Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 17th Mar 2007 00:26 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu During my 8 years of Linux on and off usage I have tried more distros than I have chocolate bars. Each one of my previous encounters meant that I had to spend at least 2 days configuring before I have a desktop that I was somewhat comfortable with. With Ubuntu Feisty Fawn's latest test beta --for the first time ever-- this was not the case. I was up and running with all the niceties I wanted within 2 hours.
Thread beginning with comment 222108
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Eugenia
Member since:
2005-06-28

rklrkl, Ubuntu only comes in a single CD. Fedora is several CDs. Therefore, on Ubuntu you will find ONLY the packages that most of the *home desktop* users will need (I never needed an NFS client for example, while there is an SMB shared-folder panel available by default). For the rest of the packages, there is the easy to use add/remove application which has Azureus and XMMS etc.

I feel that the *only* applications that are missing from Ubuntu for a *desktop* system is the Bluetooth Obex server for Gnome, Brasero and maybe Liferea. Everything else that is needed, is already there (including a simple Gnome Bittorrent client compared to the loaded Azuereus that could put off a lot of home users just by the looks of it).

Edited 2007-03-17 01:32

Reply Parent Score: 1

fsckit Member since:
2006-09-24

Therefore, on Ubuntu you will find ONLY the packages that most of the *home desktop* users will need (I never needed an NFS client for example, while there is an SMB shared-folder panel available by default).

I have to agree with the OP. SMB is all fine and good for Windows users, but you're in Linux-land now. Lack of ability to share files over NFS in a default install is quite ridiculous.

Reply Parent Score: 5

Eugenia Member since:
2005-06-28

As I said, never in my life needed NFS. However, many-many times I needed SMB. I think Ubuntu just went with whatever most people use.

....

Just wait a second!! I just checked again the "Shared Folders" admin panel and that takes care of BOTH NFS and SMB!! When you load it for the first time it asks you if you want them and it takes care of installation and service-loading. That's how it should be and that's how it is.

Reply Parent Score: 1

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""
"I have to agree with the OP. SMB is all fine and good for Windows users, but you're in Linux-land now. Lack of ability to share files over NFS in a default install is quite ridiculous.
"""


I was reading an interview with either Andrew tridgell or Jeremy Allison a while back. I can't remember which. But the person in question stated that making CIFS, with the posix extensions, the de facto standard across the board was a goal of theirs.

He made the excellent point that it is silly to have some machines use CIFS, some use whatever version of NFS, and some use... whatever Apple uses these days, when all these machines can just talk CIFS and be done with it.

I tend to agree. NFSv2/3/4 are not so wonderful that it makes sense for us to take an NIH attitude and perpetuate the fragmentation. NFS has never been what I'd call one of Unix's crown jewels. We've mainly used it because it was what we had. And cifs with the unix extensions is quite serviceable now.

Reply Parent Score: 2

melkor Member since:
2006-12-16

And that is Ubuntu's major problem imho. I dislike Gnome, much preferring KDE, yet *out of the box*, Ubuntu does NOT give me choice. Some say that that's to keep it simple, I honestly think it's bad for Linux. Everyone keeps saying 'but Linux gives you choice!!!' - strange that Ubuntu doesn't. How hard would it for Ubuntu to release a DVD instead of a CD and include the most popular desktop environment in Linux land?

Don't give me the Kubuntu bullshyte, cos that's just baloney. It gets far less attention, and has far less developers, resulting in a shoddy system. What we are seeing here is blatant favouritism for Gnome, rather than letting the end user choose what they want/prefer.

Until Ubuntu decides to support KDE properly, I won't use it, nor will I recommend it.

