linux mint better than ubuntu

[blackmail]

I have read a chip review and they stated that ubuntu is more ineficient than mint (which is also built on ubuntu) they said it is more nice looking, (ok i am an ubuntu fan but i am not a brown color fan) they said it has a better apt system, and it is a little more intuitive.
I am very curious, i am thinking that only YOU the ubuntu and possibly mint users can tell me best, and did not want to start reading blogs because of that.

[cmannnn]

I duel booted both for awhile but i prefered ubuntu becuse mint decided that it wouldent use wireless so i now only have ubuntu

[Chronon]

You could try it in a VM. I think you are the best judge of what you will like. Another option is to download a Live DVD and try that.

I haven't ever used Mint, but I'm not sure how my subjective preference would map over to your preferences anyway.

*This doesn't seem like a support question, so perhaps it belongs in a different forum.

[psychoelf]

Strangely I've had better luck with Mint so far. I was running Jaunty and kept having all sorts of sound/video issues. Switched to Mint, running the same kernel and everything is working fine. Makes no sense.

It uses its own package manager, but I still use Synaptic, which also comes with it.

[Revolutionary101]

I haven't tried Linux mint. Is there much of a difference between Ubuntu and Linux mint?

[psychoelf]

Not too much. Slightly different look, update manager, Menu and it comes with all the "restricted" stuff installed.

Much easier to do an installation on a computer without internet and have it be able to do multimedia out of the box.

I think of it more as a prettier and easier "just installed" Ubuntu.

[Stan_1936]

I have always found it far too heavy on system resources. If it was lighter(or if I was running Mint on a modern computer), I would probably go with Mint over Ubuntu.......it's bulk is what keeps me away.

[psychoelf]

I did completely remove compiz. Makes it much lighter and fluffier!

[NightwishFan]

I prefer to just use Ubuntu. I can adjust the system to my liking anyway. I do like the different main menu in Mint. It is a bit too simple in Ubuntu, and do with an app search like KDE 4.

[Bonster]

Most people would agree Mint is better than ubuntu, but is not totally different. Give it a try if u like ubuntu already

[Revolutionary101]

Most people would agree Mint is better than ubuntu, but is not totally different. Give it a try if u like ubuntu already

Thanks I don't know if I will try it because currently everything is fine for me in Ubuntu. This is also because most of you seem to only notice one difference (restricted stuff is on it, which I have already installed).

[Stan_1936]

T....currently everything is fine for me in Ubuntu....

If it ain't broke, don't fix it! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:If_it_ain't_broke,_don't_fix_it)

[Marlonsm]

Mint is nicer out of the box, but besides that, it's just like Ubuntu, IMO.

I use Ubuntu and have already used Mint, but always someone gets interested in Linux and want to give it a try, I give him/her a Mint LiveCD, because of the nicer OOTB experience.

[XubuRoxMySox]

Mint is Ubuntu, basically, which is the main thing that makes it a great distro. Like others here, I found it much more demanding on system resources than Ubuntu, but easier initially to get going. It saves about 10 minutes of work that would be done setting up Ubuntu with codecs and restricted extras. The interface is gorgeous.

Besides it's drain on resources, I found the forums much less friendly and helpful than Ubuntu forums, and most Mint users find better help more readily here. They seem to be on a quest to distinguish Mint from Ubuntu as much as possible, as if to hide the fact that Mint is almost an exact copy of Ubuntu. Systemically it is Ubuntu with new skin, preinstalled codecs, "minty" artwork, and a few extras like "Mint tools" added to make it "different enough" to call it a "distro" rather than an Ubuntu remix (which is closer to the truth).

[scouser73]

I've tried Mint, and it's ok, but I wouldn't say it's better than Ubuntu.

[symon1980]

Linux Mint is to Ubuntu, as Ubuntu is to Debian.... Ubuntu takes Debian and improves it.... Linux Mint takes Ubuntu, and improves it. There is no doubt that Linux Mint is about 98% Ubuntu... but that extra 2% makes ALOT of difference to alot of users. Alot of people say Linux Mint is what Ubuntu "SHOULD" be, and I actually agree with that in a way.... Although I love Ubuntu.... They Never have managed to give it any beauty... and Yes I know you can change that yourself... but I really praise Mint for the amount of effort they have put in to make it a Much better looking Distro than default Ubuntu... Besides that... they have developed quite a few tools such as MintInstall, MintUpdate MintDesktop MintConfig MintAssistant MintUpload MintSpace MintMenu MintWifi: MintNanny, MintMake etc

Apart from that All the codecs are installed by default, which is nice... saves a few mins of **** farting about. lol.....
And Everything is ready to go out of the box, including better wifi support straight from install.... The Software Portal is really nice too for new users to browse programs/ratings and to install it with a simple click.....

