- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Ubuntu Linux Desktop Reviewed
Figure 1. Ubuntu Linux Desktop GDM Screen. My first exposure to Ubuntu Linux occurred on forums, mailing lists and in the press. Friends told me that a great deal of hype existed around the distribution. I saw some criticism saying that Ubuntu was just another flavor of Debian. So, I basically dismissed it from the list of distributions I test. After all, we have seen new distributions of Linux crop up and die rather quickly. Also, who would believe that a Linux distribution much less any product could establish itself as an industry leader in less than seven months? In light of such success skeptics abound. People just find it hard to believe and question such a product's validity. New businesses might consider the credibility gap of attempting to reach rapid acceptance as Ubuntu did. That noted, prior to Ubuntu's launch, Sam Hiser and I presented a plan to the Linux marketing team at Sun Microsystems with a similar structure to the Ubuntu model. Our plan centered on community bridge building including making product available for free. Without giving away the specific details, here's a quote from the whitepaper to give you a hint of the recommendations. Our small user community, JDSHelp.org, organized a web site, fixed problems, monitored the Sun JDS Forum and provided documentation. While the constant criticism on the Sun JDS Forum ceased, some criticism of Sun continued as critics sited the need for an independent community to provide support Sun should have provided... The only reason for bringing up the Sun reference has to do with the power of Linux to gain market acceptance quickly when one realizes where the power lies. In our estimation, the power lies within the community. Communities of interest provide the key to success in any market today. Somehow, we didn't successfully convey that concept to the people at Sun. Next Encounter with UbuntuMy second exposure occurred after delivering a presentation to the North Texas Linux Users Group. At the end of each meeting, the LUG has a drawing for all sorts of give aways and they had many books, Linux distributions, some video cards and accessories. I felt some surprise at how the early winners chose the Ubuntu CD's over other items. So, I started asking around about Ubuntu. Several LUG members described Ubuntu as a great Linux Desktop. Having just finished talking about my latest book,Exploring the JDS Linux Desktop, I wondered if anyone had listened carefully to my talk. I guess they could see the question in my face because someone immediately said, "Oh, it's free and new. I has a long way to go before it becomes really commercial like the Java Desktop System. But, it's a good desktop!" A couple of weeks passed and curiosity got the best of me. I downloaded the disk image from the Ubuntu web site and prepared to install the mystery Linux operating system. While installing the Ubuntu desktop, I felt a sense of curiosity. The screen displays reminded me of many Linux installations, but not the latest versions. Installation takes place in text mode and you only need a single CD. You can see in Figures 2 and 3 the text based installation script.
Figure 2 – The Graphics Installer
Figure 3 The Text Base Installer with a Sample of Localizations Then in Figure 4 you can see the actual copying and configuring of a system file.
Figure 4 -Copying Gimp during installation So, at first glance, people can see that Ubuntu does not spend many resources on a fancy X based installation. As a user, I like that because it means Ubuntu installs quickly. As a consultant, I debated as to whether or not I would recommend Ubuntu because it lacked the slick installer we see in SUSE and Red Hat. I have finally concluded it doesn't matter and the benefits outweigh the considerations. Once I finished the first part of the installation procedure, the installation script came to a halt and told me to reboot. So, I removed the CD Rom and watched as Ubuntu booted up – completely in text mode. Figure 5 will give you an idea of what I first saw as the distribution headed to a usable operating state.
Figure 5 – Boot up sequence runs 100% in text mode Ubuntu booted up quickly and presented me with a login screen similar to the one in Figure 1 (see at the beginning of this article). I logged in and found myself looking at a GNOME desktop. In fact, KDE was no where to be found.
Figure 6 The First Run Ubuntu Desktop I actually liked the look and feel of the GNOME desktop. The developers had used GNOME 2.10.1 and it was my first look at that version. I found several features I liked and began trying things out. In Figure 7, you can see what my desktop looks like after using Ubuntu for a number of weeks.