In fact, these days I don't use GNU/Linux at all, since several things I use aren't supported:

1. Photoshop CS2 (WINE/Cedega/CrossOver Office do not support it, not even with nasty hacks)
2. Neat Image (full of bugs under WINE, haven't tried Cedega/CrossOver office)
3. Capture One Pro (WINE says v3.6, although it has bugs, not sure on v3.7)
4. Canon EOS 1D DSLR - gphoto2 doesn't support this *major* pro camera whatsoever. Disappointing. Asking me to get off my a$$ and code drivers for this baby is what I consider elitist and a very unreasonable demand on the end user. It's one thing that gives GNU/Linux zealots a very bad name in the real world.

I have a Windows based PC, which is what I primarily use these days because Photoshop and Neat Image are Windows versions (I didn't have a Mac at the time of buying both software pieces). I love the Mac (older PowerMac G4 1ghz running 10.3.8), but until I have Mac versions of my software I won't switch totally.

Dave

Reply Parent Score: 2

unoengborg Member since:
2005-07-06

From what I can tell kubuntu is not any worse/better than other KDE based distros. If you have any special needs perhaps you should tell them.

The rest of your problems unfortunately relates to market share and development costs. So why complain that your favorite programs doesn't run in wine or some wine derivate. Why not complain that they are not ported to native Linux to the company that made them, In this case Adobe and Canon.

Microsoft isn't even close to provide drivers for as many devices that Linux supports out of the box. Yet it is always a fault of Linux when some device doesn't work under Linux, and the fault of the device manufacturer if it doesn't work on Windows. We need to be careful to place blame where blame belongs.

Today the Linux desktop is easier to use, and looks better than current versions of Windows. What is holding it back is lack of applications that people are used to use. E.g. Gimp may be a good editor, but if you have used Photoshop half a lifetime it is unlikely that you will be prepared to relearn, at least not until Gimp is significantly better than Photoshop. Currently this is not the case.

Preloaded Linux would be nice too, but it is not as important to get commonly used apps ported. The main advantage with preloaded Linux, as I see it would be that there would be less machines that ship with windows. Modern Linuxes are so easy to install that everybody can install provided the hardware is supported.

Reply Parent Score: 4

butters Member since:
2005-07-08

I dislike Gnome, much preferring KDE, yet *out of the box*, Ubuntu does NOT give me choice... Everyone keeps saying 'but Linux gives you choice!!!' - strange that Ubuntu doesn't.

Part of the choice is that there are around a dozen major distributions to choose from. Ubuntu is merely one of these choices.

How hard would it for Ubuntu to release a DVD instead of a CD and include the most popular desktop environment in Linux land?

Not very hard, but they might as well release a CD for users who prefer GNOME and another for those who prefer KDE... which is what they do. I'm not sure where your numbers are coming from on DE popularity. I have a feeling that GNOME is currently more popular than KDE, but I think this is a cyclical thing. KDE used to be more popular, then GNOME reinvented itself and became more popular, and now we see KDE reinventing itself and gaining momentum.

Don't give me the Kubuntu bullshyte, cos that's just baloney. It gets far less attention, and has far less developers, resulting in a shoddy system. What we are seeing here is blatant favouritism for Gnome, rather than letting the end user choose what they want/prefer.

I'm not going to disagree with you. Kubuntu and Ubuntu share a great deal of development effort, but yes, Kubuntu tends to trail Ubuntu in overall polish. Remember, Linux is about choice. Ubuntu chooses GNOME. Who are you to deny them their right to choose?

There is no shortage of high-quality KDE-oriented distributions. Try MEPIS or PCLinuxOS, for example. The former is a relatively close derivative of Ubuntu with a focus on KDE and simplicity. The latter is a fork of Mandriva that uses APT tools to manage RPMs, which is unusual, but it seems to work really well.

Look, man, everybody's different. It isn't feasible for everybody to develop their own distribution, so we only have like four hundred and change to choose from. Most are really small niche projects that probably aren't what you're looking for. There's certainly no conspiracy to keep you from using a KDE-oriented distribution.

In fact, these days I don't use GNU/Linux at all, since several things I use aren't supported:...

