Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Ubuntu Linux Review

Posted by timothy on Mon Sep 27, 2004 05:53 PM
from the with-a-name-like-shuttleworth dept.
JimLynch writes "Pardon me while I pimp one of my own stories. We've got a review of Ubuntu Linux up on ExtremeTech. Check it out. Overall we had quite a positive experience with it, we think it's going to be a good distro as it matures. If you're looking for an easy-to-install debian distro, give it a download." Update: 09/27 23:25 GMT by T : Eugenia writes with another review from USALug, and a 6-page comprehensive Ubuntu preview at OSNews, writing "Gnome's & Ubuntu's release manager Jeff Waugh also had an interesting interview detailing lots of interesting tidbits. The final version of Ubuntu is expected mid-October."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Longer/better review (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 27 2004, @05:58PM (#10367561)
    I think the OSNews review posted today is better: http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=8407 [osnews.com]
  • Or (Score:4, Informative)

    by OverlordQ (264228) * on Monday September 27 2004, @05:58PM (#10367562) Journal
    See the Debian Planet [debianplanet.org] story back on the 16th. Which linked you to the announcement [ubuntu.com] and also an interview [osnews.com].
  • Not Debian (Score:5, Informative)

    by Doc Ruby (173196) on Monday September 27 2004, @05:59PM (#10367568) Homepage Journal
    Their packages are not binary compatible with Debian packages, so you can't mix them in a single install. Therefore, they're not really a Debian child, although they're related by starting with the Debian package selection, and bugfixing/certifying from there. More like a Debian half-clone, sent to finishing school. Which will have some effect on drawing away some community contribution to Debian, as a partial fork. Kinda like that clone beating his dad's time at the pub with his fancy accent, but then unable to get past Dad's doorman to use the penthouse jacuzzi.
    • Re:Not Debian (Score:4, Informative)

      by natrius (642724) <niran@@@niran...org> on Monday September 27 2004, @06:16PM (#10367701) Homepage
      Most Debian packages work in Ubuntu. For instance, many people have successfully used the Debian mplayer packages from an unofficial mirror on Ubuntu. The reason why they suggest not mixing Debian packages into an Ubuntu install is because the versioning may be different and apt can get confused. Most Debian packages are present in the universe section of the Ubuntu repository, so it's not that big of a deal.
    • Re:Not Debian (Score:4, Informative)

      by dschl (57168) on Monday September 27 2004, @06:22PM (#10367742) Homepage
      Funny, I installed the 040925 nightly build on the weekend, and then added a nearby Debian mirror (unstable, of course) to the package list in Synaptic. The (20? 30?) packages I installed from sid all appear to work just fine in Ubuntu. You appear to be incorrect, please look around for some of the interviews with the Ubuntu developers (relevant section quoted in this comment [slashdot.org]). I understand that most of the Ubuntu developers are existing Debian developers, who can now work on Debian full time - this will help Debian rather than draw resources away. Based on what little I know about the people involved with Debian, I doubt that they would be likely to do anything that would mess up the distro which they love.

      Oh, and your analogy sucks, too.

        • Re:Not Debian (Score:5, Interesting)

          by dschl (57168) on Monday September 27 2004, @09:06PM (#10369021) Homepage
          They contribute changes to the upstream Debian package. Some of their developers overlap. They have a page clarifying their relationship to Debian [ubuntulinux.org], and they recognize that they are a subset. It would take a profound level of arrogance to imagine replacing a distro as broad as Debian, and arrogance appears to be absent from Ubuntu, from the name on down.

          You seem pretty hung up on the potential for a fork - odds are, we define the word "fork" differently. I view Ubuntu as a short-term, temporary fork, similar to the branches in the Mozilla project, where every new release is effectively a short-term departure from a frozen snapshot of the trunk, which returns to the trunk to refresh and renew on a regular basis. I also do not view it as the end of the world. Unlike rpm based distros, most Debian-based ones (or at least those that lasted, anyway, progeny, etc) do not appear to fork to the same degree as RedHat / Mandrake / ten thousand others.

          You might find the following blog entries from Jeff Licquia (a Progeny developer) interesting. He's got a lot better perspective on the issue than most:

          Ubuntu universe is a snapshot taken twice a year, without any security fixes or updates. I have run sid for several years now, and quite like living on the bleeding edge - I do not plan on updating only every six months, and I also don't worry too much if anything breaks beyond my repair skills - that is why /home and /var live on their own partitions. But Ubuntu fills a gap for someone who is not ready to deal with sid on a regular basis - who wants a different compromise of stability and freshness than the regular Debian release cycle.