Figure 7 -My Working Ubuntu Desktop The Ubuntu OrganizationPeople could attribute Ubuntu's rapid success to its organizational design, use of an existing Linux distribution, and the ability to assemble open source components such as Openoffice.org, Mozilla and GNOME into the product. After I had a working Ubuntu desktop that I could test, I began researching the project. As I began working through the web site and following links, I found a well designed, highly organized support system. I quickly discovered a robust and active community. Unlike many communities that spring up after the release of a distribution, the Ubuntu sponsors had put a well planned and highly organized infrastructure together. Having studied successful open source organizations, I realized that Ubuntu had the benefit of an Open Source Maturity Model behind it, anchored by Canonical Ltd. Following the links even further, I found Mark Shuttleworth at the source of the project. Note: For those who don't know, Mark Shuttleworth, he programmed Debian Linux in the early 1990's. He founded Thawte an issuer of Internet security certificates in 1995. He sold Thawte in 1999 to VeriSign. Shuttleworth then formed HBD Venture Capital, and the Shuttleworth Foundation which funds educational projects in South Africa. On 25 April, 2002 Shuttleworth lifted-off aboard the Russian Soyuz TM-34 mission, as space tourist for approximately $ 20 million. On 5 May, he returned to Earth. In an interview, the founder of Ubuntu disclosed some interesting perspective: (Shuttleworth) emphasized that Ubuntu would be available worldwide, possibly with regional name-mutations, but that he had a personal interest in injecting life into the South African software industry by creating a vibrant “ecosystem” around OSS. Some other interesting factoids I found about Ubuntu include:
In my opinion, no single aspect of the Ubuntu project allowed it to become a major distribution in such a short time. However, the interaction of all aspects combined to create its upward spiral. People may want to dismiss it and even stay in denial regarding Ubuntu's place in the Linux world. All the denial in the world won't invalidate Ubuntu's unprecedented success. Back to the DistributionUbuntu offers characteristics found in mature Linux distributions. For example, in figure 8 you can see a screenshot of a Windows Terminal Server session initiated from the Ubuntu desktop. Ubuntu also has the ability to act as a server and client for FreeNX and VNC.
Figure 8. Terminal Server Client Positive Differentiators in UbuntuUbuntu uses the latest stable version of GNOME. In the latest edition, the developers included GNOME 2.10.1, which features better performance and significantly better theme polish that previous GNOME versions. Note: A version of Ubuntu with KDE called Kubuntu exists. That version is community driven. Ubuntu offers Live CDs for the three processor architectures they support (Intel, AMD64 and PowerPC). Users can modify the LiveCD and update it or customize it with their own personal selection of packages. The distribution comes with X auto-detection and laptop screen detection. Though the system uses open source drivers by default, Ubuntu provides access to binary drivers from ATI and Nvidia. Applications and the desktop
Figure 9 Launch Menu Three menus launch from the GNOME panel. In Figure 9, you can see they include Applications, Places and System. You can see the items available under Applications in Figure 9. Under Places you will find Recent Documents, Search for Files, Connect to Server, Network Servers (Network Neighborhood), Computer, Documents, Desktop and Home Folder . Under System Menu you will find Preferences, Administration, Take Snapshot, Help, About GNOME, About Ubuntu, Lock Screen and Log Out. Preferences provide a user with the ability to manage themes, configure VNC server, chose preferred applications for a browser, mail reader and terminal, select screen savers, etc. The Administration sub-menu as shown in Fig 10 demonstrates the significant work the Ubuntu developers have contributed to Linux. Aside from some standard functions like administering users, groups and printers, the Ubuntu team provides us with Ubuntu Update Manager and Synaptic Package Manager. The later tools provide an easy to use graphical front-end to apt-get. You can also control the sources list from Synaptic. Synaptic Package Manager provides the key tool for making Debian a user-friendly desktop.