I've tried getting alot of windows users to use linux... when I show them Ubuntu, they all get turned off by the default theme and hate it... then i show them Linux Mint, and they Love it! I really believe a Nice default theme is crucial to attract new users Over to use Linux... Mint makes an ugly gnome look really good.

So while I respect all distro's, including Ubuntu.... I really think that Linux Mint is just the icing on the cake... it takes a great distro, and makes it Even better, and easier for new users.... And theres no doubt that the Kde version is better quality and less buggier than Kubuntu itself.... I take my hat off to the Mint devs.

[howefield]

Most people would agree Mint is better than ubuntu,...

Your source for this would be ?

[Gone fishing]

I use both Mint on my laptop and Ubuntu on my desktop - They are as most folk have said basically the same but Mint has the codecs etc installed and so is a little easier to set up and it has a different feel to it. Things like the Mint menu and control centre make it feel quite different.

I think I prefer a customised set up Ubuntu over Mint but it's a close run thing.

[Bonster]

Your source for this would be ?

My source is people that have use Both distro. And they all agree Mint is more useful out of the box, therefor better.

Same reason u probably agree that Ubuntu is better than Debian.

[howefield]

My source is people that have use Both distro. And they all agree Mint is more useful out of the box, therefor better.

Same reason u probably agree that Ubuntu is better than Debian.

Ah, thought I'd missed something, it is just an opinion then, conjecture, but no facts.

[afroman10496]

Linux Mint is really close to Ubuntu. There are only a couple differences, like Mint using Mint Toos, mintUpdate, a green theme, and a different panel layout. Sometimes they even forget to change Ubuntu to Mint on some messages. I don't think Mint is any better than Ubuntu, and Mint is so much tightly based on ubuntu.

[Bonster]

Ah, thought I'd missed something, it is just an opinion then, conjecture, but no facts.

Fact is more ppl that try both, often switch to mint in the end. Hows that an opinion?

Same if most people that try Debian and Ubuntu. Most ppl choose Ubuntu in the end.

[XubuRoxMySox]

Fact is more ppl that try both, often switch to mint in the end. Hows that an opinion?

It's an opinion because you site no research and no sources. You just say "Fact," but that doesn't make it so.

There are also probably a lot of people who go the other way - from Mint to Ubuntu to Debian in search of better stability. I can name at least two people (but I don't have their permission to do so) who asked legitimate technical questions and were treated like dirt in their forum. So they switched back to Ubuntu for the supportive, informative, friendly help and community they find here.

You can tell a lot about a distro just by browsing their forums! And in fact, it's a good bet that most Mint users rely on the Ubuntu forums for real support and honest, respectful answers than they can on the tightly controlled Mint forum.

I can also name at least two others (but again, I don't have their permission) who love the minty-fresh themes and artwork, but deleted the Mint repositories and uninstalled the Mint Updater, basically turning Mint back into Ubuntu with green skin instead of brown. They tell me that the only difference between Ubuntu and Mint is about 15 minutes of work installing or deleting stuff. It's amazing to me that they get away with calling it a distro instead of an Ubuntu remix.

-Robin

[Stan_1936]

....They tell me that the only difference between Ubuntu and Mint is about 15 minutes of work installing or deleting stuff. It's amazing to me that they get away with calling it a distro instead of an Ubuntu remix.

-Robin

Well said.

[NightwishFan]

I bear no dislike to Mint, but I also have no desire to use or recommend it. I prefer to not use potentially restricted software by default. That is my standpoint.

I have noticed the main wallpaper for Mint is a remix of another rain wallpaper. Hopefully they have rights to use it. They also could smooth out the shade of green they used on it. Otherwise it seems like a pretty sharp work.

[howefield]

Fact is more ppl that try both, often switch to mint in the end. Hows that an opinion?

Same if most people that try Debian and Ubuntu. Most ppl choose Ubuntu in the end.

