Ubuntu is the most overrated distro ever put out. It’s not nearly as good as its fanbois portray it to be — certainly not moreso than many other distros. Its “success” is all the result hype and fanboi “marketing”.
Rishabh Mishra (possible248)
· 10 months ago
Hmm, yes. Ubuntu isn't all what marketing says it is, but I think it has a bright enough future to provide a good enough introduction into Linux later on, even if it may not be able to pull that off currently.
Chris Benseler
· 10 months ago
I agree with u @possible248; Ubuntu is (one of) the most friendly distros and one of the best ways to get into the linux world (for those who come from Windows platform).
Monk
· 10 months ago
If we follow your logic then Ubuntu wouldn't be the smartest choice but Linux Mint would be the ideal solution.
Rishabh Mishra (possible248)
· 10 months ago
While I think Ubuntu is a pretty important improvement over Debian, I don't think that Linux Mint is that good of an improvement over Ubuntu.
Ubuntu-spinoffs generally tend to have small communities that may not last a long time into the future. Ubuntu has established far more permanence than Linux Mint, thus I think it earns the trust of users switching to Linux.
Felice
· 10 months ago
I totally agree: Ubuntu does not hide or miss any tech hardcore feature, so it's equally good for the geeks. It is just ALSO affordable for the newcomers. Nice to have a few other choices around, but Ubuntu is certainly the best entry point.
Rishabh Mishra (possible248)
· 10 months ago
Well, hardcore Linux geeks usually do not like Ubuntu because of all the features, which they see as just bloat.
Ubuntu is also slightly less-adapted to geeky things, such as software development and compiling software. With Slackware, the choice of the geeks (like fellow CodingExperiments blogger i80and), you get all the development packages of the software installed on your system, making compiling far easier.
However, Ubuntu is still Linux, and for those hardcore geeks, like me, that can swallow a little bit of perceived software bloat, it's a good choice.
lefty.crupps
· 10 months ago
Gnome and failed-upgrade issues are two (of many) huge reasons I don't push new users towards Ubuntu.
Rishabh Mishra (possible248)
· 10 months ago
Admittedly, I don't seem to have much success with upgrades either. Keep in mind, though, that my post speaks about non-technical reasons for Ubuntu to be the default recommendation to Windows users planning on switching to Linux.
I don't like GNOME either, which is why I used to recommend Kubuntu with KDE 3. Until KDE 4.2 or above ships with Ubuntu by default, I tell new users to try Xubuntu.
Chris
· 10 months ago
Ubuntu is not recommendable for new Linux users because it lacks basic configuration tools; you have to resort to editing .conf-files or use the command-line if any problems occur (most infamously X.org-probs).
Ubuntu forums are full of first-time Linux users who have run into a problem and find themselves having to deal with the ugly reality of Debian-style text-based configuration files and the CLI.
I recommend openSUSE, or perhaps Mandriva.
Rishabh Mishra (possible248)
· 10 months ago
I've used OpenSUSE and Mandriva, and wholeheartedly agree with you that they have far superior GUI configuration utilities than Ubuntu. Ubuntu seems to rely on the desktop environment to provide the configuration GUI, which isn't exactly the best choice for some configurations.
On the other hand, the usage of the terminal and editing of configuration files is made far more easier with the plethora of tutorials out there that can help new users solve problems.
In addition, a Linux geek that out-nerds me ten times over may argue that the somewhat disappointing configuration GUIs and reliance on the terminal help new users learn Unix concepts. Whether or not that is practical is up for debate.
Voyagerfan5761
· 10 months ago
I'd like to point out that a lot of the most useful tweaks to Mac OS X also do not show up in the GUI and require Terminal commands to change. Apple's OS is touted as being über–user-friendly, remember, just like Ubuntu is marketed as one of the most user-friendly Linux distros.
Rishabh Mishra (possible248)
· 10 months ago
But those tweaks, regardless of how useful they are, usually are not basic configuration. In the case of Ubuntu, a lot is missing in the area of configuration.