Figure 10 The Administrative Sub-Menu. Ubuntu developers have an objective to provide a more up-to-date Debian than Debian and to reduce the confusion associated with installing packages. While most users love the Debian package management system, it can prove difficult to understand if one happens to be new to Linux and has to confront the command line interface. Ubuntu accomplishes its objectives with an easy-to-use installation process, an excellent system update and enhancement mechanism and a distribution that makes a great starter--or permanent home--for Linux users who just like their computer to get work done.
Figure 11. Synaptic Package Manager Update and Installation Utility In Figure 11, you can see one view of Synaptic. Under the available software, you can find server software such as Apache, which you can select, download and install. By selecting the package one chooses, Synaptic looks for dependencies, alerts you as to what it will install and when you click OK -- goes ahead and installs the software. Looking back at Figure 10, notice an icon at the top of the Administrative sub-menu called Boot-Up Manager also known as BUM. According to the the web site Boot-Up Manager (formerly Ubuntu Bootup Manager) is a Perl-Gtk2 application to handle runlevels configuration of any Debian derivative system. With this program the user will easily start and stop boot-up scripts, without the necessity to handle thru complex links and permissions. Boot-Up Manager has been tested on an Ubuntu 05.04 release, but as it only relies on Perl-Gtk2 libraries, it can be run on any Debian-like system. You might agree that community involvement in Ubuntu has led to the development of tools like BUM. In fact, one might suggest that Ubuntu has rejuvenated the community process as many more tools like BUM already exist. Similarly to effort like the one that created BUM, a group of developers have started a community backport site. The web site for Ubuntu Backports explains its purpose: Once a stable version is released, no new software updates are accepted. I (the project lead) subscribe to the view that a distribution can be both stable and up-to-date, so I've taken it into my own hands to recompile newer packages from Hoary and Debian Sid for Warty. So, one might consider efforts from the community as an important part of what Ubuntu brings to the user. The Table below shows the packages delivered with the first two releases of Ubuntu.
Table 1. While the instructions for using Ubuntu Backports seem clear, using them requires one to add a url to the configuration file in /etc/apt/sources.list. You can also add the url through Synaptic. The maintainer of Ubuntu Backports states that the repository is not official and has no relationship with Canonical Ltd. So, if you use the Backports repository, remember that it's a community effort. Is Ubuntu A major Linux Distribution?When writing a review like this, I have to prioritize the points I consider the most important and work my way down. I considered answering this question one of the most important of those points. I consider Ubuntu a major distribution and important enough to include it in the six distributions I covered in a series for Linux Journal. Ubuntu does not have the distinction of being the fastest product to market in history. Back in 1958, Wham-O trademarked and sold twenty million hula hoops in six months. That was the most successful launch in modern times. Even the first IBM PC's didn't sell as many products in such a short time frame. Actually, back in the fall of 1999, Corel launched its version of Linux and sold 400,000 units between Thanksgiving and Christmas. Many people purchased the product and consider it mature because Corel had been around for a significant number of years. Corel based its distribution on Debian. Eventually, Corel sold its Linux business to Xandros. Achieving strong market penetration in a short time does not mean a product like Ubuntu isn't worthy of being called a major player. Canonical Ltd. achieved significant penetration because it targeted markets where Linux would have a high acceptance rate. But that doesn't mean Ubuntu is only a marketing phenomenon. Canonical Ltd. employees approximately 40 full time engineers who have done an excellent job of designing, testing and innovating the basic Debian Linux distribution. Debian, a volunteer project developed a GNU/Linux distribution over a decade ago. 1000 people have official developer status in the Debian community. Debian encompasses nearly 17,000 packages of free and open source applications and documentation. The Debian community recognizes many Ubuntu developers. They remain active contributors to Debian as a matter of course in their work on Ubuntu and directly in Debian. When Ubuntu developers fix bugs that are also present in Debian packages they send their bugfixes to the Debian developers responsible for that package in Debian and record the patch in the Debian bug system. The goal is to ensure that patches made by the full-time Ubuntu team members are included in Debian packages if the Debian