You have no facts, all you have is anecdotal fantasy. That's why it is only an opinion.

And you are of course, entitled to that opinion, but that is all it is until you can back it up with hard facts. Real verifiable facts.

[Raffles10]

I tried Mint for a while but prefer Ubuntu. Mint requires more RAM but I couldn't figure out why. Mint Install seems pointless, there are app's available through synaptic that aren't in Mint install, so why use it ? You can't get a proper transparent panel in Mint, the Applications area is never transparent like in Ubuntu. Better off with Ubuntu.

[deadbeatdrum]

I prefer straight Ubuntu to Mint, but Mint is cool (sorry, but you know it had to be said). Having tried both I suspect Mint will evolve into it's own distro with it's own distinct identity. Just as Ubuntu came from Debian, Mint came from Ubuntu. Is this a bad thing?

[Thisislaw]

I use Mint. Some say it is heavier on resources but I have always found it to be lighter. But Ubuntu and Mint are very close, different theme, codecs pre-installed. Little things, though still find it better.
And in fact, it's a good bet that most Mint users rely on the Ubuntu forums for real support and honest, respectful answers than they can on the tightly controlled Mint forum.
-Robin
I use the Ubuntuforums, always have and I am a Mint user. So you are probably correct there. Since Ubuntu and Mint are so close people may as well use these forums if they use Mint. In my opinion anyway.

[afroman10496]

Hey, if you want to try Linux Mint, basically you can get most of it by doing:
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install ubuntu-restricted-extras
and just changing the theme to green. That's really basically the only difference.

[afroman10496]

Well said.

Pretty much :)

[Crunchy the Headcrab]

I use the Ubuntuforums, always have and I am a Mint user. So you are probably correct there. Since Ubuntu and Mint are so close people may as well use these forums if they use Mint. In my opinion anyway.
Heck. I use Fedora and I still use the Ubuntu forums all the time. It's just a great place with a bunch of great people that use a great OS. It's all Linux :)

[Sinkingships7]

Heck. I use Fedora and I still use the Ubuntu forums all the time. It's just a great place with a bunch of great people that use a great OS. It's all Linux :)

Couldn't agree more. Same situation here, as of right now.

[blackmail]

:P:)
As i can see everyone is having a good time, i am happy...
And jumping to limux mint better than ubuntu, well i gues i'll just have to stick to ubuntu.and if want a fast lunix, then dsl is there to do the job, and i think abiword is quite good, any way i won't start creating books and things...

[blackmail]

well, i am sticking to ubuntu and if i want to have something minty, well a chewing gum will do just fine.

[l-x-l]

I just installed Mint 7 Gloria over Jaunty last night. Wanted to give it a spin before Ubuntu 9.10 comes out. So far I really like it. MintMenu is nice. Don't really understand the diff between its 'software manager' & 'package manager' though. But overall it's been a positive experience.

[Compintuit]

My Mint experiences have been highly negative. The software mint adds just doesn't mesh with the other software. It's also branded - if Ubuntu called software it had "Ubuntu Whatever" I probably wouldn't be using it. The software manager thing really sucks. The reviews are written by people who can't spell or sound coherent. It's as bad as the itunes app store. Theme is prettier, but it's been years since I've even seen the default ubuntu theme on my desktop. I find MintMenu to be a waste of screen space, with no original functionality. So, I totally disagree with you about mint being better.

[XubuRoxMySox]

And if you express pretty much anything in their forums other than "Mint is awesome," you get labeled as a troll for your trouble.

Mint is awesome because it's Ubuntu. The only difference between them is about 15 minutes of time downloading and installing artwork and a few "Mint" applications (Mint tools look like a copy of Gimmie (http://www.beatniksoftware.com/gimmie/Main_Page) to me).

In my opinion, it should be called "Minty Ubuntu Remix" instead of its own "distro."

-Robin

[starcannon]

I have read a chip review and they stated that ubuntu is more ineficient than mint (which is also built on ubuntu) they said it is more nice looking, (ok i am an ubuntu fan but i am not a brown color fan) they said it has a better apt system, and it is a little more intuitive.
I am very curious, i am thinking that only YOU the ubuntu and possibly mint users can tell me best, and did not want to start reading blogs because of that.

Actually, only YOU, the owner/operator of your computer can decide this for sure. Set yourself up with a separate /home partition. Try them both, and see what you think. I tried Mint, its nice, but not for me; I came back to the original formula.

