Ubuntu 6.06 Reviewed
Mark writes "This year has been a huge step forward for Desktop Linux users. First, Fedora Core 5 was released and featured the new Gnome 2.14. Then SUSE 10.1 showed us how well applications could be integrated to make a desktop look great. Now it was time for Ubuntu to release their latest version: 'Dapper Drake.'" Oh yeah, the inital review is good, too. Worth checking out for desktop Linux users.
XGL?
This year has been a huge step forward for Desktop Linux users.
I know that people here frequently complain about things like duplication of effort and forking as things that dilute the impact of Linux and free/open source software on the world. I tend to be of the opposite opinion. You want something geared at the business desktop with good integration and commercial support? Get SuSE. You want something that carries the name of a recognized brand? Get Fedora (yes it is still in many places considered the standard, just look at how many hosting providers provide is as the primary or only platform). You want something different that has a reputation for rock solid stability? Get Debian. You want a user-friendly Debian? Get Ubutnu.
The point is that the diversity is what makes these things possible. None of those things would be done nearly as effectivly under a "one size fits all" approach.
It's not ready for grandma to use, and as such, it's not an XP replacement. It still takes many keystrokes to get MP3 and video codec support. Want a binary nvidia driver? Due to ideological reasons, you'll need to manually enable universe and install it. And exotic wifi protocol support is still spotty (but better). Try explaining all that to someone who is computer illiterate. All they know is that this stuff works automatically in XP or OSX.
Not that I'm ragging on Dapper Drake; I installed it the first day it came out. But it is being touted as an XP replacement when it isn't. I think it is only a marginal improvement over the last version in terms of ease of use for people who aren't already savvy. The improved theme certainly looks good, but that only goes so far when you are looking to replace XP for normal users. I think the Ubuntu team really needs to rethink leaving out MP3 decoders and regular codec support. Microsoft doesn't seem to have 'licensing issues' when they ship XP with those features, and neither does Apple.
I'm sorry, but you cannot review a whole operating system in two days. Sure, you can get the immediate "ease of use" and an idea of the speed of things. But it's only when you start using it properly every day for at least a month or more, you can appreciate whether an Operating System is good for you, or not.
Saying that, Ubuntu already won me over at Breezy. With the new Gnome 2.14, Dapper is much faster again.
So now with MEPIS, you get Ubuntu, except that it's KDE default, and it comes with every player (Real, Quicktime) and codec plugin for Kaffeine that can be found.
And all those are compatible with the GPL license?
I had to setup a linux machine recently for someone who isn't very familiar with unix. He is however a very smart guy, and isn't afraid to poke around and try to figure things out. He needed to fix some ugly output from a gps device, so he learned a little awk to write an awk script to do it.
He couldn't use gnome. Even the simplest things are painfully awkward and obtuse. Just putting a link to a windows share on his desktop was a chore. We ran into stupid little problems like that over and over for 3 days. Then I installed KDE for him and switched him to that. All the things he had trouble with and needed me to help in gnome worked just fine for him on his own in KDE.
Maybe try and teach your granny [Ctrl]+[C] & [Ctrl]+[V].
:)
CN=poolmeister.OU=lurkers.CN=slashdot
The codecs and the rest of the "illegal in USA" things are quickly installed with Automatix. Also for KDE you could install Kubuntu.
Viva package managers is more like it. This doesn't require apt.
:x
Sorry but i think that was your parent's point. APT is a single example of a package manager, therefore it is wrong to attribute specifically to APT behaviour which is characteristic of package managers in general.
Mention the Lord of the Rings one more time and I'll more than likely kill you.
Ubuntu doesn't incorporate MP3 and other codecs as part of the distribution because of legal issues, but you can install support for MP3s and most of the other software you want that's excluded with a few clicks of the mouse by using EasyUbuntu.
Needing to edit Xorg.conf just to get a GUI up is a retarded premise, if, in 2006, you expect people to take the OS seriously. If it wont INSTALL and at least fire up on the reboot, people will dismiss it out of hand, and rightly so, as poorly packaged software.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
The issue is about mp3s and other codecs covered by copyrights and/or patents. Mepis ships them, but they are a reletively small company. If somebody sues Mepis for copyright or patent infringment, what will they get? Not, much, it is a one man show. If somebody sues Canoncial and/or Mark Shuttleworth, on the otherhand, well there is a whole lot more money to be made and therefore they are a much more likely target.
MP3s are patented and licensed. The fact that the legal rights aren't normally enforced doesn't mean they couldn't be enforced (and have been in the past). That is the same reason that there are not any "free" (as in beer or anything else) dvd players in linux. As for Java and Flash, you are correct that they are free to distribute, even though they are not free software.
I do believe that with Sun's change to the Java license that it is supposed to be included in the next version of Ubuntu. The change came too late for the 6.06 release.
As for Flash and Java on Windows XP and OS X, I thought that you had to install them manually, too. They aren't included with the OS (unless the hardware vendor pre-installs them).
From the Ubuntu front page:
"The Ubuntu community is built on the ideas enshrined in the Ubuntu Philosophy: that software should be available free of charge, that software tools should be usable by people in their local language and despite any disabilities, and that people should have the freedom to customise and alter their software in whatever way they see fit.
These freedoms make Ubuntu fundamentally different from traditional proprietary software: not only are the tools you need available free of charge, you have the right to modify your software until it works the way you want it to."
emphasis added
I Browse at +4 Flamebait
Open Source Sysadmin