Gnome will simply be superior in terms of pure simplicity and sleek usability. There's countless of small things annoying me in KDE, but that's off topic so I won't go there. But the point is, the fact that Ubuntu chose Gnome as their DE made me like it so much more. That Canonical is spending time and money improving Gnome even further doesn't make things worse either.

Ubuntu has a level of quality approaching that of commercial OSes.

Edited 2006-07-20 08:46

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Oh... my... God....
by archiesteel on Thu 20th Jul 2006 16:20 in reply to "RE[2]: Oh... my... God...."
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

But the point is, the fact that Ubuntu chose Gnome as their DE made me like it so much more. That Canonical is spending time and money improving Gnome even further doesn't make things worse either.

I believe you are mistaken here. Ubuntu hasn't chosen Gnome as their DE - they offer both DEs (Ubuntu and Kubuntu) and the latest word from Shuttleworth is that efforts should go into improving Kubuntu (which is already quite good).

I admit I'm very curious about KDE 4, but until that happens, Gnome will simply be superior in terms of pure simplicity and sleek usability.

That's your personal preference, of course, and not a matter of fact (and you noted this). Myself, I prefer KDE and find it more usable, but both DEs are great and I think it's a very good thing that Ubuntu comes in both flavors (and Xubuntu as well).

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Oh... my... God....
by segedunum on Thu 20th Jul 2006 20:39 in reply to "RE[2]: Oh... my... God...."
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Gnome will simply be superior in terms of pure simplicity and sleek usability.

Having used Ubuntu and Gnome for several weeks, I'm afraid it's quality compared to other distros, and KDE based ones, is greatly exaggerated. The wireless GUI doesn't even have options for WPA, which makes it pretty useless on the widespread G networks these days - that's an Ubuntu issue there though, and is the merest tip of an iceberg.

I find more than ever that the 'simplicity and usability' argument is used as an excuse for not putting things into Gnome that end up being required, either by ordinary users or system administrators. Withdrawing options from the print dialogue is one, and it has an awful and extremely inconsistent habit of trying to make many dialogues 'simple'.

For example, Gnome's system preferences are put together as a series of small dialogues rather than as part of a coherent and functioning whole. Each dialogue has a 'Close' button on it. OK, I've changed some settings but I just want to cancel and exit, leaving everything as before. Does the close button do this? Nope. It saves everything. Does using the close icon in the top right cancel and exit? Nope. Stumped.

Worse, some dialogues like the desktop background one simply have a 'Finish' button with a green tick that looks like it was pulled off a fifteen year old VB application. Some dialogues like SCIM have an OK/Quit button combo to come out, as does the date/time one. The theme dialogue together with the menu and toolbar dialogue also offer no preview whatsoever of what your desktop and apps will look like, as Windows and certainly KDE do. Good God, it really makes me appreciative of the functionality of KDE's Control Centre. All it needs is some better organisation - and that's probably the easy bit!

The 'Assistive Technologies' dialogue, again has the close button problem, but it then has a button for 'Close and Logout'. Well, why would I want to close and logout? Yes, I know that it says that I need to logout for it to take effect in a text label above, but who reads a text label unless you need to? A better way would have been for me to confirm and exit through an 'OK' button, and then for a dialogue to inform me that I needed to log out and log back in for these changes to take effect. I would then actually be able to read about what I need to do and then click Yes or No accordingly as to whether I wanted to log out right now or not.

Seriously. I am absolutely flabbergasted that no 'usability expert' (and I use that term in its broadest possible sense after the past few weeks) has picked up on this.

I mean, seriously. Is it just not possible to develop a half-decent user interface in this desktop environment? Every single graphical window within Gnome consists of a handful of UI elements, providing you with very limited functionality when compared with other desktop environments. I mean, you can knock those interfaces up in absolutely no time in Visual Basic or Qt Designer.

And these are just the obvious things off the top of my head. Dragging a window around in Gnome is excruciating and you seem to lose both side portions of a window and your desktop icons underneath when you do it. Open the system monitor and try scrolling through the list box of processes and watch thing fall over itself when it tries to keep up. The system monitor also helpfully tells me that the system monitor itself takes up at least 10% CPU time without it doing anything. Funny. I don't recall Windows' Task Manager or KDE's System Guard doing that.

Having used Ubuntu and Gnome for several weeks as a desktop, I never cease to be amazed by how utterly limited it is, and I struggle to believe that this is the enterprise and corporate desktop people shout from the rooftops about.

Ubuntu has a level of quality approaching that of commercial OSes.

From what I've seen, I find that highly debatable at best.

Edited 2006-07-20 20:43

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Oh... my... God....
by jason_brooks on Fri 21st Jul 2006 22:59 in reply to "Oh... my... God...."
jason_brooks Member since:
2006-02-03

Ouch! Seriously, Debian got it right with its combination of apt and its volunteer package maintainer army.

What Ubuntu adds is caring about being a desktop, and caring about reaching out to a broader community.

What do you mean when you say that Ubuntu has too few package installation options, anyway?

Reply Parent Score: 1