[Marlonsm]

Mint and Ubuntu are really close to each other.
Mint, IMO, is more posished out-of-the-box, but nothing you can't do yourself in Ubuntu.
I'm having a hard time deciding which one will I use when Ubuntu 9.10 and Mint 8 are out. I'm leaning towards Mint for now.

[tjwoosta]

Mint 7 xfce community edition is the way to go.

Its absolutely beautiful right out of the box and light weight too, just enable compositing and drop shadows in the "window manager tweaks" section of the xfce settings manager and its perfect.

[AllRadioisDead]

I don't understand how mint is even considered a distro.
Fact is more ppl that try both, often switch to mint in the end. Hows that an opinion?

Same if most people that try Debian and Ubuntu. Most ppl choose Ubuntu in the end.

Stop confusing fact and opinion, I for one (like many other people) prefer Debian.
Ubuntu comes with a lot of pre-installed goodies that I simply don't need.

[gordintoronto]

For me, the biggest advantage of Mint is that it has only a bottom panel, so I have more available screen space. Not that it's significant.

I also feel better about giving a Mint CD to friends, since the things they have come to expect work out of the box. The Menu is at the bottom-left and the time is at the bottom-right, where they have come to expect them.

[MasterNetra]

I prefer the normal Gnome menu like you fine in Ubuntu, if it wasn't for that I'd probably default to Mint sense it has a better default theme, and comes with the restricted right from install. However again don't care for the menu.

[Dharmachakra]

People seem to forget about all the Mint tools... saying that Mint is Ubuntu + codecs is simply not true. That said, I think Mint should offer a meta-package to place on top of Ubuntu, just makes more sense to me.

[oboedad55]

And if you express pretty much anything in their forums other than "Mint is awesome," you get labeled as a troll for your trouble.

Mint is awesome because it's Ubuntu. The only difference between them is about 15 minutes of time downloading and installing artwork and a few "Mint" applications (Mint tools look like a copy of Gimmie (http://www.beatniksoftware.com/gimmie/Main_Page) to me).

In my opinion, it should be called "Minty Ubuntu Remix" instead of its own "distro."

-Robin

To that point, I got raked over the coals in the Mint forum for asking about the Google search function having a Mint icon in it, ostensibly to earn money for Mint. Earning money for Mint is okay, I guess, but changing the default Google search is a bit much, in my opinion. I got a bunch of PMs apologizing for the behavior of some of their forum members. That said, I think Mint is fine if you like the way things are organized, the changes and so forth. It is a little slower than a stock Ubuntu so I don't think there's that much to recommend it other than having the restricted codecs, etc. pre-installed, which takes a few minutes on an Ubuntu machine.

[hoppipolla]

I'm really tempted to try ol' Linux Mint at some point - it does look very polished and featured. I watched a short video on Youtube that reviewed it, saying he thinks it's the best distro out there at the moment, but lacks some things like multiple installs through tickboxes in the main installer (so you have to use Synaptic instead for this) and GUI PPA installs.

The review is here if you wanna see it :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9kq3k4AkNc

I am really tempted :)

[XubuRoxMySox]

To that point, I got raked over the coals in the Mint forum for asking about the Google search function having a Mint icon in it, ostensibly to earn money for Mint....

My question was why Mint (Gloria) was so much slower on my machine than Ubuntu (Jaunty) had been. The two answers I got were:

1. "It's an upstream issue." Translation: Blame Ubuntu. Which didn't make any sense in explaining why Mint was so much slower than Ubuntu. And

2. "I smell a troll." Translation: Go away.

So I went away, none the worse for the experience. But I still think Mint doesn't deserve to be called a "distro." It's a remix of Ubuntu IMO.

Obedad55 wrote:

Earning money for Mint is okay, I guess, but changing the default Google search is a bit much, in my opinion.

Agreed. I think they should offer it as an add-on for those who want to support the project in that way rather than "imposing" it on their users by default. If Canonical had such a money-raising add-on available, I would certainly be happy to use it and contribute to the support of the Ubuntu project. But it should be a choice made by the end-user rather than a default imposed by the "developer."

-Robin

[fuzzyk.k]

Mint is a system that works out of the box,(Main edition) It doesn't require alot of work, However for users who like there systems tailored its annoying

[random turnip]

Not tried Mint but it does look good.
I'm tempted to make a CD and run it through Windows for a go on it.