maintainer accepts the code. Some Final ThoughtsA tip of the hat to Ubuntu for its success. This distribution goes beyond a free, open source operating system with a business service model. Ubuntu has attracted and cultivated a dynamic and robust community of people willing to make the world a better place. Many people should find this desktop a worthy entry into the market on technical merits alone. Ubuntu will experience growing pains, but the product has already established itself and can only continue to find willing users and participants willing to make it a bigger success. The challenge facing Ubuntu exceeds providing a worthy entry to the Linux desktop market. An opportunity exists to provide the extraordinary desktop product by only pushing a few inches farther. The Ubuntu developers and community have enough veterans that one senses they will create the best operating system on the planet, fix things and provide remarkable support. One rap on Linux distributors in the past still holds true for the majority of distributions: Linux distributors are underachievers. This does not mean much to the open source technical community because we have always had an attitude of doing it ourselves. In fact, the mere existence of Linux provides millions of us with a fascinating technology with which to learn and grow. Many Linux technologists do what they can to communicate with userland. Left on their own, they would continue whether Linux excelled on the desktop or not. Ubuntu's contribution to Linux has been to help promulgate Linux and increase the numbers of people using Linux. Ubuntu has done this by reaching places other distributions have failed to touch such as the underdeveloped countries on the planet and including everyone in the process. This is the kind of effort that makes a world work for everyone. Respectfully submitted: ###
|
|
|
Comments (35)
Just upgraded to Hoary
Great insights, Tom!
I find it really interesting that Debian based systems have, over the past two years or so, formed the basis for several of the most interesting (and usable) systems around. Hard to believe at first, when you consider what an unfriendly, geek-like reputation Debian-based systems have. However, the packaging that's central to Debian systems has always been the best available, the community and openness of Debian software (which the Debian Social Contract guarantees) are great, so your premise about several of these factors coming together is, in my opinion, right on the mark.
There are many other good distributions that have come out of nowhere during the past three years, all of them Debian-based. Just a small sample of the ones available: Ubuntu and its cousin Kubuntu, Kanotix, it's father, Knoppix, MEPIS, Linspire, Xandros, the resurrected Progeny, and my favorite full featured commercial systems that's been a small, but very solid player, Libranet.
All of these distributions and their associated systems have solid user communities. The most successful ones have very energized and helpful communities.
There's a benefit to having highly motivated people working together. There's just a passion behind Debian that's hard to beat.
Sun and Microsoft unfortunately are also big Debian fans. Their hope is that everyone will drop Red Hat, SUSE, etc. and go to Debian. If you're a business person, you know why. I'm sure I'll still have a job even if Debian "wins".
Debian always intimidated me. I tried it a few times in years past, but I worked as a developer and life did not afford me the luxury of re-learning a different approach to linux package management and configuration. All the talk about Ubuntu made me curious, so I got the iso and was utterly FLOORED by the simplicity of the install and the polish of the desktop. Someone FINALLY got it, I thought. I started building a server with the Ubuntu (minimal) option custom, and started getting familiar with the Debian way of things. I will not turn back to an RPM-based distro. (though I will inevitably be working with lots-n-lots of RedHat ES/AS installations to make a buck).
That being said, I prefer KDE, so I don't use Ubuntu for a desktop. Tried Kubuntu, nice, but not quite me. Haven't tried Xandros. Liked LibraNet, but afraid it will wither with its founder's death. Got Linspire 4.5 with a $179 Athalon box at a major retailer and was very impressed...drove home that night with a grin that I bought a retail PC with LINUX on it...the validation of the years of effort tinkering with this OS almost brought tears of joy to my eyes. Linspire is definitely not for me, although it could be nice for a complete Linux newbie as a MSFT alternative.
My favorite desktop now is MEPIS, hands down. I like it so much I contributed $. For server installs without X, I will likely use sarge to keep things kosher, but it lacked for my desktop...it worked, but required too much messin' to get it right. With MEPIS, all I had to do was change one setting to get my resolution to my preference and I was done.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it. I just hope my aptitude won't give me too much of an attitude.