You're preaching to the choir. We all would like to see those seemingly irreplaceable Windows apps become available on Linux and other free software platforms, but nobody here at OSNews or over at the Ubuntu project can help you with this. Maybe write a letter to Adobe if you think it's worth your time, because it isn't a matter of Linux not supporting Photoshop, it's Adobe not supporting Linux. Same thing with hardware. Canon could have implemented the USB mass storage standard if they cared about compatibility, or they could have been more forthcoming as to why our reverse-engineered PTP driver in gphoto2 works with my PowerShot but not with your EOS.

Asking me to get off my a$$ and code drivers for this baby is what I consider elitist and a very unreasonable demand on the end user. It's one thing that gives GNU/Linux zealots a very bad name in the real world.

I have sneaking suspicion that you get this response from the Linux community because we feel you're placing unreasonable demands on us. Your points are valid, but your energy is misdirected. Unfortunately for those who don't like to code, that's how software is created and improved. We invite you to participate in our projects in a variety of capacities including but not limited to programming, but of course participation is not required.

I think that Linux "zealots" get a bad name because much of the "real world" believes in a culture of entitlement. Look at everybody living life with a chip on their shoulder, blaming everyone else for their problems and scoffing at the notion that they take responsibility for their own situation. Somewhere along the line we stopped believing in opportunity as a means of realizing our dreams and began to foster the idea that we're entitled to our expectations. In "Linux land," we believe that the opportunity to participate in our information society is fundamental to our inherent desire as human beings to better our situation and control our own destiny.

Of course, money can make just about any dream come true. Mark Shuttleworth, for exmaple, invested $10 million to help make the Ubuntu project a reality. But years ago my great-grandmother told me the story of how my family came to America with nothing but the promise that here they would find a land of opportunity. This is the same promise we make with free software. This isn't elitist, this is egalitarian.

Edited 2007-03-17 05:34

Reply Parent Score: 5

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

{In fact, these days I don't use GNU/Linux at all, since several things I use aren't supported:

1. Photoshop CS2 (WINE/Cedega/CrossOver Office do not support it, not even with nasty hacks)
2. Neat Image (full of bugs under WINE, haven't tried Cedega/CrossOver office)
3. Capture One Pro (WINE says v3.6, although it has bugs, not sure on v3.7)
}

What a strange person.

Those three points are no fault of Ubuntu nor Linux, but rather are the fault of the OEM software vendors (Adobe, Nik Software et al) for not writing a Linux version.

Windows can't run Linux binary software packages at all, BTW, so why would you expect Linux to be able run all Windows binaries?

The fact that WINE/Cedega/CrossOver Office suppaort any Windows binaries at all is the remarkable thing.

If you want even better support for running Windows binaries under Linux, then try this:

http://www.win4lin.com/index.php/content/view/64/125/

... or you can go the full way and use vmware or virtualbox (http://www.virtualbox.org/) virtualization software.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

"Until Ubuntu decides to support KDE properly, I won't use it, nor will I recommend it. "

I think it's possible to install KDE afterwards and switch to it then. Can someone confirm?

"In fact, these days I don't use GNU/Linux at all, since several things I use aren't supported:

1. Photoshop CS2 (WINE/Cedega/CrossOver Office do not support it, not even with nasty hacks)
2. Neat Image (full of bugs under WINE, haven't tried Cedega/CrossOver office)
3. Capture One Pro (WINE says v3.6, although it has bugs, not sure on v3.7)"


As it has mentioned before, just write a letter to the vendors of these software products. Tell them you paid some money to them, but their programs do not work in Linux properly.

To get serious again: Software support is not a lack of Linux or Wine. It's the fault of the software vendors. For Linux, specifications, APIs and frameworks are well documented, the libraries and the compilers are free (due to the GPL), so why do they refuse to use them in order to make a great product working on Linux?

