So... was my long review of Ubuntu too biased?
 

I am just so impressed with this OS... I did the best I could:

http://www.linuxquestions.org/review...hp?product=827

Review #9 is mine. I am open for comments =)

I use Debian myself, but I can understand how people have appreciated Ubuntu because of its slick features and its user-friendliness. The two reasons I don't use Ubuntu though is:

1. sudo
2. lack of development tools by default

I know both can be remedied very easily, but it's just that I have kept Debian for such a long time that I don't feel like using any other distribution. Besides, most tutorials available for Ubuntu also work (with a few minor modifications) on Debian.

I might install Ubuntu at some stage myself, but I'm more than happy with Debian at the moment. ;)

You really should try 32 bit, even on a 64 bit system. Runs fast, smooth, no issues with Skype et al.

Everything just works.

64 bit is still in teething pains stage. And will be for the next few years, IMHO. The hardware always goes ahead of the software.

Good review and should be helpful for people who are interested in Ubuntu. Too bad I'm the #1 Ubuntu hater!

*cough*

every distro has cons, every DE, every OS. As soon as you claim no cons I can't take your review as credible. I have used Ubuntu in the past and I installed Hardy to compare it with its parent Debian and with Arch. Ubuntu does indeed have cons, some of which are quite apparent, a few are severe, and there are some which a user might not be aware of if they haven't tried other distros. I noticed the only comparisons you make are with MS Windows which is a valid comparison for some people but rather narrow.

I'm not detailing what I think are Ubuntu's pros and cons (it certainly has both) as this thread is about your review and not Ubuntu per se.

What is a "review" that claims no cons and makes no worthwhile comparisons with competing products? Advertising/propaganda/fanboyism/ take your pick, but it isn't a review.

The sudo thing is nothing. Consider "sudo su -"

But if you are happy with Debian there really is no reason to talk yourself into *buntu.

Hey, thanks everyone for the comments. I appreciate your honesty =). Maybe saying there was no cons was a bit biased. I believe most of the small, small issues as I had (as with Skype) are quite x86_64 related. I wish I could compare Ubuntu to other distributions, but I've not run any Linux at home for quite sometime. Except for DSL on my Xbox =). I do have FreeBSD and Solaris, but I don't think either of those has the same focus on the desktop as Ubuntu does.

Another thing I don't particularly like is the default brown theme. That again, is more a taste issue ratter than usability, so I left that one out. Looks are important if they compromise the usability, for example, I can't sit on a machine with ugly fonts. If Ubuntu had default ugly fonts, that would probably be mentioned =)

Still, while I don't like the theme, I find it is important for Linux (a distribution in this case), to have a face. Something that makes them look different from other distros and even other OS. We all know how XP looks by default, or OSX. And for that, I think Ubuntu did... something. Still, in terms of polish, I'd give that to openSuSE :)

Well, have to run for work... again.

Thanks again!

Nice review. Since I'm no gamer, I had no clue that it was actually that good.
If you don't like the default look, try this theme by this French guy, he makes some absolutely amazing themes. They make suse look like dirt, seriously :D.
They can also be found on gnome-look.org and should have instructions in both French and English.
There is another amazing theme called Elegant Brit (not specifically ubuntu) but it still has a few issues that affect java applications in particular (like Netbeans having illegible menus). But I have actually seens some Mac guys drool all over it so that is pretty telling.

Wow, I have to say, several of you should never EVER write a review, you have no clue what you are doing.

You never EVER consider something to be a pro or con in COMPARISON TO ANOTHER PRODUCT!!!

EVER!!!

You can compare features and say, "This OS has more features than the competitors." but you NEVER EVER EVER EVER say, "This OS doesn't work like brand X and that is a con."

I believe Mega Man X was reviewing Ubuntu properly (to a point) and was correct in pointing out NO CONS if there really weren't any for him.

I would point out though that no multi-media support would be a con for him, and I would have pointed that out in my review. The fact that it's a super simple remedy means nothing - it was not 100% perfect. The fact that Skype doesn't work out of the box for 64-bit, again, a con.

Although he pointed out the cons in his review, his rating of CONS==0 was inaccurate for him.

*I* however am running 32-bit Ubuntu, and I can honestly say the cons for me are zero. As are the cons for three of my clients that I converted to it.

Cheers,
Ghost

Reviews should be subjective and opinionated.

That's what makes them interesting. Put a bit of yourself into the review and you can work wonders. Otherwise it'll read like a dry technical report - factual but boring. ;)

I completely disagree. All pros and cons should be in comparison to the alternatives. "Pro" compared to what? "Con" compared to what?

The entire point of a review is to help the reader choose whether to use the reviewed products. Pros and cons compared to alternative products are completely relevant.

errm....yeah, right. Making a comparison is not about saying "this works differently so it is good/bad". If you think that's what a comparison is then that's a little unfortunate for you.

Ubuntu shares a lot of features with many other distros, things like APT, the Gnome desktop and various applications. It also does a few things differently and adds some of its own facilities and ideas. It's reasonable to compare for the purposes of assessing such things as:

How is Ubuntu's implementation of Gnome similar or different to other distros' implementations? Are there aspects that Ubuntu does better/worse than others and why/how? Have they made useful improvements/customisations?

Ubuntu uses its own GUI installer (as well as the text based Debian installer). Does the Ubuntu installer offer improvements in features or usability?

Upgrades: Ubuntu releases every 6 months. Many users will wish to keep up to date. How reliable is the upgrade process? Are there other distros which offer more (or less) reliable upgrading, or is Ubuntu ahead of the pack?

The Ubuntu specific features: what do Ubuntu's unique solutions and facilities offer the user? Do they offer something useful/attractive that other distros don't? Do they solve problems that other distros failed to solve? Do they offer worthwhile new facilities that I can't find elsewhere? Are there any drawbacks to the Ubuntu specific features?

It comes down to "Why should anyone choose or decline to choose Ubuntu from amongst the 100's of other desktop distros out there?" A review with no context and no comparison in effect only says "because I like it" or "because I say so".

If a reviewer assesses a distro with no reference to other similar products then all you can learn from the "review" is if he/she likes it or not. That's not really any more useful than knowing the reviewer's favourite colour or if they prefer Coke to Pepsi.

But anyway thanks for capitalised rant. The world needs more fanboys..........

Thanks Lord Ghost. When I started reading your post, I started to think that you thought my review was so bad that I should never make reviews again :D

Anyway, I appreciate your comments and I am glad to see you are also satisfied with Ubuntu.

@Takla:

I think comparing one product with another is a good thing. But I didn't want to do so because: First, I am not qualified to do so, because I haven't tried any other distribution in years. So I believe it is better to say how Ubuntu worked for me, as a desktop user, developer and an semi-hardcore gamer, ratter than comparing with things I've no knowledge of.

Windows had to be mentioned on the review, because that is what I used for all my needs. Now if some other distribution offers the same as Ubuntu does, that is a good thing, but I fail to see how that would affect Ubuntu. If anything, now the reader has an idea of what to expected of Ubuntu and can try other distros out to compare it by themselves.

Ok fair enough, I appreciate your perspective. Your review makes more sense in this context, maybe it's worth stating the same in your review?

Thanks for the reply and the suggestion. I will probably add that to the review as well. I already changed the "cons", based on some replies here. I want it to be a good review, even if a tiny fanboy-made. It is a personal, non-professional review after all =)

Cheers!