“I have always wondered what is it that makes people embrace Ubuntu over other Linux distributions. After some pondering, it struck me that the unique selling point of Ubuntu is its user friendliness. Ubuntu is a distribution targeted at the non-techie crowd – those that want to get their job done and not spend time tinkering with the OS. And consequently, the developers at Ubuntu have bundled simple easy to use GUI front end tools to achieve common system administration tasks. Here I have put together 10 things in Ubuntu that make a new user’s life that much simple.”
Hehehe, author praises Gnome features suggesting that they are available in Ubuntu only ( e.g. blog title)
As far as I am concerned I have ALL these features on my Slackware Dropline desktop. Well, maybe the ones I really care but neverthless…
This is not a distro war comment, but having tried ubuntu, I really don’t think its that user friendly compared to the likes of PCLinuxOS. Have you seen what you have to do to get the functionality for normal web browsing in Firefox? Flash, Jave, etc. PCLinux has that built in. Ever installed anything through synaptic, NOT officially supported thru Ubuntu? Where is the menu entry? Oh I have to use some program called “Smeg” to do what should be done? Come on, a user from windows just will not go thru this crap to use it. That I think is why the migration may never really occur…I only mention PCLinuxOS, because out of the numerous distros I have tried, this one has it all built in, no real pain in the ass, lets turn away another user typr distro cause its too much to get the main things set up. Just my thoughts….thanks for listening.
Sounds like an anonymous poster to the article:
“It’s a pain to configure Ubuntu for multimedia use. The names of the packages are so weird that it’s almost impossible to find java, flash, win32codecs, libdvd-stuff. It would be nice with Acrobat Reader 7 also because the other pdf-readers does not read most of the pdf-documents found on the net. Skype was a little bit problematic to install also.
It’s nice to see that thet are developing these config tools but do we need this many different distro-tools to do the same config-task.
I think I will be an Ubuntu-user in the future but for now I’ll stick with http://www.pclinuxonline.com/pclos“
Believe it or not, that was not me. Coincidental to say the least anyways. I actually didnt even read the article and only commented based on my experiences…but I do disagree thats its not that hard to get the multimedia stuff all done….yes, maybe a windows user might find difficulty.
yes, maybe a windows user might find difficulty
Mentally challenged people will too.
hmmm…
I just install gstreamer0.8-plugins and VLC and I can play almost everything…
as for DVDs I just need to grab the dvdcss .deb from the VLC site..
1) pclinuxonline is run by one guy I think from india. Not quite the same concerns about being sued as a full company.
2) A one person endevor really has no chance of changing the underlying application code (eg Gnome) – Ubuntu can.
Enable multiverse and type:
apt-get install j2re1.4 flashplugin-nonfree gstreamer0.8-plugins-multiverse
Not exactly that hard :/
“apt-get install j2re1.4 flashplugin-nonfree gstreamer0.8-plugins-multiverse
Not exactly that hard :/”
And then watch as something else on your system suddenly stops working… Or at least that is what happened last time I installed something from multiverse. It broke other parts of the system.
I mean this is yet another of those kinds of writings where the author has a fairly zero level knowledge of distros and DEs and yet still tries to convince people about a specific one’s superiority. Granted, Ubuntu has all that. And granted, it’s not alone.
Actually, after reading the article I got the impression that he was saying that Ubuntu would be a good choice for people who don’t know anything about Linux. I must have missed the part where he tries to say it is sooo much better than other distributions.
If you want to convince Windows users to switch to Linux you have to make it just as easy to use. And Ubuntu goes a long ways towards achieving that goal.
Most of these tools are Gnome tools. More of these tools are tools that other distributions that have alternatives to. Really, the only one I see as unique is the device submitter which is a good tool to tell the Ubuntu folks about any problems users are having hardware wise (the hardest stuff for new users to correct).
Ubuntu’s popularity doesn’t come from tools that are available on pretty much every modern, non-we like to do things the geek/hard way Linux distribution (Mandriva, SuSE, Fedora, etc). Even Debian will have these in their next version (and they have them today if you’re running sid).
Ubuntu’s popularity comes from its build quality. It’s solid as a rock. While the brown is ugly (to me) everything in the distribution fits together so well. Nothing looks hacked together. Nothing works hacked together. Ubuntu doesn’t do anything fancy to try and beat other Linux distributions. They have no special tools that no one else has. It’s their execution of the entire package that just works so perfectly.
This isn’t a perfect situation for all users. While Ubuntu is built on sid (Debian’s “unstable” branch), it is still more conservative than most consumer distributions. Their move to Xorg was about 6 months after other distros. Their move to GCC4 came a release after Fedora switched. If you want the bleeding edge of tools that, well, most users don’t care about, Ubuntu leaves some things lacking – and they won’t backport things like Firefox 1.5 when it comes out (regardless of the 4-5 months before their next release). But this stability and conservatism in packages makes Ubuntu more, well, stable and that seems to resonate better with users than being bleeding edge.
Ubuntu’s quality and stability are the difference, not applications.
You are all right in some terms. But the MAIN feature of Ubuntu is…. IT´s COMMUNITY! Because of it´s subtitle “Linux for human beeings” noobs (this will shock you, noobs are humans too) are very welcome and there is no “What? A stupid Windows user? RTFM!”…
Edited 2005-11-28 11:48
You see? THAT is not writen in the article. I have checked the 10 reasons. Guess what? Community is not in there. Article is the blame, not Ubuntu which is a fine distro.
