cork1958 Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 I tried KDE on Hoary Ubuntu for a short period then upgraded to Breezy Ubuntu with Gnome. Gnome just seems to run better on all my sytems. I think it's cool that most things can be done easily (synaptic, etc), but you can also learn the terminal and all that stuff with Ubuntu. Dapper will completely eliminate any Windows OS on my systems when it comes out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kreuger Posted April 15, 2006 Author Share Posted April 15, 2006 Are NVraid drives recognized under the latest K-Ubuntu distro yet? no idea, don't use raid drives would give it a try if i didnt hate kde so much so why not try ubuntu? it's at the same stage, I just prefer KDE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j79zlr Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 No common joe/jane wants to see a command line. That's just ridiculous. No everybody is tech savvy. Linux is the command line, without it, it is windows, I could really care less if the average user can't understand it. Linux is not for everyone. I hate Ubuntu, the few times I've used it, I couldn't stand it. There are plenty of "noob" friendly distros that aren't dumbed down so much that you do not have to learn anything. Sudo is not more secure, atleast how it is configured in Ubuntu, it is only a matter of time before it comes back and bites them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zentradi Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 (edited) Well I've been using Linux since Redhat 5.0 in 1999 and I'm probably a lot smarter than you. I love Kubuntu. The simplicity is refreshing, add a debian base and you've got all the power you need, if you need it. Kubuntu is not just a few fancy gui apps, it is Linux. Remeber this, Linux is only free if you don't value your time. Why sit there all day mucking around with config files, when you can get your crap done and get on with your life. Unless of course your life is mucking around with config files. Oh well to each his own, and doesn't this just really prove the greatest thing about Linux is "Choice"? <-- Slackware user since 1996...'Slackware '96', to be exact, or for those that like version numbers, Slackware 3.1. And I love k/ubuntu as well. Both of them are exceptional distros for people wanting to use a robust alternative operating system, yet still have a life away from the keyboard. Edited April 15, 2006 by zentradi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treefrog Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 Linux is the command line, without it, it is windows, I could really care less if the average user can't understand it. Linux is not for everyone. I hate Ubuntu, the few times I've used it, I couldn't stand it. There are plenty of "noob" friendly distros that aren't dumbed down so much that you do not have to learn anything. Sudo is not more secure, atleast how it is configured in Ubuntu, it is only a matter of time before it comes back and bites them. Oh man. I hope you realize how hopelessly out of touch you're making yourself look here. Now I'm no big Ubuntu fan, but I am a Debian Sid user (and been using Linux since Slackware released 2.0). If Dapper is as well put together as it appears they are making it, I will likely switch, just because I have seriously outgrown my urge to spend all my time tweaking my system (yet I don't want to give up the newer packages available in Sid). I would much rather turn it on, and USE it instead of play with it. I certainly would not make the mistake of calling Ubuntu "dumbed down", because it's NOT. It just comes with usable configs out of the box, instead of forcing users to spend an hour (or two, or three or more) figuring out how to, for instance, enable their wi-fi... which is then pretty much wasted time, as that's not really knowledge you need to have to operate the OS on a day to day basis. Running Ubuntu is very, VERY similar to running Debian, only you get to cut out a bit of configuration time at install. That's really nice when you want to install the OS to use the pc, not to play with the OS. The ONLY thing I don't agree with is Ubuntu using sudo, then again, that is a very simple fix. I consider Ubuntu one of the more advanced distros actually, in that they are actually figuring out how to tame Sid. I think a big mistake in your thought process is that people need to become pc techs to run a pc. Kinda whacked thinking. I think that the most anybody NEEDs to learn to use a pc should be "This is the menu, you click it to then click on your program icons.". If you personally are only using Linux to learn about it, that is fine, but don't try to insist that everyone else has to do it just like you, or even for remotely the same reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mouldy Punk Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 I too am a Debian Sid user. I couldn't be bothered to faff around with config files and the CL everytime I set something up, why make things harder than they need to be? So I changed my repos to the Ubuntu dapper ones and installed ubuntu-desktop. Now I can configure the majority of my system without using the CL. Something that would have taken a few lines in the CL (that is assuming, you knew straight away what to type) now only takes a couple of clicks. How is that not a good thing for the average desktop user? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drshdw Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 Linux is the command line, without it, it is windows, I could really care less if the average user can't understand it. Linux is not for everyone. I hate Ubuntu, the few times I've used it, I couldn't stand it. There are plenty of "noob" friendly distros that aren't dumbed down so much that you do not have to learn anything. Sudo is not more secure, atleast how it is configured in Ubuntu, it is only a matter of time before it comes back and bites them. Whatever. You're just too geeky, the 1% of the real market. This is why Linux in GENERAL still sucks. Too many geeks proclaiming Linux is 1337, it'll never gain market share at this rate, with people that have your mindset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julius Caro Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 Whatever. You're just too geeky, the 1% of the real market. This is why Linux in GENERAL still sucks. Too many geeks proclaiming Linux is 1337, it'll never gain market share at this rate, with people that have your mindset. 