Cas
· 10 months ago
You get no disagreements from me. I've been using ubuntu since the beginning after ditching windows. It is powerful, it gets the job done, and because of the large community, when I DO have issues, the solutions are ALWAYS THERE. period.
Anytime something jumps to the head of the class in the linux world, it seems we (the linux community) are our own worst enemy.
Ubuntu is a great distro, and NOT over-rated as some would love to whine about here.
Rishabh Mishra (possible248)
· 10 months ago
You make an interesting point.
It seems that part of the Linux community is holding Linux back from reaching mainstream-level marketshare. I've written a blog post about the angrier side of the Linux community at (http://codingexperiments.com/suggested-tips-for...).
LinuxLover
· 10 months ago
Okay, first let me address the dependency part. Ubuntu does gets dependency problems. Apt is just very polite about it, whereas YaST is very loud and confusing. Apt simply tells the user that it was unable to carry out the installation. YaST has multicolored text dialogs that scream at you and offer ways of fixing it, none of which you want to do. Also, it's a sin on any repository's part to put up an application and not meet all the dependencies of that application within the repository. This is in no way anything to do with RPM vs. DEB. Binary files are just binary files. With a good repository, an RPM distro using Apt, URPMI, Smart, or similar package management, can be just as dependency free as Debian/Ubuntu.
Now, lets refute your points line item:
Popularity is meaningless. Windows is more popular than Linux. Should everyone, then, just use Windows? Even Mac OS X is more popular than Linux. Maybe we should all go out and buy a Mac? This point is ridiculous.
Who needs tutorials? If the forum is robust enough, anyone can get the help they need without tutorials. Second, Ubuntu needs tutorials because, like all other Debian based distros, it's still in the dark ages requiring configuration via command line or file hack. Sure, Ubuntu has very heavy handed system scripts that do a lot of work for the user, but anything it doesn't get right has to be done the hard way. Don't get me wrong, I respect the command line and think highly of it. However, new Linux users would find this either a challenge or daunting. There are much better distros out there, like Mandriva, OpenSuse, and PCLinuxOS that use a GUI control panel application that makes this chore a cinch.
The repositories in Ubuntu are very robust. However, they're also confusing... Universe? Multiverse? What the? And there are even multiple repositories needed. PCLinuxOS simplifies all of this. There is a single repository and there are 5 simple sections: main, extra, nonfree, kde, and gnome. It's that simple. There isn't as many packages in it, but most of the additional packages are multiple kernels, kernel modules, and less popular applications and the multitude of required dependencies and libraries they need. Let's face it, a repository of 25,000+ packages is _NOT_ 25,000 applications. If there is something missing that you want, make a package request and it's usually granted. Actually, I'd argue that having too many options like this is confusing to new users.
Media coverage is overblown. First of all, Ubuntu was a nobody at one time. Linux distros have a life cycle. Red Hat once got all the media coverage. Where is it now? It was plastered all over the internet and on geek shows on TechTV and such. Then Mandrake held the reigns as the most popular distro. Where are they now? Ubuntu has its time in the limelight, but, in time, someone else will overthrow it. You see, Linux is splintered for good reason. You can't make everyone happy all the time. So there are distros to suit every need, and this competition is good for the breed. And, just how we are with every other brand, we, the public, grow tired of the same-ole same-ole and want change.
Lastly, let me say, that IMHO new users should shoot for a KDE based distro. Do I think Gnome is bad? Of course not. However, KDE is much more familiar coming from a Windows background. The Kmenu should feel right at home to a Windows user. If they want to move to Gnome after that, fine, or maybe even XFCE... But to make a new user feel more comfortable, KDE is the way to go.
Rishabh Mishra (possible248)
· 10 months ago
While popularity is not the manner to choose an operating system, users theoretically should be comfortable with a more popular operating system than with a less popular operating system. They are comfortable with Windows, after all. Why? Because they have used it frequently. Why have they used it frequently? Because it's so popular it is in workplaces, schools, and computers sold by HP, Dell, etc.