While the brown is ugly (to me
Must be a noob. I can’t believe people even mention color schemes in a distro as a valid point. Themes people. Easy to switch. Don’t waste characters talking about non-issues. Most of the GUI Ubuntu applications are just Gnome applications. Fedora also has all these applications and you can also get a front end GUI tool called yumex for their yum updater tool.
Edited 2005-11-28 11:58
and they aren’t realizing that the green theme is going with the African nature roots. At least that’s how I’ve always taken it.
“One grouse that all users switching to Linux had was the difficulty in installing and uninstalling applications when compared to windows. This is done away with the Add Applications tool in Ubuntu.”
No it isn’t.
All that does is provide you with a front-end to specific releases of specific packages for the specific version of your specific distro. Ubuntu only does security fixes on its packages — so unless you chase the ever-changing ‘development’ repository (not an option in any kind of production environment) you’re stuck with what your release Ubuntu provides.
Summary: Ubuntu makes installing packaged Ubuntu software easy. That’s no big deal.
The real problem with Linux software installation is installing anything new. For example: a user sees FooBar 2.0 released, which has new features and fixes bugs. It’s not in his ‘repositories’ because he’s not going to mess around with some ‘development’ distro which’ll upgrade/break his other stuff.
The only way he can get this new app is to compile it, and all its dependencies, from source — a ridiculous ‘solution’. Or he can trawl the net for some other ‘repository’ and hope that the packages work with his distro.
Whereas in almost every other OS, people can just download the new program, install it and go.
So again, apt-get/synaptic/blah do NOT make installing new software easy. They’re just front-ends to specific versions of packages. Go to the newcomer Linux forums around the net — thousands of posts from novices struggling to get the latest app installed, because they shouldn’t have to wait 6 months (or a year) for it to arrive in a new distro release’s ‘repositories’.
Autopackage is on the road to solving this, but the situation is still bad. Let’s identify this, people, instead of thinking apt-get is a solution when it doesn’t remotely help general Linux users get new software without a lot of somersaults!
I’m probably going to get flamed for this, but Gentoo has the latest packages for a lot of software – and while you do have to compile from source, it’s all automated and managed with emerge.
I know that’s not an ideal solution, or to everyones tastes, but it works for me. I’ve had a desktop PC with a mix of “stable” and “unstable” packages now running for about 2 years without a reinstall (thank god, it takes a while!).
I really don’t think I could go back to a solution like Ubuntu and not be able to pick and choose between the bleeding edge and the stable at will.
Saying that, each to his/her own.
in almost every other OS, people can just download the new program, install it and go.
Hmm… Possibly you meant: “in almost every other OS, people can just buy the new program, install it and go.”
GNU/Linux is different from most other operating systems because you can just download and install programs free of charge. Plus you get security updates to always keep your system safe and sound. And you get easy upgrades for all your installed programs whenever the distro developers (who are often voluntary workers) find some free time to package programs for your convenience. And you don’t need to pay anything for any of these services.
But if that’s not good enough for you, then you are free to use (and pay for) some other OS that you find better.
Er no, I’m talking about free software (either gratis or libre). In 99% of cases on other OSes, you see a new program, grab it and go.
In Linux you have to wait months for a new distro release to include it in its repositories, or mess around trying to compile it (and all its dependencies) from source, or seek out some ‘third-party repository’ which may not work and pulls in other stuff, or or or…
It’s nothing to do with whether software is free/expensive/whatever. It’s about the horrid tangles users have to go through on Linux to get new software.
You can choose to ignore it, but you’re ignoring the thousands of users we see around the web struggling to do the most basic stuff under Linux.
You can choose to ignore it, but you’re ignoring the thousands of users we see around the web struggling to do the most basic stuff under Linux.
That argument doesn’t hold. You don’t need to have the very latest unstable version of an app to do “basic stuff” in Linux.
The problem is the Windows-centric mindset that says: “always use the very latest version available.” In Linux, it’s “use the latest stable version available for your distro unless you want to take chances and install from source (using checkinstall so you can easily update/downgrage the installed compiled software)”.
I use Kubuntu and Mandriva, and I have absolutely no problem doing any “basic stuff” using only official packages and backports (+ some PLF packages for non-free stuff).
Enough with the FUD already.
“That argument doesn’t hold. You don’t need to have the very latest unstable version of an app to do “basic stuff” in Linux.”
Huh? Who said anything about “unstable” apps? It’s when new, stable releases come out, and users can’t get them without all this fuss, that it’s a problem.
Ubuntu ships with GNOME 2.12.0 (closer to .12.1 with Ubuntu’s patches). Then GNOME 2.12.2 arrives, fixing lots of bugs, and users can’t run it — unless they switch to some constantly shifting mid-development ‘repository’ which brings in loads of other changes (and isn’t officially security supported).
Or they can battle to compile the entire desktop, and all its dependencies, from source, which is hardly a ‘solution’.
The same can be applied to loads of apps which issue major new stable releases, fixing bugs and adding features, and rarely can users have the new software without jumping through all these hoops.
“Enough with the FUD already.”
