You can easily enable a root account, by simply typing:

Anyway, I see the root account more like a way to prevent the user of doing something stupid (like deleting important files) than being hacked or something like that. Sudo fits well Ubuntu in this case: It does not allow a newcomer to be running as root all the time (as many... many do. Believe you me ^_^) and prevents the same newcomer of deleting something wrong by mistake, since he/she will be prompted for his own password before proceeding.

This is a long and rather subjective posting. No need to read it if you're just in for concise information. - I wasn't.
Thanks

Pros (in my eyes):
+ polished & good-looking
+ up-to-date & more than that, very innovative
+ the APT installer will never break your system
+ really large software repositories
+ wide userland (useful in case of problems)
+ amazing documentation, tons of other howtos
+ friendly ("human") and visionary
+ pure - not proprietary -, it won't hinder at all from customizing Linux in any aspect
+ free (as in beer & speech) & upright
+ everything (from the grounds - architecture, marketing - to visual details) well-designed & of one piece
+ good hardware recognation (no single issue with my - older - PCs)
+ thoroughly planned from both (triple?) a business, software engineering, and holistic, perspective

Cons:
- while there is a DVD available, software installation mostly relies on a an existing internet connection
- restricted drivers not included (though I would probably not "buy" any distribution that had, I'ld rather like to customize myself)

There's a new, thriving, and human, philosophy about Ubuntu, coming in one piece with a the plans of an extremely savvy and competent businessman and leader (Shuttleworth), and the well-chosen software foundation Debian.

To me, Ubuntu is a revelation (in, admittedly, an almost religious sense), and it enabled me to finally move from Windows to Linux (SuSE did not).

I have to admit that there are not only technical reasons for me, but also emotional ones, like - I just love it.
But, isn't that a valid point, too?

One thing is, I like this idea very much, that open source software and sharing can give people more than they would coldly buy for (much) money, otherwise. - Is Mandriva free, is it partly free, or does it want your money, after all? (According to reddazz, the first...) - Are "they" true, and are there hidden costs? - Will they treat you well? - Will they treat others well, who don't have opportunities like you fortunately have? - These are questions about accomodation, ethics, and trust.

(Now, I will not even start to talk about Microsoft software.)

You can never know in our world - but, Ubuntu has made a popular campaign out of just the opposite.
This "insignificant" piece of software does not only enable users to use a free desktop (or server), but it also opens eyes for what software should be to humans, and how software should/might fit in, in local and global societies.

And, it actively aids new users to learn Linux (not only to learn "Ubuntu", like Microsoft would do), to free themselves.

I find the role of Ubuntu extremely helpful in these tides of times.

I am a fulltime ubuntu user. I DO remember liking Mandriva (at the time, it was mostly because I could get my wireless connection up and running with ease!). Same thing goes with ubuntu. Right outta the box, I was online! (with a wireless device that is not supported to boot! Linksys wusb11.)

But, if i remember correctly, Mandriva was a little bloated. I'm not a big fan of Kde. I did not like having three or four CD's just to install one OS, and I have to agree with aysiu. I did not like having to subscribe to be a member of the Mandriva community! (I paid for that priviledge). The Mandriva web site is too cluttered. I have never recieved any benefits from BEING a club member YET! At least none that I cant get free from other Distro's!

One thing I do like about Mandriva (and its derivative PCLinuxOS) is DiskDrake. It's the slickest free partitioning tool I've found.

In the past GParted and QTParted have sometimes mysteriously given me greyed out options (yes, even if the partitions are unmounted) or weird errors. DiskDrake is rock solid.

Yeah, Mandrake/driva has always been one step forward in partitioning. Weren't Mandrake the first distro to actually be able to resize NTFS partitions?

OK.,CRAP! NOW you guy's are forcing me to install Mandriva on my test box in order to test 'Diskdrake'! LOL!

I think more people posting comment, will make ryedunn become more confuse cause everybody is right. Why don't ryedunn you try yourself? all distro is good actually, just their direction is difference.

ks

Thank you all for you insight.

