To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Personally, I have used Kubuntu 5.10 for a while. While I do believe those who claim it's stable as a rock, it's definitely not what I have experienced. In my case, the system itself was fine (no kernel panics or freezes) but I got crashed with various KDE applications (Kaffeine, Konqueror, Adept, Krita and some KDE games). That said, most of them were segmentation faults, so it might just be some compilation flags (since I don't remember having these issues with other distributions, save for the games).
system-settings isn't that bad, but its localisation was not complete. Basically, I got frenglish. Adept got to be the worst package manager I have used. I'd rather have to deal with aptitude. There are some customisations here and there (lipstick theme, a space between minimise/maximise and close), but I would agree that it's pretty much "as is". But now that Mark is using Kubuntu, perhaps improvements will speed up!




Member since:
2005-07-11
Other branch - Kubuntu is actually bad and I think do not deserves lots of talk. The main thing I remember from Kubuntu was KDE crashes and lot's of other bugs.
I can't confirm that. It's very stable on my system, no crashes and no noticeable bugs.
They working on Gnome and optimizing all distro for it. KDE is installed "as is".
That's not true. Kubuntu uses a much better control center (called system-settings), a more user friendly Konqueror default toolbar, Adept as package manager, Katapult...
It's better than standard KDE and definitly not installed "as is".
What was the last Kubuntu version you were using? 5.04?