FUD to you — a major problem for so many newcomers trying Linux, as you can patently see by looking round forums on the net. Of course, you can choose to ignore this and claim anything negative said about Linux is ‘FUD’ (after all, it’s the catch-all retort de jour) but it doesn’t help. I’ve been using Linux for five years, and I still see people struggling to use new software today. It even gets on my wick that I can’t get the latest stable releases without a six-month distro-upgrade wait or messing around with unstable repos and source.
If Windows was like this, if it was the other way round and Linux app installation was almost uniformly double-click-and-go, whereas Windows required so many different levels of abstraction and configuration just to install new software, you’d be blasting Microsoft ’til kingdom come.
Sigh. If I could be bothered, I could find you 100 links from message board posts TODAY where potential Linux convertees are bermused by the sheer complexity of just getting FooBar 2.0. But you’d still cover your eyes…
Huh? Who said anything about “unstable” apps? It’s when new, stable releases come out, and users can’t get them without all this fuss, that it’s a problem.
It usually takes only a couple of days when a new app comes out before it’s added to the backports repositories. Nothing worth making such a big fuss.
The same can be applied to loads of apps which issue major new stable releases, fixing bugs and adding features, and rarely can users have the new software without jumping through all these hoops.
Again, these apps are usually packaged pretty quickly. If you couldn’t use the app before this new release, then why did you install it in the first place. If you can use it, then why do you need to install the latest version so badly?
As I said, this is due to the “I want all the newest apps NOW” syndrome. If this is what you want as a user, then install a distro like Gentoo, which will give you the latest apps all the time (as long as you don’t mind compiling times). I myself install apps that I know will get the job done. If a new feature isn’t available yet, then I’ll wait until it is available.
See, there’s always going to be new versions coming out, so this is just a never-ending chase. The fact is that when an app is mature, upgrading is not essential. This is why I still use Office 2000 at work, even though there have been two major releases since then. It gets the job done, so why upgrade just for the sake of upgrading?
FUD to you — a major problem for so many newcomers trying Linux, as you can patently see by looking round forums on the net.
Funny, I go to a lot of forums around the net, and this isn’t something that jumps out as a major problem.
Of course, you can choose to ignore this and claim anything negative said about Linux is ‘FUD’ (after all, it’s the catch-all retort de jour) but it doesn’t help.
Aren’t we jumping to conclusions a bit too quickly here? From saying that this isn’t a major problem, you automatically assume that I brush aside all criticism of Linux? Let’s be reasonable, shall we? Find REAL problems with Linux and we’ll talk (hint: Wifi adapters needing ndiswrapper or driverloader solutions, lack of games, winmodem support still flakey, etc.).
The fact that you have to wait a couple of days before apps make it to a repository is NOT a big issue, which is why there are very few people actually complaining about this on web forums.
I’ve been using Linux for five years, and I still see people struggling to use new software today. It even gets on my wick that I can’t get the latest stable releases without a six-month distro-upgrade wait or messing around with unstable repos and source.
I’ve been using Linux for five years as well. When I was a newbie, I wasn’t bothered by the fact that I couldn’t always get the latest version right away. In fact, I appreciated the fact that I could have a stable base system. Of course, I LIKE having the latest and greatest, which is why I’ve “cookerized” my Mandriva desktop, and I use backports on my Kubuntu laptop. Guess what: I installed KDE 3.5 RC2 only a few days after it officially came out…
If Windows was like this, if it was the other way round and Linux app installation was almost uniformly double-click-and-go, whereas Windows required so many different levels of abstraction and configuration just to install new software, you’d be blasting Microsoft ’til kingdom come.
No, I wouldn’t. I believe the Linux way is superior to Windows, and I wish Windows had these repositories for free software (obviously, for commercial software installers are better). And the “waiting time” is there for Windows as well, the difference being that you can’t download and install an app in between the time that it’s ready for released and the time it’s packaged with the installer. You have the impression that there’s no waiting time only because the app isn’t offered at all until it’s packaged…
I don’t understand what you mean by “different levels of abstraction and configuration”, however. It’s simple: start synaptic, add repositories if you don’t have any pre-configured, select apps, click install. There’s only one level of abstraction and configuration, so I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say here.
Sigh. If I could be bothered, I could find you 100 links from message board posts TODAY where potential Linux convertees are bermused by the sheer complexity of just getting FooBar 2.0.
Please do. I certainly don’t see it on the Ubuntu forums, which is where Ubuntu newbies go.
But you’d still cover your eyes…
No I wouldn’t, because I don’t. I don’t see software installation as a major issue with Linux right now, in the sense that I do not believe it has an impact on the adoption of Linux. To me it’s a minor annoyance, a tempest in a teapot. There are more pressing issues to be dealth with (as I mentioned above: improved support for Wifi cards, better interoperability with MS Office, more games, suspend/hibernation support for laptop which is still flakey, and so on).
They could easily upgrade when it’s packaged for that distro. Waiting a bit for the new version to be packaged is small beans if you ask me.
C,mon you can download free windows programs as well,
go to download.com or tucows or many others to download free programs for windows.
I can not agree more. After n linux installs, I finally always switched back to Windows (w2k). It is not a GNOME, KDE, or CLI issue, it is just to complicate. After all, I should not feel guilty that FireFox, OpenOffice, Java, Python, MikTeX, …, are so easy to install on my win platform. I prefer to be considered as a stupid win user.