Popularity also means I'm more likely to find a Ubuntu-specific tutorial than a tutorial designed specifically for some obscure Slackware spinoff. Newbie users really need a tutorial specific to their system if they hope to complete a task or solve a problem that is beyond their knowledge.
I never said that the Ubuntu repositories were intuitive. I said they had a lot of packages, which makes it easy for users to find software that they are looking for. While 25,000 packages is not 25,000 applications, I would think that something is deeply wrong with the individuals managing the repository if a repository with 25,000 packages does not contain more applications than a repository with 2,000 packages.
In addition, I never said that Ubuntu would be the Linux Desktop King for all eternity. It just happens that i think that if a Windows user wants to switch to Linux now or in the recent future, Ubuntu should be the first method explored. Five years from now, I may write a blog post that says that another distro should be what new Linux users try first.
Also, every reason that I have listed for Ubuntu also applies to Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and every other 'buntu out there, because they're the same thing besides the desktop environment and a few applications. Like you, I happen to think that KDE is a pretty good desktop environment for seasoned Linux users and newbies. KDE 3.5 is solid, and KDE 4.2 is a major step to making KDE 4... you know... actually *usable*.
Thanks for the comment. :)
Nathan Edmundson
· 10 months ago
Thank you for taking the time to write about this.
Voyagerfan5761
· 10 months ago
Say, where'd you get the photo? I'm just wondering, because it's not credited and some people get mad if you don't credit their work.
Rishabh Mishra (possible248)
· 10 months ago
Oh, dear.
Thank you, VFan, for pointing that out. I usually credit people for their work.
I believe this is from a photoshoot sponsored by Ubuntu.
devnet
· 10 months ago
so really, what it boils down to in this post is that you are saying popularity is the key. Because debian has a HUGE community, no problems with dependencies, a huge wealth of repositories, and excellent documentation available.
Honestly though, I find that Gnome is not the first choice for new users coming into Linux the first time. I'm afraid you're looking at what YOU think a user should be concerned with but not actually what the user IS concerned with.
Rishabh Mishra (possible248)
· 10 months ago
Well, this post equally applies to all Ubuntu flavors, and I also don't happen to be a GNOME fanatic myself.
Yes, popularity is pretty much the main reason my post states that one should use Ubuntu.
While Debian has large repositories, huge community, and so forth, Ubuntu is preferable for technical reasons which this blog post did not cover.
All Comments
Ubuntu-spinoffs generally tend to have small communities that may not last a long time into the future. Ubuntu has established far more permanence than Linux Mint, thus I think it earns the trust of users switching to Linux.
Nice to have a few other choices around, but Ubuntu is certainly the best entry point.
Ubuntu is also slightly less-adapted to geeky things, such as software development and compiling software. With Slackware, the choice of the geeks (like fellow CodingExperiments blogger i80and), you get all the development packages of the software installed on your system, making compiling far easier.
However, Ubuntu is still Linux, and for those hardcore geeks, like me, that can swallow a little bit of perceived software bloat, it's a good choice.
I don't like GNOME either, which is why I used to recommend Kubuntu with KDE 3. Until KDE 4.2 or above ships with Ubuntu by default, I tell new users to try Xubuntu.
Ubuntu forums are full of first-time Linux users who have run into a problem and find themselves having to deal with the ugly reality of Debian-style text-based configuration files and the CLI.
I recommend openSUSE, or perhaps Mandriva.
On the other hand, the usage of the terminal and editing of configuration files is made far more easier with the plethora of tutorials out there that can help new users solve problems.
In addition, a Linux geek that out-nerds me ten times over may argue that the somewhat disappointing configuration GUIs and reliance on the terminal help new users learn Unix concepts. Whether or not that is practical is up for debate.
Anytime something jumps to the head of the class in the linux world, it seems we (the linux community) are our own worst enemy.
Ubuntu is a great distro, and NOT over-rated as some would love to whine about here.
It seems that part of the Linux community is holding Linux back from reaching mainstream-level marketshare. I've written a blog post about the angrier side of the Linux community at (http://codingexperiments.com/suggested-tips-for...).