Peace.
Tom:
I would recommend Ubuntu to anyone. Keep in mind, I make a living recommending Linux. So, if you wonder why, I'll tell you.
Every PC manufacturer with whom I have worked has had to make serious engineering changes to Microsoft Windows. I wish I could show you the hotfix lists. I don't have access to them now, but one time I did. I'm talking about reams of pages. Reams and reams of pages and 10's of thousands of hotfixes existed.
One manufacturer doesn't have an NDA with me, so I'll tell you about Gateway. Once they received the product from Microsoft, they had to fix it, make enhancements, build drivers, etc. Then they would test it like mad men. Then, they would create a download and would load the OS on hard drives which could be put in computers.
I watched people slam things on tables and walk away cursing and angry because they thought they were ready to do a run and something went wrong in the final test. It cost a fortune to hold up production because of some flaky bug.
If Gateway or any other manufacturer bundled Ubuntu, they would make serious fixes to the distribution to get it to work. I think that they would have fewer fixes and would have better documentation with Ubuntu than Microsoft. They would also add components like a version of Cyberlink's PowerDVD, etc.
Why don't they? Because they are tied to the financial arrangements - marketing rebates.
I build my own computers unless someone gives me a name brand computer for whatever reason. I have a Gateway sitting here, for example.
I tweak and fix every system. Something is wrong with every OS with which I have ever tried. I see complaints about drivers and apps and all sorts of things on mailing lists including this one.
Unless an operating system is engineered for a specific set of hardware, it's almost impossible to get it right the first time. For example, I have a Whitebox I bought from Micro Center because they are now bundling Linux with their house brand. But the DVD software that came with the drive doesn't work on Windows. Guess what - the OEM version of that software built for Linux works extremely well with the DVD drive. It's a cheap Chinese drive, but it works great.
If I recommend Ubuntu, I'm willing to engineer it to a customer's specs - only if I'm paid however.
The problem many people face with Linux is simple: hardware compatibility. Back in the mid 1990's we carried around hardware compatibility lists for NT, Novell, O/2 and IBM Lan Server. If something didn't work, it was always our fault. Funny how expectations have changed.
That's a perspective from the industry. It's not that Linux has less drivers than Microsoft or Mac - it's just that they have different ones.
If you want to make Linux work for you then you'll have to make it work.
I consider it fun, you may have other things to do.
Vincent Trouilliez:
I agree with Tom...
I am no Linux guru, nor a developer, but I have worked 3 years at the Nec and Packard-Bell factory for Europe (in Angers, France). I don't have any DNA with them as I was only a simple worker there... employed to fix all the machines that would fail anywhere in the production lines, either assembly or stress testing. The point is, like Gateway, they have whole teams of S/W guys that spent their time fighting with H/W and S/W suppliers to get drivers or programs that work, and work hard to make everything work together, before they can upload the final master image to the network, to be used in production. For every new machine/configuration, they must do it all over again. So they are quite busy. But it used to be okay. However over time, they were given less and less time to get everything working, so this lead to more and more problem. Every other week, you would have thousands of machines that show a similar bug/problem, due to insufficent testing from the engineering dept. Needless to say, everytime this happened, it was real mess. Not only the affected machines would not be shipped in time, but more importantly, they would clog the production lines (slots would not be freed) and slow down the entire factory... costing lots of money.......
So, to sum it up, I don't believe that putting Linux instead of Windows XP, would cost them or be any more hassle than what happens with windows right now. Just not possible ! Also, the biggest complain so far with Ubuntu is the problems with proprietary format for multimedia files. Well, I don't have the figures, but considering Ubuntu is 100% free, I very much doubt that it paying a little fee for Java, mp3, crypted DVD what have, would cost anywhere near as much as a Windows XP license !