1%? That's too much for him. This type of fanboyism is of the same type that says apple macs are not for "common" people. GET A LIFE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mouldy Punk Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 Play nicely children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmahmood Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 I think Ubuntu is a great OS. and it gives you total control over the OS. and it take so little time to set things up here. Hey I want to use my computer don't wan't to spend hours after hour trying to play a mp3 file or setup my graphics card. If you want to fine tune you OS install, Ubuntu gives you that option, just run the installation in expert mode. And If you are saying, Never become dominent!! have you visited distrowatch lately? You will find Ubuntu is on the top of the List and is far ahead of any other distro! sure prove its domineting Linux world right now. And Dapper will rock :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miuku. Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 (edited) Too many geeks proclaiming Linux is 1337, it'll never gain market share at this rate, with people that have your mindset. A lot of people are afraid that with the 'dumbing down' of the most popular distributions, the more "advanced users" will be left out and most of the developers will concentrate on "omg, hi thar exe files" approach while sacrificing what makes Linux special - the ultimate customization. I will say right out of the bat that I prefer SuSE because it flexes into two different types of distributions right out of the box: The super minimal, do it yourself with some flavour and the "Look daddy, stake and potatoes are on the table" -style distribution that is "everything pre-installed, no knowledge of anything" -required system. For one, I am feeling the bat right now thanks to Novell who is focusing their development on the GNOME platform rather than the much more powerful and complete KDE not to mention force feeding us Mono with their 10.1 impending release (Which, by the way is horribly broken so don't try it). And on that note, I don't personally mind if Linux will stay as a very minority OS as it suits my purposes and provides an extremely flexible platform - something Windows style 'cater for all' operating systems cannot provide. Edited April 15, 2006 by daPhoenix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mouldy Punk Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 Ok, take Ubuntu for example, that is just as customisable as slackware. Linux is linux, you can add all the nice wizards and easy to use control panels, but at the end of the day, Ctrl + Alt + F<1-6> will bring you back to the more "traditional" linux approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerxes Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 I prefer Ubuntu (Gnome) but it is great. Have you tried Dapper Drake with XGL yet? That's really good :D I prefer Ubuntu (Gnome) as well :) I've tried XGL (well I think it was anyway :blush: ) and it didn't work, didn't support my video card (it's an ATI) :( it seems most graphical things in Linux (heavily) favour Nvidia cards (cause Nvidia cards are better at OpenGL)..well I plan on getting a new graphics card within the next year or so (hopefully) so I think my next card might be a Nvidia this time :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyboard Cowboy Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 I really want to go back to Ubuntu but they have yet to support my video card :( GeForce 7800 GT, maybe one day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markwolfe Veteran Posted April 15, 2006 Veteran Share Posted April 15, 2006 ^^^ No support for nVidia GeForce? :ermm: That should work just fine, and with hardware-rendered 3D! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyboard Cowboy Posted April 16, 2006 Share Posted April 16, 2006 ^^^ No support for nVidia GeForce? :ermm: That should work just fine, and with hardware-rendered 3D! Hmmmm don't know, all I get is a brown screen with a cursor. I don't think it's listed on there list of supported video cards. I never got that before with my old PC configuration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaKeY Posted April 16, 2006 Share Posted April 16, 2006 Hmmmm don't know, all I get is a brown screen with a cursor. Sounds like Ubuntu to me! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyboard Cowboy Posted April 16, 2006 Share Posted April 16, 2006 (edited) Sounds like Ubuntu to me! :laugh: lol! All I want is a distro that has kick ass hardware support and great package manager and tons of software and isn't a headache to use, that's all i ask for. :D Edited April 16, 2006 by Synthetic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitch00 Posted April 16, 2006 Share Posted April 16, 2006 As a former Arch user, and current Ubuntu user, I have to say it's very refreshing to start using something that from the ground up is working how I want it (more or less). Okay, it's not as fast as my i686 optimized Arch install, but it just works. With all my school work I really had zero time to be fiddling with a broken Arch install. It wasn't that I couldn't handle fixing it all eventually, and that the CLI scares me... I've been there before, but I was just tired of it, I needed to do my work and the fastest solution (after already spending hours trying to fix Arch) was to install Ubuntu 5.10, change repo's to dapper dist-upgrade it and install openbox. I mean, that's SIMPLE and I was back in business within an hour or so. So basically to sum it all up, what I'm trying to say is that Arch (and all more "advanced" distros) are great, but sometimes people just don't have the time meddle with the inner workings of their OS, and (K)Ubuntu offers a great alternative OS without having to turn to Redmond for their Operating System "just works" needs. One final thought, I do appreciate how nvidia drivers, mp3 playback and all non-free codecs were included by default with Arch, and it was very annoying to have to go out of my way to set something as trivial as that up in an OS that's just supposed to work. Oh well, not their fault I guess. Long Live Ogg! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miuku. Posted April 16, 2006 Share Posted April 16, 2006 Ctrl + Alt + F<1-6> will bring you back to the more "traditional" linux approach. You're missing the point completely but to be honest I can't be bothered to explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts