UbuntuThis forum is for the discussion of Ubuntu Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I just recently tried Ubuntu on my new Toshiba laptop. WOW!!! For the past 2+ years I have been running nothing but Slackware in my house. I decided to try Ubuntu on my new machine since it appears to be the most popular distro out there. Immediately upon loading the liveCD just about ALL of my hardware was detected and my wifi network was a few clicks from being configured. In just minutes I was having fun with Linux. So, I decided to wipe my hard drive and install Ubuntu. Again....it was EXTREMELY easy! Poof, I was happy as a pig in slop. I just have to get my 5-in-1 media device to work and I am all set.
Now I know Slackware is VERY barebones, but I never really liked some of the other popular "user friendly" distros (red hat, fedora, mandriva, etc). Ubuntu is EXTREMELY well done and VERY easy to use. I've spent MANY hours learning the ins and outs of Slackware. I learned a lot about Linux, but Ubuntu takes just about all of the headache out of basic configuration. WELL DONE UBUNTU...WELL DONE!!!
I just installed Ubuntu on my Toshiba Libretto U100 and I was surprised how practically everything works! Windows XP could only make the bare essentials work on this laptop since I don't have the recovery CD. Needless to say, XP is history on this machine!
I'm a total newbie to Linux... but last night reading forums etc allowed me to even get my Verizon Aircard (Novatel V620) to work!
Distribution: Mac OS X Leopard 10.6.2, Windows 2003 Server/Vista/7/XP/2000/NT/98, Ubuntux64, CentOS4.8/5.4
Posts: 2,986
Rep:
I also have been trying different distros lately. Fedora Core 5, SuSe 10.1, CentOS, and Mepis 6.0. They all aren't that great in comparison to Ubuntu. I am actually starting to switch over to Kubuntu. I personally like KDE better.
I'm a Windows programmer and, of course, I'm using a computer in my free time, too. Thus, I need a transparent, sympathic operation system plus some applications in order to surf the web, listen to music, do my stuff - and, it needs to be extensible, serious, pure. It needs to be stable, and run business software (like major software development environments and databases) without problems. No need to mention that it needs to recognize the hardware.
There's much more ... to say on Ubuntu. To me, it "just worked", but even if it should not, it's still transparent, so anything can be fixed. There are even political and ethical issues towards using Ubuntu.
To me, Debian, and moreover Ubuntu, is the real deal.
---
BTW, funny how Ubuntu gets so many fans, hm? And no single (possible) enemy could ever tell they're not the good ones. This is amazing...
Before I installed Ubuntu I was using SuSE 9.0.(along with Windows) After I installed Ubuntu 6.06 it was good-by SuSE, hello Ubuntu. I can't get over how easy it is to install programs. I've been using Ubuntu for about 3 days and I'm able to do things that I never could with SuSE.
agreed.. i've been bitching about linux installataions (and on here too).. since red hat five.. ubuntu is the first one that has ever worked straight out of the box on my acer laptop.. even the wireless and the digital tv work.. in fact i've got nothing to mess about with now on rainy weekends..
the thing that makes this special is apt.. the main problem i've ever had with linux distro's is endless dependency issues.. now they are gone. i need to use the damn thing productively, not spend all my energy setting it up..plus we've finally got rid of apache and sql.. frankly as a desktop user i don't need them, good as they may be..
now it may be that ubuntu 'breaks' the *nix method of doing things.. so what.. its up to *nix to catch up.. all of these advocacy it issues are a red herring anyway.. if you check it out there have always been differences between flavours.. i.e. aix, solaris and redhat, so this is nothing new happening here.. i think a few people are quite proud (and justifiably so IMO) in their linux proficiency and would prefer to keep it in the domain of the enlightened few.. get over it..
the only gripe over ubuntu is that is should be made clear where the main differences are between it and mainstream *nix solutions .. these are a few things and could be put on a splash screen for installation.. jast to make people aware who are using generic *nix documentation and expecting it to be accurate..
