are the ubuntu repository servers down or what?......
i know this is off topic, but ffs, i can't get a damn answer about this and no repository or backport repository is working,

yes ubuntu is great, because it is. it was appealing because i've tried many a linux, and non have i just liked...i just like it, that's why it's great.

the servers aren't down...just did an upgrade

I do know that *some* of the Debian devs are working on Ubuntu, but so far they have put out a distro that, on 7 installs on 3 different computers here (including my own desktop that runs both Sarge and Slackware without so much as a hiccup) and 4 installs on 2 machines at my friends house, have had multiple severe lockups within days or hours of install. I've heard many similar stories from others on the net. Ubuntu is no Debian. The problem is simple, they rushed xorg into the mix before it was ready. I wanted to like Ubuntu. I really did, but it bit me and I won't soon forget.

Well maybe you're not a 'master of installing Linux'
Ubuntu runs quite sweetly on my box that also houses a very stable Sid.

Anyways, Xorg runs stable as well, except when trying to get composite and true transparency up and running. The only unstable app I've seen is Firefox but it has the same problems on Debian Sid with Xfree86.

I really do think you need to be using a distribution a bit longer than a couple of hours / days before judging it. I tend to bite back when a distro bites me in stead of running away.

I am very new to linux coming from windows.
I have tried many distros such as fedora, yoper, Suse, mandrake, linspire....
to name a few.
So far I have liked Yoper and Ubuntu the most.
I am learning as well as achieving with unbuntu. Where as with most of ther distros I found them to claim they were user friendly, but they weren't for anyone who wanted to get under the hood.

So I think ubuntu is a great learning distro, and I really enjoy using it.

I had registered in the Ubuntulinux.org website and had ordered 10 CDs a few months back. I have yet to recieve them. So I can't exactly give my opinion about Ubuntu. But one thing I found really interesting was that the more distributions there are, the more choice the user has. Which is really good because if there was only one linux distro like MacOS and Windows, then it would have been really boring. Now we have a distro tailor made for each and every type of people there - from the geeks (linux from scratch) to the newbies who want a distro that just works (Ubuntu ??, Fedora, Suse etc). And then there are distros that fall in between the above two categories like slackware and debian.
Ultimately it is all about choice which is the true spirit of GPL.

I've never claimed to be a "master of installing Linux", though I have been using it for, oh, bit longer than 10 years. You yourself even say it is unstable when trying to get features of the xserver working, therefore *you* have backed up my claim of instability. Lets see, if Sarge (among many distros) runs fine, but then Ubuntu installs on the same machine, yet does not want to run smoothly, then remind me again why I should spend more time on the less stable distro? What exactly would I see if I were to spend a longer time judging it? A distro similar to Debian (but not fully compatible nor as stable), with a new xserver (which I cannot use the new features of because they are not stable) and a new version of Gnome (which is nice, but the older version works just fine)? I think I'm quite capable of judging a distro in whatever time frame I choose to allocate to it, thank you very much. There is really nothing to see here. The biggest advantage of Ubuntu is it's community (home forums and user written documentation), and while that's nice, I'm not looking for yet another community to become active in. Sorry, new and shiney just isn't enough for me.

Sorry if I offended you, just foolin' around a bit

I'm not backing up your claim of instability at all. I have merely pointed out that some applications are. Which IMHO has absolutely nothing to do with Ubuntu or any other distro for that matter but with the fact that they are new. Are there no new and unstable / less stable applications in Debian Sarge or Sid?

To me it all depends what you want to do with your system. If you don't like what Ubuntu is doing for you, so be it. But don't go around making statements like 'pie in the sky utopians' who don't know what they'er doing. I think the people working on Ubuntu (or any other distro for that matter) deserve a little more respect.

I just like Ubuntu for trying something new based on Debian. Debian is my distro of choice since I started using GNU/Linux and think it is very interesting to see what Ubuntu can do, based on the Debian framework.

Eh, don't mind me, I'm just in a mood .

But as far as message content.. you did say "Xorg runs stable as well, except when trying to get composite and true transparency up and running.", which, in laymans terms means "not all features work" which to me means, software is not complete nor stable. New or not, if the distro is going to include software that is not stable, the distro should not claim complete stability. Sarge is probably the most stable distro there is, next to Woody.. I have had exactly 0 system crashes with Sarge. Sid is *not supposed to be stable*, therefore no comparison can be made. My prediction is that very soon after Sarge goes gold, Sid will have a spastic episode lol.

I NEVER said "'pie in the sky utopians' who don't know what they'er doing" (the "who don't know what they'er doing" part is what I'm referring to here). I said that they were no match for the full Debian team (since the full deb team is quite a bit larger). As far as my "pie in the sky utopians" statement.. well, what kind of imagery do you get when the first text on the homepage is "Ubuntu" is an ancient African word, meaning "humanity to others". Ubuntu also means "I am what I am because of who we all are". and their logo is a bunch of people in a group hug.. makes me think they're preparing to sing Kumbaya... LOL!

As far as respect, I'm sure they get plenty of that, but they get a paycheck as well, so that kinda makes up for us malcontents.

But you know as well as I do there is a difference between a system crash and X crashing. The latter is just a program crashing while the system is still up and running. I have neither had a system crash in Ubuntu in the past 1.5 month (I've never used Warty) nor in Debian Sarge in the past year (except when I borked it because of my own stupidity) and yes I did have a couple of X crashes when trying to get composite to work. Without it, Xorg runs just as smooth as Xfree86 in Sarge.

*LOL*

What's wrong with Kumbaya???

Ah, but, when x crashes in *just that way* such that it completely locks your system up so that there is no other way to bring it back than hitting the big red button, the difference between a full system crash and an x crash kinda becomes moot. Don't get me wrong, I DO understand that it is an applications stability problem, but where it chaps me is when the particular app that is unstable might as well be a core system process. What, really then, is the difference between using xfree or xorg, if you can't use the nifty new features that set xorg apart from xfree? Then again, what does Ubuntu become when the xserver can't be touted as a new feature? It becomes Debian, with Gnome 2.10, minus complete Debian .deb compatability. Hmm.. Debian Lite maybe?

Lol damn X always causing problems

Aahh...those kind of X-crashes...hmmmm. Nope never had one of those.....yet. Up til now I've always been able to Ctrl-Alt-F1 / Backspace. But I understand your point.

But still, the new features will eventually loose their newness and become stable enough to use and until that moment it's fun to experiment. And I really don't mind experimenting with Debian with Gnome 2.10.

I think it's a very promising distro and will be following their progress over the next year or so with great interest.

I Have tried many, many, different distros on this laptop with no such luck, when I was surfing around some more and found it Ubantu Live 5.04 Zippity Pow!! It loves my computer. I Installed KDE on it, I just don't do Gnome well at all, Perhaps it's cause I'm use to KDE then Gnome. Most everthing works except my linksys wireless card, but I don't use it much any more, so I will pick at it in a while.

thats true, but when a distro is overhyped the way ubuntu is, you get people who are using a distro that they otherwise would not have liked. ubuntu is not a distro taht just works and its not a very good noob distro. IMO, noob distros go from linspire being the easiest to mepis being the hardest with mandrake/fedora/pclos/suse/etc. somewhere in the middle. i really wouldnt put ubuntu on that list. in my experience, kubuntu was the hardest distro to install and configure, and it wasnt worth the effort.

as for x.org crashes, yoper has been the most stable followed by kubuntu and then fedora. kinda funny too cause yoper was using an older version of x.org. but honestly, they were all unusable with transparency turned on. hopefully 6.9/7.0 will fix all these problems.