So really, it's hardly neither a S/W nor money problem, but just marketing/policies. If they had the nuts to at least "test the water" by offering a small range of Ubuntu machines, I bet they would find it less costly to get Ubuntu rather than XP, implemented/working on their machines.
tadelste: I spent a couple weeks in Angers in '93 with a friend who was studying there. Nice town, Nice tapestries.
more Ubuntu screenshots
[url=http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slideshow.php?release=342&slide=27&title=ubuntu linux 5.10 colony 1 breezy badger screenshots]http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slideshow.php?release=342&...[/url] - Ubuntu Linux 5.10 Colony 1 Breezy Badger
Comments via email to the Author
I really appreciate feedback like this as it helps me when I write additional articles.
Thanks
- While Mark is the guiding force, I think you should mention that he hired an /awesome/ core group of Debian and GNOME developers to form the distribution team.
- I didn't see you mention Universe prominently. You should perhaps mention that when enabled, it brings the total package count to over 16,000 packages. That's awesome!
- If you have a laptop handy then you should point out some of the features that work out of the box with Ubuntu. For example CPU scaling, power management, wifi, etc. will all work with no user configuration needed. Of course, this depends on driver support.
- Community Stuff. One of the reasons I dig ubuntu is the community. Members are expected to follow the Code of Conduct, which is great because people don't want to get yelled at, they want to get involved.
http://www.ubuntulinux.org/community/conduct/
Also, there is an ever growing group of Ubuntu LoCo teams that you might want to mention:
http://www.ubuntulinux.org/wiki/LoCoTeams
Simplified Installer?
Don't forget what it does to Debian aside from helping...
I think of Ubuntu as just an extension of Debian as are many others.
Want a solid livecd for demoing the capabilities of Linux and KDE? Knoppix!
Interested in testing the boundaries of what can be done with multimedia on Linux? DeMudi!
Want a regularly updated, easy to use desktop Linux machine based on Gnome? Ubuntu!
Thakfully, the possibilities go on and on.
The only problem I can see with having Ubuntu (or any other variant) around would come from the advances that these variants make not being funneled back into Debian. That problem can come from two different points of origin: the variants' developers and Debian's developers. Developers for the variants need to make their work available to Debian's developers. Debian's developers need to take that work and incorporate it into what they are doing.
Does this problem actually exist? If so, what is the point of origin?
The developers employed by Canonical came from the debian team. They continue to work with debian and submit their patches to the various debian package maintainers. In addition, many of the Canonical developers continue to work as developers on debian.
Canonical developers, of course, produce Ubuntu. In addition, Ubuntu+Canonical are the only people I know that contribute back to debian. Whereas, Xandros and Linspire do not - as I understand it. I'm not sure about other debian based distributions.
What I look at is this. Many of those employed by Canonical don't have enough time to work on Debian. I know that being a package maintainer is quite a daunting and time consuming task in itself let alone being a top dev. They no doubt contribute code back to debian...but I doubt they develop as much as your post describes. Time just doesn't permit it.
Not to mention that half of what they develop for canonical isn't compatible with Debian so it prevents them from giving it back...it's just too far out in front and hasn't even made it into testing.
The way this is panning out is that Ubuntu needs Debian and synchs every 6 months. Debian on the other hand I think gets a very nice desktop oriented cousin.
The developers need to sort out their egos I suspect. A lot of this acrimony is due I suspect to the phenomenally rapid success of Ubuntu plus the money poured in by Shuttleworth to pay Ubuntu dev salaries. The fact that it is Murdock who is upset suggests some feelings of threat on the Debian side.
Quoting:In addition, Ubuntu+Canonical are the only people I know that contribute back to debian. Whereas, Xandros and Linspire do not - as I understand it.
I"ve heard that about Xandros and Linspire as well. Can anybody confirm that? If that is indeed the case, they seem to be better vitriol targets than Ubuntu. At least Canonical isn't charging for Ubuntu.