          • I have run sid for several years now, and quite like living on the bleeding edge - I do not plan on updating only every six months

            Ubuntu will also have a dev branch, once the first version is released. The dev branch will be similar to sid... daily changes etc.

    • Not a fork (Score:3, Informative)

      Ubuntu is a commercial distribution with 34+ full time engineers working on it. Every bug they fix they contribute back to Debian or the relevant project. There are a number of really good distributions out there that have forked Debian, but Ubuntu is one of the few who gives most of their changes back to the community. So I say it's a branch, not a fork.
  • Wireless Card (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 27 2004, @06:00PM (#10367584)
    Finally, we were disappointed (but not surprised) that Ubuntu did not detect or configure the wireless card in our laptop. We've come to expect this, unfortunately. But it would sure be nice at some point if we could connect wirelessly right after installing a Linux distro, with no extra effort required.

    I don't know what brand of wireless card it was, but if it was one with a Broadcom chip inside, well your SOL on that one. If they would give out the specs, we'd have drivers for them.
  • Could someone please explain where the name came from? I'm picturing African shields and spears flanking my computer.
  • Poor review (Score:5, Informative)

    by iMaple (769378) on Monday September 27 2004, @06:03PM (#10367603)
    The review concludes that one of the few disadvantages of the disro is 'no VPN wizard'. Now isnt that a bit too picky !!! I would understnad if they mentioned the Text based Installer, no pakg selection , bad install documentation etc. but no VPN wizard is absurd.
    • Not at all. A VPN connection is something that any OS/desktop should be able to quickly and easily. Windows has had it for years, there's no excuse at this point for Linux to not have it.
        • That's helpful feedback, I'll bookmark that for future reviews. We can include a more detailed commentary on how it compares to other distros. Thanks.
  • by dankelley (573611) on Monday September 27 2004, @06:05PM (#10367621)
    In case you're wondering, it holds recent versions of software (Evolution 2.0, Gnome 2.8, ...).

    The main thing, it seems, is that this disto provides a spoonful of sugar to make the Debian medicine go down. But this sugar may not be enough for laptop users. Quoting from the article, we were disappointed (but not surprised) that Ubuntu did not detect or configure the wireless card in our laptop. So that spoonful of sugar may be deceptive ... some real skill may be required after the pointy-clicky stage. Is it a good thing to mix the difficult and the simple?

    • There are some issues with the lp module b0rking up Dell and IBM laptops, so that may be the cause of the wireless trouble that ExtremeTech had. It is with my Dell Latitude and it's IPW2100 wireless chip - see bug 1254 on bugzilla.ubuntu.org.

      That being said, they have released an evaluation install, not a final. That's scheduled for mid October, IIRC. It's therefore not suprising to see some things - especially wireless - flaky or non-functional in the eval release. The final is supposed to be a lot better
    • kick-ass laptop support is one of the stated goals of Ubuntu, so you can assume this will go away when the final release is done. As for a VPN client, yeah, ok, whatever, file a bug at bugzilla.ubuntu.org and in the description point at some existing stable free client that could be incorporated.
  • by huiqbal (726451) on Monday September 27 2004, @06:11PM (#10367661)
    Well at least we have to give Ubuntu folks some credit. This is the only linux distro that installed on my Apple G5. Installation was real easy on G5. They have PPC32 support only. PPC64 support coming soon. For those of us looking for an alternate OS for their G5 without paying yellowdog or without having technical expertise for debian and gentoo, Ubuntu is the distribution. The only problem sound card is not recognized. Even the thermal driver is working.
  • Why you should care (Score:3, Informative)

    by steveha (103154) on Monday September 27 2004, @06:21PM (#10367739) Homepage
    Several people have already posted comments asking why the world needs yet another Linux distro.

    I wrote a Slashdot comment explaining why Ubuntu is interesting. Click here [slashdot.org] to read it.

    A comment [slashdot.org] by Doc Ruby states that Ubuntu is not package-compatible with Debian. I said otherwise in my comment linked above, but I haven't checked it out for myself yet so I'm probably wrong.

    steveha
  • Oh great... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 27 2004, @06:35PM (#10367845)
    Me: Hey boss, why don't we standardize on Ubuntu Warty Warthog Linux on the desktop.