[timestandstill]

Linux Mint better then Ubuntu? Don't make me laugh!

[hoppipolla]

Linux Mint better then Ubuntu? Don't make me laugh!

hehe I dunno, it does look pretty cool to me :)

[hoppipolla]

Agreed. I think they should offer it as an add-on for those who want to support the project in that way rather than "imposing" it on their users by default. If Canonical had such a money-raising add-on available, I would certainly be happy to use it and contribute to the support of the Ubuntu project. But it should be a choice made by the end-user rather than a default imposed by the "developer."

-Robin

I dunno man, I think people kinda agree just by using it! lol

Plus, I think it's important a company puts just a little bit of pressure to earn from what they have made - we all know that a bit more financial incentive could improve Linux on the desktop, and maybe it's things like this that will help to provide that :)

[Stan_1936]

Like the saying goes(Lock Stock and 2 Smoking Barrels):

Guns for show, knives for a pro.

Mint for show, Ubuntu for a pro.

[hoppipolla]

Like the saying goes(Lock Stock and 2 Smoking Barrels):

Guns for show, knives for a pro.

Mint for show, Ubuntu for a pro.

lol and where's the evidence for this conclusion? :)

[HomoGleek]

noob question ... :lolflag:

Is there any "Mint Style" themes for Ubuntu?

[oboedad55]

noob question ... :lolflag:

Is there any "Mint Style" themes for Ubuntu?

If you go to the mint forums I'm pretty sured they describe a wat to "mint" your Ubuntu install.

[canam101]

Thanks I don't know if I will try it because currently everything is fine for me in Ubuntu. This is also because most of you seem to only notice one difference (restricted stuff is on it, which I have already installed).

That is about the only difference I see too. But, oh brother, what a difference.

I can't tell you how many hours I have spent with Ubuntu reading information about how to get various streaming videos to play, and how much time I have spent downloading codecs that would supposedly let me play them.

The result after a year of using Ubuntu and trying all these codecs is that I still could not play most streaming videos from most sites - I mean mainstream sites like cbc.ca, cnn.com, yahoo.com, etc. etc.

Well, I finally gave mint a try because I read it had these restricted codecs. Jumping Jehosophat! almost every site I had tried for a year with Ubuntu worked out of the box with mint!

I would have preferred to stick with Ubuntu because it is, well, it's Ubuntu, instead of something that is based on Ubuntu. And, except for the videos, it worked well.

But I am not a 'geek'; I don't like screwing around reading documentation and downloading this or that codec. I just want results.

And Mint gave me what I wanted just for the effort of installing it.

You are obviously somebody who knows what he is doing and have been able to set things up the way you want them. I could not do that, and any other non-geeks like me will find Mint's out-of-the-box usability to be a very big drawing card.

[hoppipolla]

That is about the only difference I see too. But, oh brother, what a difference.

I agree with you, but Mint does have other advantages as well doesn't it? The default theme is more polished and it has it's own Mint-only tools. It also apparently has some disadvantages like apparently it's harder to add repositories and some hardware doesn't work as well, but overall I'd say it's considerably more than just Ubuntu with pre-installed codecs.. right?

[MC707]

I've read some comments above, and many are wrong. Everything - everything here is personal opinion. Almost everyone's comments here are opinions and are pretty subjective, based mostly on their point of view and experiences. Linux distros are that way. There is no 'better' or 'worse' distro, just preferred distros. My brother used Mint, he liked the out-of-the-box functionality regarding codecs and other things I don't remember (never used it myself). So we might wanna see their pros and cons and features, rather than 'better' or 'worse'.

[canam101]

I agree with you, but Mint does have other advantages as well doesn't it? The default theme is more polished and it has it's own Mint-only tools. It also apparently has some disadvantages like apparently it's harder to add repositories and some hardware doesn't work as well, but overall I'd say it's considerably more than just Ubuntu with pre-installed codecs.. right?

I can't say one way or the other - somebody with more experience with it will have to answer.

Its ability to play the streaming videos would be worth a lot of putting up with in regard to other things; but I haven't had to put up with anything because it works perfectly for me in everything I have tried.

[bruno9779]

It's amazing to me that they get away with calling it a distro instead of an Ubuntu remix.