I think I should give you a litlte background though:
Although I have been running linux for a few years, I by no means am an expert. Linux is my Firewall, mp3 server, web server, mail server, etc.. and it scares the heck out of me to think of rebuilding it from scratch but it will need to be done soon... but I dont think linux will be my day to day machine until a few final apps that I need are developed for linux.

For this particular project, I have some extra hardware laying around and Im going to move the mp3 server and start working on getting MythTV installed (www.mythtv.org).

With this being said Im not sure if Im ready for Debian? (maybe I dont give myself enough credit) and I would like to try to get this up and running asap without having to take weeks to tweak and reconfigure Debian when Ubuntu would work. but if you believe there is no difference, I'll give it a go.

Finally is there a list I can go look at all the APT programs? I know urpmi has mythtv and all its plugins, but I would like to know if APT does too?

Finally, Finally, I will still be installing Ubuntu somewhere at my house (I have lots of old machines) only because I want the little lady to start using linux too.

From Debian's repositories:You might also want to take a look at this.

ubuntu have too..

Heres my reason on Why Ubuntu :I've been using linux off and on for several years now trying out different distros throughout the years but it was always done by dual booting windows and linux. I like using linux but I always found myself spending hours looking for drivers, and getting other things to work. I downloaded Ubuntu and started the live cd, and to my amazement Everything really did "just work"! (with the exception of websites requiring the latest version of flash but thats all linux users .. right? workaround was using firefox thru wine with a flash xpi installed) So I tried it out and looked for programs that I must have and everything has been great. I then made the decision I've been wanting to do for a long time now, COMPLETELY get rid of windows and use linux Ubuntu/Kubuntu as my OS. I have everything I need installed and working great. I really do love this distro and am glad I never gave up.

The main reason that attracted me to Ubuntu was the wiki and excellent forums.

I don't really run any ubuntu gui stuff.

I am just wondering why Ubuntu is getting all that attention.
I test drove it and I found it very inefficient, with a first impression of being easy, thanks to a nice cosmetic installation and a nice marketing job.
Split in thousands of little pieces that the user has to put together somehow, it looks more like a giant jigsaw puzzle than an OS.
I am a Slackware user for years and I will definitely not swap Slackware for Ubuntu.
Furthermore, just take a look at the configuration files of the Apache2 dapper server and then you're in for a good laugh.

Next step: reformat your partition and look for something else.

You know, i don't understand the new fad of bashing Ubuntu. I see more blogs and articles on it in the past three weeks than i ever have since it hit distrowatch. The newest one to reach me came from my osnews rss. here. The thing is.. why? If you are a satisfied slacker, gentoo user, debian fan, etc.. Then you have found the distro that works for you. Thats great. If Ubuntu is your bag, great. I think we all understand one thing about Linux. It really is what you want. If you want something that finds your hardware the first time, installs easy enough for you to mail a CD to your grandmother, and provides an environment that is almost free from the cli, then ubuntu may be for you, but you do sacrifice the sleek system that a Slack or Arch install will give you. I use ubuntu on two computers at home. I use debian at work. There are lots of distros that are user friendly, but i like having my home computer work a lot like my computer at work. Its easier on me. And lets face it, any distro is user friendly if you set it up to be. My 16 year old daughter is no geek, but she got around Gnome on Arch just fine. Since i have started using my computer to make a living, i got out of the distro testing in favor of something very easy, stable, well supported, that just works. Ubuntu is Linux, and that makes it a very good thing.

Nepish, ... I read your link, and I think it includes a lot of stuff that Ubuntu should take to heart. Especially, the recommendations for the desktop. Imagine the kind of resources Ubuntu could throw at Enlightenment, XGL, etc. It would really set them apart as a "different" distro.

As a staunch Debianite, I find all the "newbie friendly Debian derivatives" to be a Godsend since they keep the newbies out of the Debian forums. I only have to try helping new Ubuntu users solve their problems if it's one that I find particularly interesting, or if it's related to an issue I've been fighting myself.