    Boss: Say, that sounds like it will decrease our ROI, while providing value to our shareholders. However, why don't you install Ubuntu Warty Warthog Linux on one test machine, and Indigo Salamander Pumpkin Dog Linux on another machine, that way we can objectively compare their packaging systems.
  • by theolein (316044) on Monday September 27 2004, @09:31PM (#10369230) Journal
    The name Ubuntu is zulu, a South African language, for God. The distro is compiled and managed by South African Soyuz tourist millionaire Mark Shuttleworth (Hey boet) and his company Canonical. There has been quite a bit of movement in South Africa over the past couple of years to get Linux into schools and small businesses, although the vast majority are still using pirated versions of Windows or whatever came with their computer.

    This distro, from my point of view (I'm South African), makes excellent sense for people wanting to install Linux and basically just get up and working without having to fight through masses of obscure applications. It provides what 90% of average computer users need and use on their computers:Office productivity, mail, browser, messaging, graphics and media player. That's it, no fluff.

    This distro is exactly what is needed (once they sort out the various bugs) for a home user or small business to get started. Given that there has only been a move to competition in the telcom business in South Africa this month, and that SA has had the world's highest rates out, wireless networking has not been a major feature in the SA IT landscape up until now, so I think that not working detection of Wireless NICs is not a major priority at the moment.

    I'm really proud about this, as it gives SA its first distro aimed at the country.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Choices.
        • It doesn't mean anything. It's essentially a meaningless "feel-good" answer that doesn't address the underlying problem: we have bazillions of mostly but not quite compatible appliances, rather than a unified platform. The differences between most distros are negligable, and people end up choosing which one they use based on how many packages are available for it: in other words, how little of a pain-in-the-ass it is to install software. So, by "choices" the AC actually means "the ability to choose between
    • by pcmanjon (735165) on Monday September 27 2004, @05:59PM (#10367571)
      QUOTE " What benefit, exactly, do Linux users get from the proliferation of distros?"

      One large benefit is the fact that every distro is different, has different goals and aspirations.

      Some people want a server, some people want a desktop, some want to run an FTP server.

      If your looking to say, run an ftp server, wouldn't it be nice to get a distro that has an ftp server built in to the kernel?

      You're more likley to find the distro that does exactly what you want with so many distro's around.

      That's the purpose, and advantage to the proliferation of distros.
      • To me this is "unnecessary choice". The choices only evolve because the existing procedures fail at particular tasks. Why not develop, for example, a clean, comprehendable, human as well as machine usable startup system to handle services so that one distribution could act as a server or desktop.

        Hell, isn't this the purpose of the SysV init system, to provide a separate runlevel for X as well as a stripped down network-and-servers-only runlevel?

        Choice is bad where it limits interoperability. You don't see
      • by jcr (53032) <jcr@@@mac...com> on Monday September 27 2004, @06:20PM (#10367726) Journal
        One large benefit is the fact that every distro is different, has different goals and aspirations.

        That's a feature, not a benefit. These are not the same thing. A benefit would be something like "not all distros are susceptible to the same failure modes", or the like.

        So, what is the benefit of many distros, as opposed to (say) switches I can flip in a standard distro?

        -jcr
        • So, what is the benefit of many distros, as opposed to (say) switches I can flip in a standard distro?

          Because some distros include things that someone else would not want in their distro at all. Some distros use mutually exclusive methods of configuring certain kinds of software. And who would get to be in charge of this "standard" distro? Who would get to decide what goes into the distro and what doesn't?

          Asking this question is like asking, "What's the benefit of there being so many brands of auto

      • >> You're more likley to find the distro that does exactly what you want with so many distro's around.

        No, you're less likely to find one that does what you want, having to research 50 distros all claiming to be everything to everybody.

        "Specialized" distros that are made for a specific purpose are great. Knoppix, Smoothwall, and Damn Small are examples of distros with specific reasons for existence. The problem comes when someone wants a desktop Linux distro, and there's an army of them claiming to

        • I don't see anywhere in the quote you quoted that says anything about building anything into the OS in the manner that IE is built into Windows.

          "Some people want a server", doesn't imply that

          "some people want a desktop", doesn't imply that

          "some want to run an FTP server", while redundant, doesn't imply that.

          Unless you are saying that the distributions shouldn't even bother to include Mozilla, Konqueror or whatnot in their binary builds??

          There is a key difference between building a browser -with- an OS
    • by john_anderson_ii (786633) on Monday September 27 2004, @06:00PM (#10367573)
      You must be new here....

      Don't take this wrong, but do you know a "linux user"? Most of us are little obsesive compulsive, erratic, and curious. We have nothing to do but become pastier and pastier while trying out distros.

