Ubuntu is amazing!

**jefjj01** · 10-29-2004, 09:09 AM

--Ubuntu is ... misterious distro

Why do you say that?

After two weeks I am completely sold because I finally have a desktop that is polished, fast and every piece of hardware (including the 3-n-1 printer) works perfectly. Plus the stability is as good as what I had with SUSE!

Its all good though...to each his own.

**BaVinic** · 10-29-2004, 11:38 AM

Originally posted by lupin_the_3rd
Not sure why being debian based is a problem but for your second point:

actually, I did not mean to make it sound like Debian was a problem, just that Ubuntu is not a "From Scratch" distro. there are many ditros out there that are repackaged distro's, and even though I would agree that there is still a lot of work put into them, it is not like we are getting a completly new distro, just repackaged goods.

Ubuntu is a good distro, installs great, is very fast and clean, I like it a lot. it's just not Original.

BaVinic

**rbrimhall** · 10-29-2004, 11:57 AM

Originally posted by BaVinic
actually, I did not mean to make it sound like Debian was a problem, just that Ubuntu is not a "From Scratch" distro. there are many ditros out there that are repackaged distro's, and even though I would agree that there is still a lot of work put into them, it is not like we are getting a completly new distro, just repackaged goods.

Ubuntu is a good distro, installs great, is very fast and clean, I like it a lot. it's just not Original.

BaVinic

On that slippery slope wouldn't a lot of distros "technically" not be original? Like Mandrake and Suse deriving from Redhat for example? Not starting a flame war or anything... just curious how far that logic extends

**BaVinic** · 10-29-2004, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by lupin_the_3rd
On that slippery slope wouldn't a lot of distros "technically" not be original? Like Mandrake and Suse deriving from Redhat for example? Not starting a flame war or anything... just curious how far that logic extends

That I think was my point, but please, don't misunderstand my comment, there was no logic intended

BaVinic

**rbrimhall** · 10-29-2004, 12:20 PM

Originally posted by BaVinic
That I think was my point, but please, don't misunderstand my comment, there was no logic intended

BaVinic

Got ya

**infiniphunk** · 10-29-2004, 03:31 PM

Are any of you having any luck with wireless profiles settings on Ubuntu? When I installed it on the SatelliteA10 the wireless worked right off the bat, but I need to set it up so that it will also connect to the access point at school, where in one builidng there is no encryption or essid and in the other building the essid is set and there is a 64-bit WEP key? I'm pretty sure I just have to add these profiles in /etc/network/interfaces and then ifup for them depending on where I am. Anyone know an easy way of settign this up? Using the GUI configutation tool just seems to set it up wrong.

**rbrimhall** · 10-29-2004, 06:27 PM

Someone on the mailing list wrote a script for this... try searching there for "wireless profiles"

**teeitup** · 10-31-2004, 05:25 PM

I spent last night installing and checking out Ubuntu. It's a very young distro and will get better over time. It has a good development team and corporate money behind it.

The installer is too automatic for my tastes. It is another Debian high bred much like Libranet. It doesn't conform to a particular branch. This can cause dependency problems down the road after installing a bunch of software.

The available software in the apt repositories is extremely limited. They recommend against mixing Ubuntu sources with Debian sources. You can use deb files with dpkg. I did this for a number of programs I use all the time and they seem to run just fine. I used testing versions. All the development libraries are available through apt-get so rolling your own isn't a problem. I had to add samba and smbfs support, xmms, and a decent file manager, Nautilus is the default.

The basic install of Gnome 2.8 and Evolution and Firefox produces and very nice basic system.

screenshot

**jefjj01** · 10-31-2004, 07:49 PM

--The basic install of Gnome 2.8 and Evolution and Firefox produces and very nice basic system.