1. you won't automatically get the build tools
2. you need to use sudo for root ops
3. relbuilding the kernel uses the debian method
4. you need to sort out your sources.list file asap (why not do it automatically?)
other than that.. people vote with their feet.. and they are doing..
I'm a slack user too and find ubuntu the only user friendly distro that I can both "tolerate" and get DRI working and have the system stay stable; well once I got kde on it and working
I was shocked tho that ubuntu did not have these as default install:
-no firewall, or at least an icon/readme to tell you there is none installed.
-no samba
-no nfs
-no portmap
-no setup printer icon
-no midnight commander or pico
-no build essentials, make, headers, etc.
-no tool for admin to gui style modify grub
What I really like is that gnome is there and works so I can use gnome applications as I've tried and failed at getting gnome on slackware.
They have good accurate wiki's / how-to's.
The download's for apt-get is really fast.
I got 3d rendering on ATI first time and the xorg looks really good and I cant wait til' it comes out for slackware.
Ubuntu is just fab - I love it. It's a breath of fresh air after working with Windows XP at work... horrid. That said, I'd like to see some further development of the server version of the distro, along the lines of SuSE linux enterprise edition - anything that make the migration from Windows to Linux easier.. But as a desktop operating system, Ubuntu is absolutely spot-on.
I was going to install Ubuntu until someone told me it does not have gcc or development libraries with it. Is that true? I chose Suse 10.1 over Ubuntu for that reason and I hate downloading a bunch of packages in order to get stuff to work. YaSTing around from a set of CDs, however, is fine with me.
I do like the concept of Ubuntu though.
Ubuntu doesn't come with the development libraries installed out-of-the-box, but it's an easy job to install everything you need using Synaptic. I can understand your not wanting to download lots of packages, but a big part of Ubuntu's appeal, IMHO, is that it's tight, well-integrated and doesn't overwhelm the new user with loads of software packages installed by default. I'm lucky to be on a broadband internet connection, so downloading extra software isn't too much of an issue, but I can appreciate that for dialup users, Ubuntu's single-CD installation constaint might be a bit limiting.
I was going to install Ubuntu until someone told me it does not have gcc or development libraries with it. Is that true? I chose Suse 10.1 over Ubuntu for that reason and I hate downloading a bunch of packages in order to get stuff to work. YaSTing around from a set of CDs, however, is fine with me.
I do like the concept of Ubuntu though.
The development apps (make, gcc, etc) aren't installed by default, the reasoning for this is that the "average" user won't need it, average users in ubuntus eyes are new linux users. But, the packages are on the CD for you to apt-get them (without download).
I was shocked tho that ubuntu did not have these as default install:
-no firewall, or at least an icon/readme to tell you there is none installed.
AFAIR, there's no open port with the default installation.
Quote:
-no samba
-no nfs
-no portmap
Now you confuse me. - What's that?
Quote:
-no setup printer icon
I'm too cheap to buy a printer, anyways. If I need to print, I'm doing that at work.
Quote:
-no midnight commander or pico
I prefer nano.
Quote:
-no build essentials, make, headers, etc.
Come on. I've been using Ubuntu for more than half a year now. I'm a Windows programmer, so I should be able to use make or similar applications. - After all, I've used it one time, only!
Quote:
-no tool for admin to gui style modify grub
Again, Ubuntu's mission is just to "make it work", for a start. - There are, of course, tons of advanced settings.
-----
BTW, I actually liked the way you stepped down from Slackware to Ubuntu. And I - as a Ubuntu user - don't feel miserable at all. I liked the way you've been accepting this Ubuntu distribution - being both advanced and serious, and friendly to newbies.
-----
After all, Ubuntu is one of the "real deals" in my eyes. At least, it isn't after your money in the first line, other than almost anything else these days. - Ubuntu doesn't cheat. - And, while it aims for publicity, it brings in most valuable goals for everyone.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.