Having said this, (K)Ubuntu are great, still to complicate to manage.
See folks, we need to listen to people like this!
Linux does not have 5% desktop market share because of lack of Photoshop. It doesn’t have 5% because of Microsoft’s monopoly. Sure, those don’t help, but the real reason it’s not closer to 20% or so:
It’s so darn complicated to use. Installing new software (that’s not in ‘repositories), installing drivers, no standards for configuration, no standard platform, constant API and ABI breakage — these are things that need sorting out.
Please, go and visit forums around the net. Tell me how many newcomers are giving up on Linux because it doesn’t run Photoshop, and how many are giving up because of the problems described!
Please, go and visit forums around the net. Tell me how many newcomers are giving up on Linux because it doesn’t run Photoshop, and how many are giving up because of the problems described!
The number of newbies abandoning Linux for both these reasons is negligible. This is why Linux’ marketshare keeps increasing, albeit slowly.
Why isn’t the figure higher? No games, no MS Office (except with Codeweavers) and the fact that some proprietary hardware vendors make life more complicated or Linux users. But it’s mostly the games and the fact that you don’t have a native version of MS Office.
When I want to install something new in ubuntu, I type apt-get install “appname” or use synaptic. sometimes I’ll download a deb file and run dpkg -i “debfilename” it’s child play
Really? So when The GIMP 2.4 comes out, you’ll just type ‘apt-get install gimp’ and you’ll have it?
Of course not!
Ubuntu (like most distros) only issues security fixed packages. To get the new GIMP, you’d have to edit your /etc/apt/sources.list, add Dapper repositories, do an update, pull in loads of other packages and dependencies, and finally get The GIMP.
You have to do all that — switch to some ‘development’ constantly-shifting system, to pull in a new app and all its dependencies. Or compile the whole lot from source.
See what the problem is now? Users just want to download and run a new app. They don’t want source and development repositories and all that baggage.
No, when they put out the new version, I’ll type “apt-get update”
and then type “apt-get upgrade”. if I want to update all of my packages to the newest version, I type apt-get dist-upgrade
still pretty easy. That’s why I like Debian, and that’s why I like Ubuntu.
> Really? So when The GIMP 2.4 comes out, you’ll just
> type ‘apt-get install gimp’ and you’ll have it?
> Of course not!
Why not? If you have the backports repository, most of what’s available in Dapper is ported over and tested.
If you’re *really* impatient, you could always install GDEBI:
http://www.whiprush.org/2005/11/gdebi_arrives.html
There’s little need for stuff like autopackage, when Debian already provides the infrastructure.
The real problem with Linux software installation is installing anything new. For example: a user sees FooBar 2.0 released, which has new features and fixes bugs. It’s not in his ‘repositories’ because he’s not going to mess around with some ‘development’ distro which’ll upgrade/break his other stuff. […] Go to the newcomer Linux forums around the net — thousands of posts from novices struggling to get the latest app installed, because they shouldn’t have to wait 6 months (or a year) for it to arrive in a new distro release’s ‘repositories’.
I gather you are unfamiliar with the concept of “backports”. The backports repository has newer packages for older distros, so I can (for example) install the latest version of amaroK on my Kubuntu laptop without having to wait for Dapper Drake.
This isn’t a real issue. I don’t know of any Linux user who really feels that they are penalized because they can’t always install the very latest version of an app through their repository. And yes, I do read forums where new Linux users post messages. I believe you are greatly exaggerating this, as I have not seen the alleged outcry you describe.
In any case, installing software is still easy. The fact that you might not get the very latest stable version of the app is irrelevant to the ease of package installation.
“In any case, installing software is still easy.”
Really? Oh, can you tell me how to install the latest Rhythmbox on my Ubuntu Hoary machine then please? Oh wait, my only option is to upgrade my entire distro to get the new GNOME, or compile the whole lot (and dependencies) from source.
I could say the same for many, many other apps, which often have few dependencies but aren’t in some ‘backports’ ‘repository’.
That’s easy? What planet are you on?
“The fact that you might not get the very latest stable version of the app is irrelevant to the ease of package installation.”
Huh? It’s directly related to it. If software installation was clean, easy and elegant, people could get new stable releases without having to use mid-development repositories or pray it’s in some ‘backports’ or compile the whole lot from source.
Instead, you’re arguing that it’s not important for users to have stable new releases of apps. Let them wait six months with bugs before they upgrade their entire distro to get it.
Like with the other poster, if I could be bothered, I’d find stacks of links to forums around the net, with novice Linux users utterly frustrated that they can’t get bugfixed releases without switching their distro to a mid-development thing, or compiling an app and all its dependencies from source.
What would you say to them?
Really? Oh, can you tell me how to install the latest Rhythmbox on my Ubuntu Hoary machine then please? Oh wait, my only option is to upgrade my entire distro to get the new GNOME, or compile the whole lot (and dependencies) from source.
I could say the same for many, many other apps, which often have few dependencies but aren’t in some ‘backports’ ‘repository’.
That’s easy? What planet are you on?
It IS easy, because you can update your entire distro automatically. Easy means “not complicated”. So it is in fact easy.
