Ubuntu 7.10 has been released. "Ubuntu 7.10 Desktop Edition adds an enhanced user interface, improved hardware support, multiple monitor support and integrated desktop search. Ubuntu 7.10 Server Edition features improved functionality, manageability, pro-active security and hardware compatibility and delivers a rapid deployment platform for developers and businesses. New versions of Kubuntu and Edubuntu, derivatives of Ubuntu aimed at KDE enthusiasts and the education community respectively, are also being released at the same time." And a review. Update: One more review.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
Well, for starters Ubuntu doesn't feel like a stripped down version of Canonical's main offering because it IS Canonical's main offering (remember, we're talking distros here, not support contracts).
NB: I'm not saying that Fedora and OpenSUSE aren't feature complete, it's just that _I_ get the feeling that Red Hat and Novell aren't too interested in polishing Fedora and OpenSUSE too much as it would threaten their commercial offerings. YMMY though.
Secondly, Ubuntu has IMHO a superior package management system as it is Debian-based.
Thirdly, it's Debian-based and everybody loves Debian except for the fact that Debian releases "always" are "outdated" and "far between". The unsupported Debian-unstable is the way out, but unstable sounds "nasty". Not to mention how nasty "unsupported" sounds...
Which brings us to the fourth reason: Ubuntu is essentially an up-to-date Debian with support.
I could go on mentioning Mark Shuttleworth's likeable personality, Canonical sending free CDs to anyone that asks, and so on. Suffice to say: yes, there is indeed something about Ubuntu.
Member since:2006-01-01
Thirdly, it's Debian-based and everybody loves Debian except for the fact that Debian releases "always" are "outdated" and "far between". The unsupported Debian-unstable is the way out, but unstable sounds "nasty". Not to mention how nasty "unsupported" sounds...
Debian releases are meant to be as stable and reliable as possible, they're not meant to be as up-to-date as possible. Debian releases are good for servers as well for those desktops where stability and reliability are more important than up-to-dateness.
For those who want Debian with more up-to-date software, there's also Debian "testing" that is slightly behind Debian "unstable" in up-to-dateness. There's also the option to stay in "testing" while getting some select packages from "unstable". Also, you seem to forget that Ubuntu is built on Debian "unstable".
Debian "unstable" is *not* unsupported. On the contrary, Debian "unstable" is fully supported -- it gets bug-fixes and security updates come from upstream developers. However, the largest component of Ubuntu, called "universe", *is* unsupported. The Ubuntu web site says that it "comes with no guarantee of security fixes and support".
http://www.ubuntu.com/community/ubuntustory/components
Which brings us to the fourth reason: Ubuntu is essentially an up-to-date Debian with support.
This is a myth that needs to be busted.
Like I said, Debian is fully supported (security & bug-fixes) but Ubuntu's "universe" and "multiverse" components are unsupported. Ubuntu releases get outdated soon after the release but Debian "unstable" and "testing" receive version updates every day, which always keeps them more or less up-to-date.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2006-01-07
What is it about Ubuntu that makes people so enthusiastic about it? Don't get me wrong, I use it at home, and I can be counted amongst those enthusiasts. But rationally, it doesn't appear to be much better than the likes of Fedora or Suse
I'm not too familiar with (recent releases of) Suse, but I have tested practically every release of Fedora. For me, Ubuntu wins because of apt-get (much faster than YUM) and the huge repositories. And Automatix solves those pesky "patent issues."
I'm not trying to start a distro war - for those who prefer RPM-based distros, more power to you. I've played around with all the big distros from Slackware to Debian, and each has some endearing feature. But all things considered, Ubuntu just seems easier than the others. If I wasn't using Ubuntu, I'd probably be using Debian.
Member since:2006-01-17
But rationally, it doesn't appear to be much better than the likes of Fedora or Suse
Rationally, it doesn't appear to be much better than Fedora or Suse now. But it wasn't long ago that Ubuntu was the simplest to download and install, had the most up to date packages that I cared about (mostly Gnome) and worked the best on my hardware (and others' too presumably).
If Fedora was as good as it is now when Ubuntu came out it could be the one with so many fans.
Edited 2007-10-18 15:43
Member since:2005-08-18
I can give you one example: package manager.
Fedora's Pirut and Pup is quite frankly an embarrassment. It's sluggish but even worse is the complete lack of user feedback of what's going on. Often you launch pirut, get prompted for the root password and then have to wait forever while it does something in the background without ANY indication or feedback of what's going on. Heck, it doesnt even show a window. Thankfully there's Yumex.
I still use Fedora (when not in my primary OS, OpenBSD) but pirut and pup are a huge pain in the ass.
Ubuntu is also admittedly more polished than most other distros.
Member since:
2006-01-08
What is it about Ubuntu that makes people so enthusiastic about it? Don't get me wrong, I use it at home, and I can be counted amongst those enthusiasts. But rationally, it doesn't appear to be much better than the likes of Fedora or Suse (and both of which have prettier default themes IMO). Yet, Ubuntu seems to have a certain je ne sais quoi, something that generates buzz, that makes people infectious in their enthusiasm, and that eludes many other distros. I can't even say why I choose to use it, yet I do.