Now, lets refute your points line item:
Popularity is meaningless. Windows is more popular than Linux. Should everyone, then, just use Windows? Even Mac OS X is more popular than Linux. Maybe we should all go out and buy a Mac? This point is ridiculous.
Who needs tutorials? If the forum is robust enough, anyone can get the help they need without tutorials. Second, Ubuntu needs tutorials because, like all other Debian based distros, it's still in the dark ages requiring configuration via command line or file hack. Sure, Ubuntu has very heavy handed system scripts that do a lot of work for the user, but anything it doesn't get right has to be done the hard way. Don't get me wrong, I respect the command line and think highly of it. However, new Linux users would find this either a challenge or daunting. There are much better distros out there, like Mandriva, OpenSuse, and PCLinuxOS that use a GUI control panel application that makes this chore a cinch.
The repositories in Ubuntu are very robust. However, they're also confusing... Universe? Multiverse? What the? And there are even multiple repositories needed. PCLinuxOS simplifies all of this. There is a single repository and there are 5 simple sections: main, extra, nonfree, kde, and gnome. It's that simple. There isn't as many packages in it, but most of the additional packages are multiple kernels, kernel modules, and less popular applications and the multitude of required dependencies and libraries they need. Let's face it, a repository of 25,000+ packages is _NOT_ 25,000 applications. If there is something missing that you want, make a package request and it's usually granted. Actually, I'd argue that having too many options like this is confusing to new users.
Media coverage is overblown. First of all, Ubuntu was a nobody at one time. Linux distros have a life cycle. Red Hat once got all the media coverage. Where is it now? It was plastered all over the internet and on geek shows on TechTV and such. Then Mandrake held the reigns as the most popular distro. Where are they now? Ubuntu has its time in the limelight, but, in time, someone else will overthrow it. You see, Linux is splintered for good reason. You can't make everyone happy all the time. So there are distros to suit every need, and this competition is good for the breed. And, just how we are with every other brand, we, the public, grow tired of the same-ole same-ole and want change.
Lastly, let me say, that IMHO new users should shoot for a KDE based distro. Do I think Gnome is bad? Of course not. However, KDE is much more familiar coming from a Windows background. The Kmenu should feel right at home to a Windows user. If they want to move to Gnome after that, fine, or maybe even XFCE... But to make a new user feel more comfortable, KDE is the way to go.
Popularity also means I'm more likely to find a Ubuntu-specific tutorial than a tutorial designed specifically for some obscure Slackware spinoff. Newbie users really need a tutorial specific to their system if they hope to complete a task or solve a problem that is beyond their knowledge.
I never said that the Ubuntu repositories were intuitive. I said they had a lot of packages, which makes it easy for users to find software that they are looking for. While 25,000 packages is not 25,000 applications, I would think that something is deeply wrong with the individuals managing the repository if a repository with 25,000 packages does not contain more applications than a repository with 2,000 packages.
In addition, I never said that Ubuntu would be the Linux Desktop King for all eternity. It just happens that i think that if a Windows user wants to switch to Linux now or in the recent future, Ubuntu should be the first method explored. Five years from now, I may write a blog post that says that another distro should be what new Linux users try first.
Also, every reason that I have listed for Ubuntu also applies to Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and every other 'buntu out there, because they're the same thing besides the desktop environment and a few applications. Like you, I happen to think that KDE is a pretty good desktop environment for seasoned Linux users and newbies. KDE 3.5 is solid, and KDE 4.2 is a major step to making KDE 4... you know... actually *usable*.
Thanks for the comment. :)
Thank you, VFan, for pointing that out. I usually credit people for their work.
I believe this is from a photoshoot sponsored by Ubuntu.
Honestly though, I find that Gnome is not the first choice for new users coming into Linux the first time. I'm afraid you're looking at what YOU think a user should be concerned with but not actually what the user IS concerned with.
Yes, popularity is pretty much the main reason my post states that one should use Ubuntu.
While Debian has large repositories, huge community, and so forth, Ubuntu is preferable for technical reasons which this blog post did not cover.