The case you mention is special, however: the Rhythmbox developers obviously make use of some new features in Gnome, which require the new version of it. That’s not the distro’s fault, nor is it Gnome’s fault, or even the Rhythmbox developer’s fault. If I make a new softwaer that REQUIRES Windows XP or better, it sucks for those who have Windows 2000, but that’s life. The good thing about Linux is that a complete system upgrade is just a couple of mouse clicks away.
If software installation was clean, easy and elegant, people could get new stable releases without having to use mid-development repositories or pray it’s in some ‘backports’
If in not in the backports repository, then you can always request it. That’s the beauty of Linux.
Instead, you’re arguing that it’s not important for users to have stable new releases of apps. Let them wait six months with bugs before they upgrade their entire distro to get it.
It doesn’t take six months. It takes a couple of days before new versions of apps are added to the backports repository (for K/Ubuntu). If not, you can see if the developers have packaged it for your distro. Many of them do, especially for popular packages.
Like with the other poster, if I could be bothered, I’d find stacks of links to forums around the net, with novice Linux users utterly frustrated that they can’t get bugfixed releases without switching their distro to a mid-development thing, or compiling an app and all its dependencies from source.
What do you mean, “like the other poster”… You obviously posted both messages. You have the same IP address (or at least the same first three numbers), you use the exact same arguments and you have the same writing patterns. I think you just wrote two posts to give the impression that there’s more people supporting your argument, which is pretty pathetic.
If that’s not the case, then I’ll invite you to register as a user. It’s quick, it’s free…my, it’s as easy as installing software on a Linux system! 🙂
What would you say to them?
That its a problem with Desktop Linux not Ubuntu, and that anyone who really cares should use Gentoo anyway. MOST PEOPLE do not care about having new software the day it comes out, only a certain segment of nerds (that actually knows what version of software they run and keep up with new releases) must have the newest software the day it comes out and they are best served by Gentoo, Windows, or OSX.
Saying that Ubuntu has a problem because it cannot satisfy these sorts of nerds is like complaining that you car does a poor job of pulling your boat- its not what it was intended to do. Ubuntu is for people that might think that getting new software every six months is a real fast track! I personally used to be a nerd like yourself but then after a year of using Ubuntu I have learned to wait for packages because it really doesn’t add to much to run that new version of rhythmbox. If I really need something new then I use Autopackage but this is rare (I wanted newest Abiword once). Otherwise I get new software when it gets backported and I don’t waste time going to website reading that new software is released.
If that doesn’t suit you then fine. Just don’t pretend it holds Ubuntu back on the desktop. Windows 2000 and Office 2000 are still really popular for a reason- people don’t care about running new software if the software they have works. Almost everything in Ubuntu works for me right now and what doesn’t isn’t going to come from some 0.x releases, its going to come from years of development on Linux Desktop software.
Posts like this are exactly the reason Anonymous posting is a good thing.
You’re also forgetting that on almost every other OS, new versions of software only come out once every year or two. How often does a new version of Internet Explorer come out (patches non-withstanding)? The current version is three years old at this point. How often does a new version of Office come out? Last I checked, 2003 was the newest edition. How about AIM? Version 5 is a year old at this point. Open source programs tend to release very often, because that helps retain developer interest and allows the distributed development model (where people are always joining and leaving) to work smoothly. It also means that if you want to stay on the cutting edge of every release, you’re going to have to do that work yourself.
With closed-source apps on a closed-source OS, users get new versions of stuff once every year or two. With open-source apps on Ubuntu, they get it every six months. If people have gotten by just fine with software updates being so far apart in the Windows world, how is six months suddenly too much in the Linux world?
If you know enough to know what Ping is, why you want to ping something, and understand TCP/IP dotted thingy addresses means, why would a clunky GUI interface be easier than “Ping 12.0.0.1” in cli?
Why is this better for newbies??
Well, that’s handy for Newbies, there was me thinking what would be useful would be a working sound card, not knowing that it’ll be there for next release. Because new users probably won’t be hanging around in silence till then..
That’s a useful tool for developers and general Computer snoopers, not newbies.
“Do you suspect your son is viewing X rated movie CDs on your computer when you are not around ? You just uncheck the option “Use CD-ROM devices” in the user privileges of your son’s account and you can rest assured.”
But your son wants to watch his PG DVDs (that’s what movie CD are called these days)??
This is an administrators tool, not for err.. yes, you guessed it.. newbies
so for what would I (as a normal user) need network configuration, gparted, some obscure device manager, strange services I have never heard of and above all have a fight with annoyed linux geeks in irc.
I personally use ubuntu though because it is easy to install and features a quite up-to-date repository (with gems like ion3, mutt, irssi, etc.)
My experience with the live CD of latest version of Ubuntu was that it scrunched all the Firefox menus together in the upper left-hand corner of the browser, making them essentially unusable. The desktop does look clean, but other than that, I couldn’t see any significant difference between Ubuntu and the 10 or 12 other live CD’s I have.
Yeah. It’s a great newbie distribution, except a few glaring issues.
Example: The media player that comes with it is RhythmBox… And as compiled, out of the box, it does not support mp3… A distro targetted at neophytes where the audio player does not support the most common audio file format out of the box? That’s unacceptable in my opinion for a distro targetted at non-techies..