Quoting:They no doubt contribute code back to debian...but I doubt they develop as much as your post describes.
Actually, I didn't suggest that they were contributing at all (although I do believe that they do). I was stating how a problem between Ubuntu and Debian could exist then asking if that problem did indeed exist.
Quoting:Not to mention that half of what they develop for canonical isn't compatible with Debian so it prevents them from giving it back...it's just too far out in front and hasn't even made it into testing.
I do know that Ubuntu, at least in the beginning was supposed to have been based on testing. But let's consider this:
Quoting:I think the basic point is that Ubuntu breaks binary compatibility with sarge because it is synched with experimental every 6 months but makes substantial source contribution to experimental.
Assuming that is the case, would their contributions to experimental be viewed as positive? If so, would Canonical simply restating that Ubuntu is based off of experimental make everything good?
BTW, I have to say that I enjoy the way most conversations on lxer can stay civil even when we disagree. Such a refreshing change from most online experiences.
I don't think it is egos. Ian has a great distro in Debian and he's watching someone come in, break parts of it, and go against many of the standards that are employed by Debian. He has every right to be ticked off.
Not as satisfied...
No, it isn't any off the others but think about how long it has been in existence. Think about the resources and commitment of its backers. I think it has the best chance of becoming the best Free and commercial distro.
Addressing the problems with the media players, the experiences you describe are more akin to mine on Debian vs. the much smoother, trouble free playing on my son's desktop with Ubuntu. I could not play Spirited Away using a damaged dvd whereas a random choice from our personal dvd collection played well. Moreover, the same disc (S.A.) played well using mplayer on his desktop accessed remotely from his server/workstation (I sort of lose track of the permutations of his usage :-) ). One further note, he created both a live and core distribution Ubuntu discs for my daughter's use on her XP machine - the live cd worked flawlessly.
To be fair, I have seen some wild things happen on various permutations of hardware and software under Linux, but I tend to think it's either my fault or hardware related.
I have tried Kubuntu. After searching and searching, I have found that MEPIS provides me with the desktop I like the most...it just made me SMILE when I first ran the live-cd: so polished, so fast, so many apps, tweaked, easy to install...ad infinitum.
I have been TRYING to like and respect sarge, and most certainly have mountains of respect for debian and its team...AS A BASE DISTRO. However, I am frustrated by it as end-use distro to a point that I am turning to derived distros, both for server and desktop installations. I consider sarge a low-level base distro (I am sure I will get flamed for this). Not literally, of course, but practically. Building a bare server, I can be productive and secure MUCH quicker with Ubuntu. For a desktop, MEPIS simply rocks...it takes a religious commitment to get something that cool going with sarge, and by the time you are done you have another desktop distro.
Although I have been using linux for almost 8 years now, both personally and professionally, I still find the little things and polishes sarge lacks annoying and time consuming. It seems that a lot of the debian communiity are puritan and haughty in their outlook, almost with an attitude of "Screw you if you don't like it the way it is, we have a religion to attend to here!". Dogma. I want to get done what I want to get done. I want my keyboard to react the way I want it to in a terminal. I want X set up to work to full advantage with my hardware without having to constantly tweak the config. I want modern packages that are already tweaked...for the most part. Life is short...I already gave up on RPM-based distros (my alma maters)...too much time f**king with the non-compatible packages to get something reasonable happening.
I want to compute, not worship.
My $.02...and I am wearing a fire-proof suit.
And, yes, the community is the biggest difference. Not only is everybody willing to help, people are helping the right way. Joe-user knows how to configure this one wireless card easily, he writes up a HOWTO. Jane-user knows how to set up tweak a particular app to work seamlessly with Fluxbox, she helps out there. Everybody adds their little piece to the puzzle and every time one person helps a new person, that new person gets the desire to help somebody out down the road. Community - just like we've been told it's supposed to be.
Now, I have an ulterior motive, this statement:
.I already gave up on RPM-based distros (my alma maters)...too much time f**king with the non-compatible packages to get something reasonable happening.