      In short....we get one more to play with, flame, fight and argue over, and most importantly compare/contrast/disect to our hearts content.

      • You must be new here....

        Nope. I've been on /. for many years. Some people have even told me that have a low usser number..

        -jcr
        • "Some people have even told me that have a low usser number.."

          Well, that's all depending on the perspectve...

          On Topic: Your complaint on choice boils down to the same question as when people decry the existence of mutliple desktop environment projects - who is supposed to enforce anything?

          Ok, assue that we have too many distros, and that it is hurting the community in some unsepcified way. How do you suggest reducing the number? You can assume that people building on, or using, any given distro aren't wi
          • Your complaint on choice boils down to the same question...

            Complaint? I was just asking what the benefit of distro proliferation was.

            -jcr
                • And when they find a security vulnerability in zlib, you're prepared to download every single app using it again? That's assuming the project is still even being maintained.
                  Having each app statically linked or with its own libraries means you:

                  1) waste memory
                  2) waste developer effort
                  3) waste bandwidth
                  4) waste hard disk space
                  5) make maintaining systems a nightmare (DLL-hell)
                  6) Open yourself up to security problems - look at Microsoft's problems with their jpeg lib spread all over the system.
                  6) lose the abili
                    • How is keeping twenty or more copies of the same library any better than keeping one?

                      It reduces to the same problem of keeping libraries and the applications using them compatible, except now you have twenty or thirty as many files to keep track of.

                      In which case, you might as well just use system-wide shared libraries, with a few compatibility libs installed for those apps that need it.

                      You can do per-application testing with a chroot, if you feel the need.
    • 3. What are its main differences from Debian? Why would someone pick Ubuntu over Debian or any another distro?

      Jeff Waugh : At its core, Ubuntu *is* Debian. Our six-monthly releases are based on Debian's "sid" development branch, with lots of bugfixing and integration work (which goes back to Debian), and some special additions such as the very latest GNOME releases. Ubuntu 4.10, which we call the "Warty Warthog" shipped GNOME 2.8 in our Preview release last night. :-) We provide 18 months of high-impact
    • by Scarblac (122480) <slashdot@gerlich.nl> on Monday September 27 2004, @06:11PM (#10367662) Homepage

      What benefit, exactly, do Linux users get from the proliferation of distros?

      No-one gets any benefit directly from the fact that there are a large number of distros.

      However, for each specific distro, there is apparently at least one person who likes that distro better than the alternatives. Which is enough.

      If someone decides he wants to make AbominationDistro, which is existing distro X but with the meaning of /etc and /usr switched around, and he creates it - more power to him, that doesn't influence me at all - and he has the distro he wants.

    • by Chernobog (743532) on Monday September 27 2004, @06:17PM (#10367707)
      Eventually someone will get one right.
    • What benefit, exactly, do Linux users get from the proliferation of distros?

      Very simple answer for you. You like Debian, I like Slackware, my work uses RedHat, but we are switching to SuSe soon. Some people like Mandrake, other's swear by Gentoo. Every Distro fills a niche, every person has a niche. The more distro's the better. If you have an issue with an array of choices, you can use Windows or Solaris. Some of us really like to have a distro that provides EXACTLY what we want.

      You can not please
      • Very simple answer for you. You like Debian, I like Slackware, my work uses RedHat, but we are switching to SuSe soon. Some people like Mandrake, other's swear by Gentoo. Every Distro fills a niche, every person has a niche. The more distro's the better. If you have an issue with an array of choices, you can use Windows or Solaris. Some of us really like to have a distro that provides EXACTLY what we want.

        I've used many distros I like. But every time, they're missing something I liked from another distr

    • You're right the review sucks. For instance, under the heading 'Installation', it says,

      "At the end of the installation, we were asked if we wanted to use APT (Advanced Packaging Tool) to update our system. We said yes and our system was updated over the Internet before we even booted into our Gnome desktop."

      This totally glosses over the connection to the internet. Was it by broadband, satellite link or modem? Did the installer correctly identify the modem if there was one and did it create a connection
      • Good point. It was a broadband connection on the desktop, a wireless card on the laptop and I used NAT translation in the vmware install. My bad for not including the details in the review. Sorry. I'll see what I can do about adding that in.
    • Are you referring to my install? I put it on a laptop (dual boot with XP), desktop (another dual boot) and in a vmware VM running under Windows XP. I think three different installs covered it nicely.