Same thing for copy-protected DVDs, but I don’t blame them. After all, they have to comply with the laws.
I believe there are more important issues with the distro. In my experience, there are some broken packages (the spam filter coming with Evolution doesn’t work), the badly-supported Universe/Multiverse and WPA support for WiFi (I believe this one is more of a DE/config issue).
I don’t mind doing hand configuration, but if I’m going to do so, I’ll take a distro tailored with that in mind.
lacking mp3 support isn’t a “problem” – it lacks it because the entire OS is built on open source software ergo the sound format to use is .ogg.
That’s the same with all open-source distros. In the US the only “legal” way to currently play mp3’s is via RealPlayer. The Ubuntu site has easy to follow instructions on installing RealPlayer (as well as the other proprietary codecs) if you want.
“lacking mp3 support isn’t a “problem” – it lacks it because the entire OS is built on open source software ergo the sound format to use is .ogg.”
And the average newbie / end user cares? No, they don’t. All they care about is “What the hell? It won’t play my mp3 files and doesn’t know what format they are?”
It most certainly *is* a problem for a desktop / neophyte targetted distribution. Not supporting the most common audio file format out there is unacceptable given the target audiance. And no, don’t tell me .ogg. Because nobody and nobody actually uses it. None of internet radio sites use it, none of the music download sites use it, etc.
Ubuntu most definitely is NOT aimed at neophytes. Not unless they made gigantic strides from 4.10 in this area.
In 4.10 mounting had to be done from the commandline, GCC was not installed by default (on a Linux distro? wtf?) so I couldn’t install my wireless driver, and there was no *offline* documentation to speak of to help me amend all this.
“GCC was not installed by default (on a Linux distro? wtf?) so I couldn’t install my wireless driver”
And you shouldn’t even need GCC to install hardware. If the Linux folks sorted out some form of binary compatibility in the kernel, we’d be able to simply download and use drivers.
No need for GCC, kernel headers, version numbers, upgrade breakage, etc. etc. etc. It’s shockingly messy.
Making things easy for USERS should be the priority — not developers!
It’s a trade-off between making things work at all for the kernel developers, and making things more convenient for the user.
A Windows-style binary-driver ecology just wouldn’t work in Linux. The merits of open versus closed-source drivers aside, the simple fact is that the community can at least fix the open-source drivers. If most drivers were closed source, there’d be no hope of that, and the driver situation in Linux would be very bad. For every good driver (like NVIDIA’s), you’d have a dozen crappy ones (like ATI’s). And not only would the community be unable to fix the drivers, but the kernel would stagnate maintaining backwards compatibility for all those crappy drivers.
The driver situation in Linux is just fine if the user treats the machine like a Mac instead of a Windows PC. Before buying a piece of hardware, check the HCL for your distro. Almost all the good, brand-name stuff will have open-source drivers (with the notable exception of video cards), and you won’t have to deal with drivers at all.
after adding aptget source list
it’s hard to find all the packages because of weird multiple files/naming.
(flash, java, acrobat, realplayer, mp3, dvd, w32codecs for quicktime and windows media…)
photo printer didnt work
laptop wireless lan didnt work
camera didnt work
cell phone didnt work
bad font rendering
—
technical rant:
root account disabled makes things more cumbersome. trust me.(long sht to write…)
—
with suse + packman rpm all problems getting from ubuntu are gone!
I liked Ubuntu at first, but I found my satistaction level with Ubuntu was inversely proportional to the amount of time I had used it. Eventually, I got rid of it.
I’ve talked to others who had similar experiences.
Ubuntu is overly hyped and distributes free pre-burned cd’s.
There is nothing special about Ubuntu, and trying to find such things is pointless.
Its not a bad distro, but there is no huge secret, or killer feature of Ubuntu. It simply doesn’t have major issues, and is well documented.
The newest ubuntu release by default does not have the computer,home folder, and trash icons on the desktop. There is no obvious, user friendly way to put them there.
Open office is still using a horribly archaic “save as” dialoge.
The Trash icon is in the tool bar and the home folder and “computer” can be accessed (shockingly) through the “Places” menu. I know, this is some crazy shit, and the five seconds you spend searching for it will be the most terrifying of your life. I’m sure billionaire astronaut Mark Shuttleworth will be happy to pay for your therapy.
That’s because these things are all easily accessible from permanent locations in the panels.
On ubuntu you can simply download easyubuntu(automated scripts), and with 2 clicks you can get all the multimedio you might need.. dvd,divx,mpeg, quicktime+ a lot more a user might need…
For the slackware user.. if you are happy where you are, why you bother telling you have the same?
For the one complaining about not getting codecs, I guess I have already told it..
As an Ubuntu user, I can say I didn’t lik Breezy as much i did Hoary.. few annoying bugs.. Breezy felt a bit more like a alpha release..