-Robin

It is not amazing. They use restricted stuff that cannot be shipped with ubuntu, so they cannot use the name

[mdsmedia]

It is not amazing. They use restricted stuff that cannot be shipped with ubuntu, so they cannot use the name
Like....ummmm....restricted extras?

[handy]

I have a 2nd box that has 3 drive drawers in it, so I can easily insert drive with whatever system on it to boot.

It primarily uses FreeNAS (2 drawers - boot & storage) & rarely Mint-7-Xfce. The Mint install is in case I need to reference the web to fix up my primary machine (which uses Arch) because I have stuffed it up or on the very rare occasion that I have downloaded bug(s) inherited from upstream.

I have done a LOT of distro hopping in the past. So when I say that the Mint install was (from memory) the easiest installation of a system I can remember since I have been using computers (started in 1986). Mint just set up right; it knew how to deal with my graphic card from hell, everything just worked properly right from get go.

Mint is the perfect solution for me & my 2nd machine, as I don't want to waste any time on configuration & setup, I just want it to install perfectly & for everything to work. That is exactly what it did.

I think that Mint is brilliant for new Linux users & for people like me who just want a quick trouble free setup to a fully functional occasionally used web reference machine.

There is no other system that I would think of recommending to a new Linux user than Mint. It is just too easy to install, setup & use.

[darksideforge]

I duel booted both for awhile but i prefered ubuntu becuse mint decided that it wouldent use wireless so i now only have ubuntu

It likes wireless fine on my Toshiba Satellite L-45.

[Penguin Guy]

Definitely not, it's basically just Ubuntu with a touch of green paint. If you don't like brown, it's easy to change in System -> Preferences -> Appearance. It has far less programs available than Ubuntu and it's very difficult to upgrade. Stick with Ubuntu, take a look on gnome-look (http://www.gnome-look.org/) if you want to make your Ubuntu look better.

[rb0171610]

Thanks I don't know if I will try it because currently everything is fine for me in Ubuntu. This is also because most of you seem to only notice one difference (restricted stuff is on it, which I have already installed).

True. I will say that it is pretty. Anything that gives people an alternative to Windows is great. It is the same, except for a prettier GUI -- no Orange. Since you know how to install the restricted stuff, you have no reason to switch. You should try it in a virtual machine to see what it is all about. It might be good for someone you know.
It is easier to help with something if you have a little experience with it.

[Algus]

Well I used Mint for about a year and am just now coming back to Ubuntu. Some of my experiences in general

- Love some of the artistic "fun" stuff they put in like the quotes on the terminal
- Menu is nice and tool suite is cool
- Lots of screen real estate
- Hurray for getting media to play out of the box more easily

Updating was a pain. Maybe they've fixed it by now? I was always disappointed that you couldn't upgrade versions directly in Mint as you can in Ubuntu (and one of the reasons I am coming back to Ubuntu). Also, it feels like more and more Mint is trying to look more like Windows. Well, one of the reasons I use Linux is to get away from Windows. Some people like this though, so that's cool.

I think they are both great distros

Everyone always says that with Linux, your distro comes down to personal choice. Couldn't agree more. Between Mint and Ubuntu you get essentially the same functionality but a few different aesthetic and other design choices. I think if you give both a spin you can quickly decide which is more appealing to you.

The Ubuntu community is much larger, which makes them more helpful, but I've posted on the Mint forums and gotten a lot of help from those guys too. The way they respond to perceived criticisms of Mint is most likely a by-product of actual trolls spoiling things for those who would have a critical eye.

Don't know what to say there. It's a shame, but Mint is still a good distro.

There is one big difference that I feel is important though:

Mint feels like an aesthetically pleasing OS, Ubuntu feels like a philosophy.

Let me explain,

Mint is a great OS that looks nice, runs reasonably well (on newer hardware...) and is very easy to use. It's a great way to introduce friends to Linux. In the end, however, it is one distro among many.

Ubuntu really does feel like a philosophy. It starts with the name, chosen for a very specific reason and goes from there. Ubuntu is a very specific way of thinking about computers by bringing this great thing called Linux to the average guy (or gal) who doesn't know a thing about bootstrapping a system but admires the notion of free software. It favors the notion of collaboration with large communities of programmers (and, I think, that collaborative spirit is reinforced by the forums here) and tries to make computing easier, and cheaper, for everyone.

