I was first introduced to Linux through GNOME via Ubuntu, but KDE also rules. To me KDE has a better overall look at feel and I read somewhere that even Linus Torvalds prefers KDE over GNOME.

>> "Besides, it is very easy to add KDE to classic Ubuntu as well."

i have been hearing classic ubuntu ... what is that actually ...

what are ther differences between classic ubuntu and the rest of the ubuntus ... ??


//sounds interesting to me ...

.

When someone says "classic ubuntu" they are refering to a standard installation of Ubuntu (not Xubuntu or Kubuntu) which has the default DE of Gnome. Xubuntu has the default DE of XFCE and Kubuntu has KDE by default. As a whole, they are all the exact same system, just with different default DE's, which I think is pointless since Ubuntu is Debian based and uses the APT package manager (why someone would want to download an entirely new CD instead of running a simple APT command to get a new DE is beyond me).

http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu

http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/derivatives

i didnt know there are other(infact many) ubuntus other than x/k/ubuntu ... initially by mentioning classic ubutnu its a bit confusing for me ...


//thanks to both for letting me know ...


.

You seem to be assuming the starting point is one of the other Ubuntus, but it probably is not, in many cases.

For example, I experimented with regular Ubuntu a while back, but I want to get the new version next week and start over. I know that I prefer XFCE to either Gnome or KDE, so it makes sense for me to download Xubuntu as my only CD download. That way I won't have to load the wrong DE and then fix it.

So Kdefanboys now wants Ubuntu to replace GNOME with Kde>?nice fine?then what else kudubuntufd is for?

Your point is quite good, except why download a whole new CD for updates/upgrades when they can be installed via APT in less time, effort, and bandwidth?

Kubuntu, Xubuntu etc. are independent installation disks, not upgrades to Ubuntu install CD. If you know that you want to use KDE (not Gnome) then obviously it's only natural to get Kubuntu disk and install from it. You don't need Ubuntu installation CD to install Kubuntu, Xubuntu etc.

*slaps forehead*

You're missing my point completely.

For example, if you already have Ubuntu installed and one day you decide "Hey, I want to give KDE a try and see how it goes." You dont want to download an entire Kubuntu CD image and then have it wipe out your existing system*. Instead, just fire up the cli and run APT to get KDE installed (i believe the package is called kubuntu-desktop). This way, you only download the needed packages for KDE instead of an entire CD and you dont have to wipe your entire system*.

kubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-desktop, xubuntu desktop are all in the repositiories, and each CD points to the exact same repositories. There is no difference in the base code on each installation CD. The only difference is the default DE installed. So why download the entire base system 3 times to get all 3 DEs (while loosing your existing data on the hard drive*) when you can do it safely from apt-get/aptitude/dselect/synaptic package manager/ or whatever you want to use.

* If you follow all default options during installation your data will be formated and overwritten. Custom partitioning schemes will allow you keep certain data intact, but the base system will still be overwritten. Multi-booting will allow more than one system to exist along side others nicely without overwritting data, as long as shared partitions do not exist (i.e., kubuntu and ubuntu sharing the same /home partition will overwrite one during the installation of the second.)

Cool down... You're missing my point as well Everybody knows (well, almost everybody) that it is easy to install more desktop environments in *ubuntu than default one. What I mentioned was quite common situation when somebody knows in advance which desktop environment he/she wants. For example, I know that I will use KDE, so I will not even bother with classic Ubuntu/Gnome but will choose Kubuntu in the first place. It will be easier for me to install directly from Kubuntu CD. In fact, I would most probably use Kubuntu DVD purchased from Cheapbytes or another vendor instead of downloading and burning huge ISO images.

luckily i never come across all these facts before i was actually intending to install my ubuntu ... ^_^


//anyway ... good reads for me ...


.

I'm calm. I misunderstood you're last post. What you are saying is in fact a smart decision in that case. I was on another case, one I see all too often (especially from people converting from Windows) where someone will format the whole system just to change something that originally could have taken only 2 minutes (funniest one was someone could not understand the difference between hda and hdb [grub was trying to boot tho the wrong drive] so they formated the whole system and started over... yeah...). I swear, if people grew up on Linux instead of Windows the world would not be so stupid.

GNOME Only.I can tolerate,may be some other WM's or even Xfce on my system.bcoz they all are based on GTK2.I cant tolerate,qt libs,kde on any of my systems.KDE is a bloatware and this exactly is not the reason for my hatred,I Support Free Software Foundation and it's Project -GNOME.while kde is from trolltech built on qt.i dont want to keep this crap on my system.GNOME must evolve.GNOME remains to be simple.But it is highly customizable.
I think for modification freaks may be GNOME ppl release some version with focus on eye candy.that means a new WM or a modified metacity.

Myself, I use KDE, Gnome, and XFCE, but, when I need to really crunch CPU (such as compiling a kernel) I use the command line. KDE though, is my default.