These is onething I wanna tell to all linux developers, coders.. As myself being a joe user.. I can do everything with linux(ubuntu) i want, and yes linux looks and feels ready for desktop. BUT PLEASE DON’T EXPECT JOE USER TO COMPILE KERNEL JUST TO MAKE WEBCAM WORK. DON’T EXPECT JOE USER TO SUCCEED INSTALLING ATI OR NVIDIA CARDS FOR FULL PERFORMANCE ON VIDEO(AND YES THAT MATTERS.) WEP PROTOCOL FOR WIFI IS SO RARELY USED NOW, AND MOST NETWORKS USES WPA-PSK, AND MOST MODEMS YET DISABLED WEP(EX:ROBOTICS), AND WE DEFINETLY NEED WPA-PSK OUT OF BOX, CAUSE JOE USER MASSES UP EVEN HE/SHE INSTALLS WPA_SUP OR NDISWR.. THATS ALL WE NEED, NOTHING MORE
What’s made me an overnight Ubuntu is its hardware support! The 6month release cycle so far has been ensuring up to date hardware support.
I really don´t know what all the people like about Ubuntu.
I tried every release of it but on one of my machines the sound doesn´t work. If I install Sarge then it works. I mean here the standard configuration of both distros.
On another machine the X server of Ubuntu crashes at random times in the middle of work. But the X server of Sarge never crashed on this machine.
And these bugs were in every release of Ubuntu.
What hardware should I have that Ubuntu will work?
If you have read carefully, you will find that the author of the post has said – and I quote “the developers at Ubuntu have bundled simple easy to use GUI front end tools to achieve common system administration tasks.”. The word to note here is ‘bundled’.
He never said they created the tools. Second, not all linux distributions bundle all these gnome tools. Take slackware for instance, it comes with only KDE. And fedora core 2 does not have gparted even if it has gnome.
Third, he clarifies in a comment (see the comments) – “In Ubuntu, the 10 things listed in my post (even if some of them are related to gnome ) are really a boon for the newbies who come from a windows environment.”
Lastly, the post is targeted at newbies and not linux gurus – not even linux experts. And me being a linux newbie myself, I have gained some information from what the author of the post has said.
Personally, I think ubuntu is good because I like Debian much more than Redhat or Suse for example, but debian stable is too outdated for my desktop needs (you have to mount manually etc. etc.), so Ubuntu was the obvious choiche.
Even the fact that they send you CDs is not to underestimate. The thing I didn’t like about Suse was that they always gave only outdated DVDs for free, and openSuse doesn’t convince as a distro to “just use”.
This is a FREE in both aspects disto. Those complaining about it not having flash have you donated time or money to the developers of gplflash or java? Also those talking about being user friendly and attracting the “average joe” I dont want all the “average joe” windows users migrating to linux let ms have them.
I want linux to have just enough users that hardware developers will write drivers for us.
> I want linux to have just enough users that hardware
> developers will write drivers for us.
One problem is that Linux may never reach sufficient market share to convince vendors to produce FREE drivers.
(Proprietary drivers are considered a violation of Linux copyright.)
While I agree that some things in linux are waaay too difficult, there are a couple of things that annoy me.
First, people don’t expect to drive OK the first time they get a car. This is especially true with manual gear shifts. And basically everithing in the car is in sight. Why then do people expecto to manage a computer as an IT pro without ever reading a bit? I mean, most people learn to drive pretty fast, but Computer Science is a degree, ain’t it?
Second, many linux distro’s are free AND legal. And if you are free, legal and don’t pay money to Thomson or the flash developers, your distro won’t have neither mp3 nor flash support out of the box. Something similar happens with MS office documents. But people prefer to blame linux (or *BSD) before realizing that their troubles are caused by propietary formats. It is a bit difficult to put propietary and free in the same sentence.
Is installing generic new software versions easier on Mac or Windows? Yes, it is. But don’t expect to get maximum performance from scientific software in windows, or just the features you need… unless you compile it (Be it cygwin, VisuaStudio or whatever). You see, everything has pro’s and cons.
Miguel
Well, this is more Debian oriented (haven’t tried it with RPM distros)
On april the 27th, replace breezy with dapper (or wait and replace sarge with etch). Shut down most services (just in case) and back up your data. Enter as root and type apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade. Wait. Answer a few questions. Reconfigure a couple of things if you want. Reboot. If you are not unlucky (wich, unfortunately is more often than 1%), you emerge with a new version… of the entire OS.
What will happen with vista? What happened with OS 10.4? Format the whole HD?
Anyway, sorry for the rant. I had a hard day, am in a pretty bad mood and, well, you see.
Archlinux.
Check it out for yourself.
pacman -Syu and you get all currently installed (through repos) apps updated to whatever is the most current version. This is why I switched from Ubuntu to Archlinux, with Ubuntu, no backports of new software requires you to wait 6 months, then go through a massive upgrade and pray that it upgraded properly.
With Arch, I know that when a new version of an app is released, I’ll be able to get the new version within days from the repo.
What version is Arch right now? I heard a few stability concerns not so long ago.
I’m kind of geeky, and a minimalistic fast distro that leaves control to you is something that appeals me. You know, I’m a physicist, I NEED to play with things.
Well, they had a HUGE upgrade recently, but from what I see, the rough spots are past them.
If you install with 7.0, and do a full system upgrade post install, you will be running a 7.1 system.
There is a 7.1 install cd in RC form right now that can be used, its pretty stable.
As for a tinkerors os, arch is definately the one you are looking for.
Ok first off im pretty much mainly a Mac OS X user, that said I use Linux at work a lot and have had a moderate interest in using it occasionally at home. Im not a complete novice to UNIX/Linux (been using it for years from Mandrake to Red Hat Linux to fedora core now to Ubuntu) and yet im not super frickin technical with it either I use Ubuntu because
(1 – It can figure out how to partition with remaining free HD space (something EVERY distro should do period) and setup grub easily to work with a Windows partition (i have to have for my courses)
(2 – It recognized my wireless card and actually worked with it – granted several other distros did but I usually had to manually add the wireless connection and in Debians case it plain didn’t recognize my wireless card (had to setup off shared connection from my Powerbook via Ethernet)
(3 – it makes installing apps a snap, now that I can easily use a Debian based distro I love using Apt-get
(4 – new software faster. I shouldn’t have to wait forever to get a simple upgrade to GNOME/KDE/WindowMaker,etc
Before Ubuntu I never was able to install a system by myself and get GNOME/KDE/WindowMaker/XFCE/GNUstep/Wine/Mono,etc all installed and added to the GNOME menu (where applicable) without having to manually edit everything myself.
Ubuntu is as close to what Linux “should” work like, it’s not Mac OS X easy but it is a hell of a lot closer than other distros. It’s not a newbie distro it’s HOW LINUX SHOULD WORK period.
I don’t think you can generalize by saying installing software is easy in Ubuntu. With simple or famous packages it’s usually easy (except, as somebody mentioned, codices which should be more automatic).
Ubuntu is a beautifully designed distro. But over the holidays I installed Ruby. It wasn’t nearly as easy as the 1-step installation the rubistas have built for Windows.
I found Ruby in Synaptic. Installed it. Looked for it using “which.” It couldn’t find it. Oops, I had to do “which Ruby1.8.” Ok, that doesn’t bother me too much. Then tried to install the FreeRide IDE that comes in the windows package. Tried a couple different ways, downloaded it a couple of times, but never succeeded. It seems to have a buggy install script.
Then tried to program a Ruby script. Oops, the Ruby installation installed the interpretter, but not any libraries. OK, go look for IRB, go look for gems.
Overall, huge pain in ass compared to Windows.
How much of that is due to the fact that the Ruby package maintainers didn’t do as good a job creating a Ruby package for Ubuntu as they did creating a Windows installer? There is no technical reason for the problems you described. It’s simply a byproduct of the quality of the package itself. A crappy Windows installer would have produced the same result.
How do most people get spyware etc. on their computer?
Because of the windows way of doing things! They want everything handed to them as quickly as possible without any thinking or even reading. Most windows install scripts TELL THEM they are installing this extra garbage but the user is trained to just click next next next next till it works or doesnt work. Linux actually makes people think read and learn and i like that. Who cares about getting new convertees. If people dont want to read think or learn then stay on windows and let them keep passing viri trojans etc back and forth to eachother. I dont want linux to become a dumbed down os that any imbecile can use or MISUSE like the “average joe” windows user.
Exactly. Repositories help reduce such security issues.
Personally, I don’t see the huge rush in getting the latest and greatest before it’s been properly tested on your distro. A few years back, it was pretty critical to have the latest and greatest of everything because everything was evolving so quickly and most new software depended on the latest and greatest. These days, waiting isn’t that big a deal. The foundations are pretty well set, so dependency issues are few and far between.
Rhythmbox 9.1 is available in Ubuntu backports. It’s been tested and since it’s in an official repository, you’ll receive notices when there are security updates or other upgrades. Had you installed Rhythmbox 9.1 directly, you’d lose this key security feature.
Rhythmbox 9.2 has just been released. When it’s tested, it’ll automatically be available. What’s the rush?
As for the lastest GNOME, it’s a point release so, most of the bug fixes have been migrated to the current repository. There’s no need do a mass upgrade if you want them since that’s what you’re getting anyway.
2005 was my Linux year. I downloaded a lot of distros, visited a lot of forums, sent a lot of mails, read many man pages. If Kunbuntu was the most pleasant for me, I never succeeded to install and put a Linux to work correctly (always printer and/or modem and/or apps issues). My short conclusion, I spent a lot of time trying to solve problems, I have not with my win platform. I will not repeat this experience in 2006.
“(always printer and/or modem and/or apps issues)”
Did you check the database at linuxprinting.org?
Even if you printer wasnt on the list or didnt work with cups there are options did you try turboprint?
http://www.turboprint.de/english.html
As for your modem im assuming its a WINmodem. And modems designed specifically to run in wondows I would not bitch if they didnt work under a different os. Apps you need to give more detail i suspect user error.
To viator,
Most windmodems are supported out of the box in Ubuntu because they include something most other distros do not.
Its called the restricted modules and its one of the reasons I use Ubuntu.
Printer issues? Even my HP Photosmart is supported. Is this one of those posts from a person who really has not used linux in years?
Now, linux IS an alternative OS and as such hardware support will be spottier so maybe this person has a really, really wierd chipset winmodem or one of those all-in-one fax/photo/waxes my car on Sundays all-in-one printers that CUPS has problems with.
I have to say I love Ubuntu’s use of admin tools and its emphasis on the end-user as opposed to server admin tools and on top of that using distro-nuetral (most cases) tools like gnome-system-tools and such.
My love only beef with the distro and gnome in general is that the sound server esd sucks and sound is a constant annoyance for me with Ubuntu especially.