BTW, I'm a photographic enthusiast myself and I never found any reason to use one of the products you mentioned. There are very capable alternatives available, just try them and see how you can work with them. Remember, even the Gimp's interface has improved and is ready for Joe Q. Sixpack.

"4. Canon EOS 1D DSLR - gphoto2 doesn't support this *major* pro camera whatsoever. Disappointing."

I agree, that's a real problem. But it's Canon's problem. There are standard specifications that Canon could have used, but they simply didn't, because they don't care. So, if your EOS had a standard USB mass storage system, a /dev/da?s1 file would be available to be mounted via the -t msdos command. No problem! There are other free standards that could have been used. But if Canon decides to be proprietary, I won't buy this product.

A simple workaround could be to eject the storage media from the camera and put it into a drive (internal or attached via USB). So access to the files would be possible.

I for myself own a Canon EOS-50 (without D) because digital SLR's quality is not worth the money at the moment. Letting a photo CD being made is possible as well, and is enough for my needs at the moment.

"Asking me to get off my a$$ and code drivers for this baby is what I consider elitist and a very unreasonable demand on the end user."

Inform developers that are able to. How does someone who you would call "elitist" to write a driver for your camera? He even would not use it, so why should he do such work?

It would be better to inform Canon itself that you want to use their great camera with Linux, but you can't because they don't support it. So you won't buy or recommend their products...

The easiest alternative: Hardware vendors and software vendors, use existing standards or publish new ones to the public!

"It's one thing that gives GNU/Linux zealots a very bad name in the real world."

Per definition, zealots have a bad name, if they defend Linux or MICROS~1 or whatever. I won't worry. Nobody cares about them.

Reply Parent Score: 2

rklrkl Member since:
2005-07-06

Sorry, but the lack of NFS client support means that if you have two machines with Linux on and one is to share the files to the other, then by default, you *can't* on Ubuntu. It took a bit of Googling to realise that portmap and nfs-common were needed - the average user of Ubuntu would have no clue about this and think it was impossible to set up an Ubuntu box to use NFS (as either a client or server). Saying that SMB shares are available is a complete cop-out - this implies that the only way an Ubuntu user can share files on their local network is to have a Windows box as a fileserver!

Problem with saying that you can use Synaptic to install stuff is that I was sick and tired of running it over 20 times to fill in the gaps shockingly left wide open by Ubuntu. No secure shell daemon installed - oh, you can't log inbetween Linux machines on your network then. No Azureus meant downloading Sun's Java (from java.sun.com - the Ubuntu version didn't work for me) and the Azureus package - the Speed Scheduler plugin is essential for me (and *many* users) because I'm quotaed during peak times and I must have automatic throttling at certain times of the day.

Got to say that claiming some obscure Bluetooth server was missing isn't that essential - not being able to run the Flash plug-in, Adobe Acrobat Reader plug-in or Java plug-in in Firefox on a 64-bit Ubuntu system easily is way more important a problem. Ubuntu should make it easy to install 32-bit versions of apps that rely on 32-bit libraries onto 64-bit systems (and before you say that 64-bit is "scarce" - it isn't, a *lot* of new systems are 64-bit capable) - at the moment, it's too hard to do so on Ubuntu, which is a big negative in my books. I'd like to see Synaptic include a 32-bit/64-bit option (i.e. add an architecture column and let you choose which bitness you want for a particular app [for apps, you can probably only have one or the other, but for libs, you should be able to install both, assuming the install paths don't clash].

Reply Parent Score: 2

ubit Member since:
2006-09-08

Ubuntu doesn't come with smb or nfs by default. Like Eugenia said, you open up the networking config tool and it prompts to install nfs and/or smb. You don't "need to realise that portmap and nfs-common" are needed, unless I'm misreading something.

Edited 2007-03-17 12:23

Reply Parent Score: 3

zombie process Member since:
2005-07-08

Why wouldn't you use fish or scp to share files?

Reply Parent Score: 1