Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 20th Oct 2010 22:22 UTC, submitted by vivainio
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu This is kind of... Well, good news, I suppose? It depends on where you allegiances lie, but it seems like Ubuntu is warming up to the idea of using Qt to develop applications. It's no secret that Qt is a far more advanced development framework than Gtk+, so it only makes sense for Ubuntu - a GNOME/Gtk+ distribution - is looking at it.
Thread beginning with comment 446096
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by cmost
by lemur2 on Thu 21st Oct 2010 00:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by cmost"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

Kubuntu really doesn't offer much apart from a stock KDE implementation or anything unique from Canonical to separate it from the myriad of other better KDE offerings from Sabayon, Linux Mint, or Mepis. Canonical and the Ubuntu devs treat Kubuntu like an afterthought. It's little more than an Ubuntu base install with the (vanilla) KDE packages and a few different default applications. And they call it a distribution. Really?


If Kubuntu has nothing to distinguish it from KDE offerings from Sabayon, Linux Mint, or Mepis (or OpenSuse, PCLinuxOS, Mandriva, Slackware or Knoppix for that matter where KDE is also the default), then how are any of the other offerings "better"?

Kubuntu 10.04 is an LTS distribution. It uses debian .deb packages and hence apt/aptitude package manager backends. It can add any of the Launchpad PPA projects to expand the number of applications that can be installed. It can install any Ubuntu package (most of them don't assume GNOME but only gtk+ support BTW). This gives Kubuntu the largest selection of installable packages (that can be installed from repositories) of any KDE distribution.

This alone IMHO makes it worthwhile.

Frankly I'm struggling to see any Canonical customisations that could be applied to Kubuntu that would be worth it.

PS: I have thought of a few worthwhile Canonical customisations. These are: upstart (quick boot process); jockey (install proprietary graphics card drivers); Ubiquity (distro installer); GRUB 2 and automatic detection and configuration of printer drivers when the printer is first plugged in.

Kubuntu has all of those.

Edited 2010-10-21 00:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by cmost
by cmost on Thu 21st Oct 2010 01:13 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by cmost"
cmost Member since:
2006-07-16

If Kubuntu has nothing to distinguish it from KDE offerings from Sabayon, Linux Mint, or Mepis (or OpenSuse, PCLinuxOS, Mandriva, Slackware or Knoppix for that matter where KDE is also the default), then how are any of the other offerings "better"?


Have you used OpenSUSE? Have you tried SimplyMEPIS? Have you given Sabayon's KDE offering a good workout? Have you even looked at Linux Mint's community KDE edition? Based on your comments, I'm fairly confident the answer is "no."

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by cmost
by lemur2 on Thu 21st Oct 2010 01:29 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by cmost"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Have you used OpenSUSE? Have you tried SimplyMEPIS? Have you given Sabayon's KDE offering a good workout? Have you even looked at Linux Mint's community KDE edition? Based on your comments, I'm fairly confident the answer is "no."


The answer is "Yes" apart from Sabayon. I tried Sabayon some time ago, new applications took ages to download, compile and install and it was possible to get yourself in a twist.

I also tried PCLinuxOS BTW, Arch (KDE) and Fedora (KDE variant).

The latest versions of MEPIS, OpenSuSe and Linux Mint community did not properly detect my video hardware on boot of the LiveCD. They all started in a fallback vesa graphics mode with the incorrect resolution for my LCD screen.

MEPIS, PCLinuxOS, Arch and OpenSuSe have quite small application repositories compared to Kubuntu.

Only Mint KDE included the Canonical improvements: upstart (quick boot process); jockey (install proprietary graphics card drivers); Ubiquity (distro installer); and automatic detection and configuration of printer drivers when the printer is first plugged in.

All things considered, partly due to the contributions of Canonical, Kubuntu is the best KDE distribution available right now.

Edited 2010-10-21 01:30 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by cmost
by sorpigal on Thu 21st Oct 2010 12:39 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by cmost"
sorpigal Member since:
2005-11-02

If Kubuntu has nothing to distinguish it from KDE offerings from Sabayon, Linux Mint, or Mepis (or OpenSuse, PCLinuxOS, Mandriva, Slackware or Knoppix for that matter where KDE is also the default), then how are any of the other offerings "better"?

What the grandparent was saying was that Kubuntu's KDE has little to distinguish it from stock KDE, whereas the other distributions mentioned have added value in the form of defaults, integration, tools, etc.. By comparison Kubuntu KDE is weak.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[5]: Comment by cmost
by lemur2 on Thu 21st Oct 2010 13:06 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by cmost"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"If Kubuntu has nothing to distinguish it from KDE offerings from Sabayon, Linux Mint, or Mepis (or OpenSuse, PCLinuxOS, Mandriva, Slackware or Knoppix for that matter where KDE is also the default), then how are any of the other offerings "better"?

What the grandparent was saying was that Kubuntu's KDE has little to distinguish it from stock KDE, whereas the other distributions mentioned have added value in the form of defaults, integration, tools, etc.. By comparison Kubuntu KDE is weak.
"

But how exactly is it supposed to be weak?

By virtue of using the same OS mix underlying the desktop as Ubuntu, it has the best underlying OS features, such as apt and upstart.

It has the best repositories and the best "additional application" installer.

It has the best community support via Launchpad PPAs.

It has an extensive community-users-cooperative-help forum.

All of these features are provided through Canonical's involvement.

If we are talking about just the configuration settings and the theme out of the box ... all of those are user settings anyway. Just configure it how you would like, it is as easy as pie.

What exactly is wrong with the default settings as provided by the KDE project compared to the default settings as adjusted by other distributions? How does changing the default wallpaper and the default Plasma theme make other distributions supposedly better than Kubuntu?

Is that it? Is that the complaint? That Kubuntu doesn't change the wallpaper and the default Plasma theme away from the KDE defaults?

Let me quote Colonel Quaritch: "You have got to be kidding me!"

Edited 2010-10-21 13:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2