apsalyers
December 7th, 2005, 10:53 AM
While I recognize these are basically the same thing, with the only real difference being the default desktop, I do have the following question/comment. Does anyone else feel that Ubuntu is simply at this stage more stable and refined the its KDE counterpart? It seems to run faster and overall smoother. I installed Kubuntu 5.10, edited sources.list, even adding the repos for KDE 3.5 and Amarok. Firefox, Thunderbird, Amarok, Gaim, basically all apps I run on a regular basis seem to run better in Ubuntu desktop. Also it seems that I can't update any KDE component without the KDE crash mamager flashing up, its starting to feel like part of the process.
Prior to trying Kubuntu 5.10, I did my own hybrid thing, like many users or using Ubuntu desktop as the base, then adding KDE apps as I need, Amarok, K3B, even Konqueror for file management. But I tend to like the look and feel of KDE more, especially file browsing and the space on the taskbar.
Anyway, comments and suggestions welcomed.
Prior to trying Kubuntu 5.10, I did my own hybrid thing, like many users or using Ubuntu desktop as the base, then adding KDE apps as I need, Amarok, K3B, even Konqueror for file management. But I tend to like the look and feel of KDE more, especially file browsing and the space on the taskbar.
Anyway, comments and suggestions welcomed.