But see that is what makes this system so nice! It is lightweight, fast and polished. I personally use my computer to do Java Development (Eclipse), Surf the Web, Email, and write documents sometimes (Writer). Along the way I need to use my CD burner, listen to music, create graphics (gimp), and use other various development tools (like ssh). Why do other distros have to carry so much bloat just for people who want to do these things? The beauty of Ubuntu is everything most people need is nice and polished and just works. I just think its about time somebody did not give into the pressure to try and be everything to everyone. On a side note I find it interesting that people download Ubuntu to install KDE. Why would you do that? And if you do why are you surprised that your disappointed? Ubutu picked the packages they deemed worthy to include and they picked GNOME. There are plenty of distros trying to be everything...which is why I am constantly disappointed with the results. And actually I did not know I was disappointed until I found Ubuntu.

**Ehwaz001** · 11-01-2004, 08:51 AM

I have downloaded the Live CD version and used it on a PII 400 with 320 MB RAM and noticed that it detected all my devices properly and that it actually booted fast. I don't like the distro however, since it tends to be developed and focused more on people who just want their computer to do their daily work done and don't want to mess around much. Indeed, the distro and certainly GNOME looks very polished, but it has a bit to much eye-candy for me. All applications and leisure programs are available just by the click of a button, and that's what a regular PC user just wants from a PC. Nothing more, nothing less.

Therefore, I don't like it that much. Not much is being showed when the OS boots and not much is shown in the actual log when you press escape to erase the boot screen and see what's going on. I tend to see more messages and much more lines with other distros then this one. I showed it to my parents and they like the OS. Logically, they use their computer just to get their work done and don't use it that much for anything else.

So for me, it's not a good distro for developers and people who really want to dive in. It's focused on people who see their computer as a tool to make their everyday life just a little bit more easy. I have absolutely no objection to that, because these sort of distros have to be available as well. I don't demand everybody to dive into code or command lines like I do, and I can understand those who dislike this way of using a computer.

Overall, Ubuntu is a good OS which is focused more on the casual user and that worked very good on a rather old PC. You do have to love using GNOME (and that is something I don't like using either, so...)

Greetings, you all have a nice monday!

**mrBen** · 11-01-2004, 09:06 AM

Originally posted by Ehwaz001
I have downloaded the Live CD version and used it on a PII 400 with 320 MB RAM and noticed that it detected all my devices properly and that it actually booted fast. I don't like the distro however, since it tends to be developed and focused more on people who just want their computer to do their daily work done and don't want to mess around much. Indeed, the distro and certainly GNOME looks very polished, but it has a bit to much eye-candy for me. All applications and leisure programs are available just by the click of a button, and that's what a regular PC user just wants from a PC. Nothing more, nothing less.

Therefore, I don't like it that much. Not much is being showed when the OS boots and not much is shown in the actual log when you press escape to erase the boot screen and see what's going on. I tend to see more messages and much more lines with other distros then this one. I showed it to my parents and they like the OS. Logically, they use their computer just to get their work done and don't use it that much for anything else.

So for me, it's not a good distro for developers and people who really want to dive in. It's focused on people who see their computer as a tool to make their everyday life just a little bit more easy. I have absolutely no objection to that, because these sort of distros have to be available as well. I don't demand everybody to dive into code or command lines like I do, and I can understand those who dislike this way of using a computer.

Overall, Ubuntu is a good OS which is focused more on the casual user and that worked very good on a rather old PC. You do have to love using GNOME (and that is something I don't like using either, so...)

Greetings, you all have a nice monday!

Developers should use Debian, then

**Ehwaz001** · 11-01-2004, 09:57 AM

Hmmm, and which distro are you using ?

**mmills** · 11-01-2004, 10:03 AM

I personally like CCUX for a desktop, has anyone tried this on a laptop?
does anyone have a KDE screenshot?

**mrBen** · 11-01-2004, 10:04 AM

Originally posted by Ehwaz001
Hmmm, and which distro are you using ?

Debian and Ubuntu, of course

**rocketpcguy** · 11-01-2004, 11:10 AM

can i use this ubuntu distro as a NAT and samba server while it's being used as a home PC?

Thread: Ubuntu is amazing!

Thread Tools

Display

ccux vs ubuntu

Posting Permissions