Frankly, for me, it doesn't come down to code or calculations but to a philosophy. And I like what Ubuntu is selling me the most.

[XubuRoxMySox]

...for me, it doesn't come down to code or calculations but to a philosophy.

Agreed. It's also, at least for me, about ethics. Here's why:

1. - Take the number one Linux distro, add a few licks of paint, restricted extras, and a few applications adapted from elsewhere (for example, Gimmie (http://beatniksoftware.com/gimmie/Main_Page) with new paint and a new name), change some artwork, then change the name and call it a distro. Legal? Of course. But it seems very much like "plagiarized" Ubuntu to me.

2. Rig up the "new distro" to turn it into an automated fund raiser ("Mint search") by default and not be forthcoming about it. Legal? Sure. Ethical? Yeah, maybe so, but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

3. Take free software and make it "proprietary" by changing the extensions (from .deb to .mint) rather than share improvements with other developers. Tacky, in my opinion.

Yes, I'm a relative newcomer to Linux (started in March of this year) and I know I have a lot to learn about GNU and FOSS and all that still. But I'm not a newcomer to ethics. When something so obviously built on the hard work of others is treated as though it's the unique and special work of one "developer" who makes it semi-proprietary (perhaps there's a better word than proprietary but I can't find one), I can't help but have nagging ethical concerns about it.

Yes, it certainly is a matter of personal choice and I can't truly charge Mint with any real wrongdoing. They've done nothing that I know of for which they can be legally challenged. I'm making no such accusations! Still, the whole thing just "smells" like plagiarism for personal gain.

-Robin

[Grimhound]

Agreed. It's also, at least for me, about ethics. Here's why:

1. - Take the number one Linux distro, add a few licks of paint, restricted extras, and a few applications adapted from elsewhere (for example, Gimmie (http://beatniksoftware.com/gimmie/Main_Page) with new paint and a new name), change some artwork, then change the name and call it a distro. Legal? Of course. But it seems very much like "plagiarized" Ubuntu to me.

2. Rig up the "new distro" to turn it into an automated fund raiser ("Mint search") by default and not be forthcoming about it. Legal? Sure. Ethical? Yeah, maybe so, but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

3. Take free software and make it "proprietary" by changing the extensions (from .deb to .mint) rather than share improvements with other developers. Tacky, in my opinion.

Yes, I'm a relative newcomer to Linux (started in March of this year) and I know I have a lot to learn about GNU and FOSS and all that still. But I'm not a newcomer to ethics. When something so obviously built on the hard work of others is treated as though it's the unique and special work of one "developer" who makes it semi-proprietary (perhaps there's a better word than proprietary but I can't find one), I can't help but have nagging ethical concerns about it.

Yes, it certainly is a matter of personal choice and I can't truly charge Mint with any real wrongdoing. They've done nothing that I know of for which they can be legally challenged. I'm making no such accusations! Still, the whole thing just "smells" like plagiarism for personal gain.

-Robin

Yeah, but ethics have to be approached lightly. Many Debian fans see Ubuntu like you see Mint. Same with GNU-ers who point out that Linux is simply the kernel and not the OS.

Ethically, Ubuntu is like... GNU/Linux Debian Ubuntu, and I know I missed a few things that should be included in that name.

[C!oud]

I used to run Mint Xfce & Gnome and some people might like Mint, but personally I found it to be too bloated and slow. There was nothing particularly innovative that I found useful and the default theme didn't really look that great either.

[lrcaballero]

Linux Mint, it is very nice!!! I've used it before coming to Ubuntu, Linux mint is very good looking and everything works Out-Of the Box, that is why many people lean towards Linux Mint, Linux Mint is my Second favourite Distro. Play with it, install it and if you don't like it just come back to us.... we'll be here, don't be afraid to try new things, direct experience it is always your BEST option!!!!!!! When I left WIndows 100% 3 weeks ago, I didn't know what to expect it!!! But little did I know that Linux is awsome and I don't want to look back.... Linux Rockssssssss!


Luis.

:guitar:

[djbon2112]

Srsly? I used Mint back in the 5/6 transition days (so early Ubuntu 8.04 era) and I found it significantly slower than Ubuntu on the same hardware. I don't know what it was, but everything was slow to load, windows took awhile to do anything, I just hated it in general. I like some of the things they were doing, but they're things I'd much rather see just integrated into Ubuntu rather than forking off Mint.