Previous to that, my esteemed associate (no really...I like this guy) mentioned the polish and smoothness of Mepis. Besides the fact that Warren has some problems working within the guidelines of the GPL, I do not find his work near as polished as PCLinuxOS. AHA! Here is his motive!!! Yes. Although PCLinuxOS is 'RPM" based, it is packaged with the apt/synaptic system that insures the earlier dependency hell is relegated to, well...hell. I just could not let the old "RPM=sux" wives tale continue. Maybe with suse and red hat, but not only is PCLinuxOS Smoother than even Mepis...and FULLY respects the GPL, it's package management easily equals debian...after all, it's apt-get apt-update apt-upgrade all the way.
Anyone who claims that PCLinuxOS "Fits" the old RPM dogma just doesn't know what he or she is talking about. Ive used it for two years and have yet to enter dependency hell.
helios
helios, one of the things that makes Debian so strong and reliable is the quality control of the official package archives. You need more than just a dependency-resolving front end like apt or yum, you also need a strictly-enforced packaging policy. This is one of the reasons RPM can be so poo- anyone and everyone can and does release crap RPMs.
http://lwn.net/Articles/143500/ (there have been others recently eg on Newsforge)
There was also a rather heavy and heated exchange between Murdock and Matt Zimmerman (a major Ubuntu dev) on the Ubuntu developers list a couple of weeks back concerning package compatibility.
helios
case closed, problems solved, everybody happy. Java IS Linux!
there is no other solution.
helios
Java is great.
Stopped by Starbucks this morning to get some with my wife.
Oh wait --
You mean that other java, don't you?
Never mind. Can't stand the stuff.
Whats the advantage with ubuntu´s Live-CD vs Knoppix ?
1) Knoppix is KDE based and Ubuntu is GNOME based. Kubuntu is another distro of Ubuntu but KDE based, There is also Gnoppix which Knoppix based on GNOME.
2) Knoppix the father of all LiveCD based distros, Ubuntu is LiveCD is one of them. All are based on Debian distro.
3) Knoppix is complete sophisticated distro. It has everything and anything. Ubuntu is new and I consider it to be still in development. Ubuntu is backed with good resource and has great potential
4) Ubuntu is very user friendly and easy to install to hard drive but you can't install from LiveCD. Knoppix is built to run from CD and not really meant to install on hard drive although you can from the LiveCD.
5) Knoppix has many tools and applications which you wont find on Ubuntu CD.
... There are many other differences but let me give you one advice. The beauty of Linux, especially for CS student, is to explore it yourself and learn it by experience. Linux is Linux no matter what distro you use, the difference is cosmetic and on the outside. The only way you will appreciate Linux is when you take your time and explore all the subtle and sophisticated features it offers.
I assure you that most of the Linux users started with Linux just like you. Didn't know much about it and they learned to appreciate it by exploring it themselves. You will find lots of help on the Internet but if you expect to be fed with a silver spoon, you will be disappointed. You have to kick the tires and get your feet wet. Get yourself a computer, if you don't have one, and get busy. No body will tell you the differences between Ubuntu and Knoppix better that experiencing them yourself.
So get busy and have fun. It is F/free.
All LiveCD's are not Debian based as #2 infers after reading it. Surely Abe meant that all knoppix offshoots are Debian based.
If you're looking for something that really shows off the Linux Desktop, I suggest SimplyMEPIS or PCLinuxOS.
Both are liveCD's and can be used on just about any PC. I find the hardware detection and all around appearance better with these two distros than that of any other distros.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
I have recommended this distro to a few neighbors and working friends. I have given out many live-CD's of Ubuntu too. This really is a nice distro for those who want to use linux for everyday tasks.
I have just upgraded to 'Hoary' and had a couple of problems initially. But it ended up being a BIOS change that I had to do to fix my problem. Other than that it works great.
Definiately a good article and its a great distro for those interested in moving to Linux.