Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Ubuntu 4.10 (2004) VS Ubuntu 12.10 (2012)

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Beans
    9

    Ubuntu 4.10 (2004) VS Ubuntu 12.10 (2012)

    A lot of Ubuntu fans seem to despise the fact that Ubuntu now uses Unity as its default user interface. Well I let my mum try out the first ever version of Ubuntu as it was back in 2004 with the highly customizable gnome desktop environment. What version of Ubuntu (pretending compatibility/hardware support and drivers was identical) do you like better? What is easier to use and what looks nicer?

    Oh and yes... I have Ubuntu 12.10 running on my surface pro and touch screen works but the high resolution makes everything way to tiny to touch with ease...

    Check out my mum's opinion of both operating systems below:

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Kubuntu 14.04 Trusty Tahr

    Re: Ubuntu 4.10 (2004) VS Ubuntu 12.10 (2012)

    virtual desktops were already present before. i know i saw them on first red hat i tired back in the 90's.

    what about KDE and then KDE for tablets (plasma or what's it called). especially with classic menu it looks like winxp enhanced
    Easy to understand Ubuntu manual with lots of pics: http://ubuntu-manual.org/
    Do i need antivirus/firewall in linux?
    User friendly disk backup: Redobackup

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Beans
    9

    Re: Ubuntu 4.10 (2004) VS Ubuntu 12.10 (2012)

    Yea I wonder what distro had that multiple desktop feature first...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Beans
    277

    Re: Ubuntu 4.10 (2004) VS Ubuntu 12.10 (2012)

    Probably slackware

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    VietNam
    Beans
    34

    Re: Ubuntu 4.10 (2004) VS Ubuntu 12.10 (2012)

    I've installed, used and or played with every MS OS from ME to 8 and every Ubuntu version from 10.4 to 12.10. I began with Amiga of some version. The Amiga was the best IMHO. I could write programs in Amiga Basic which was terrific. Deleting a file simply involved moving it's icon into the trash. Even partitioning the HDD was simple. ME was the worst. It crashed everytime I tried to 'clean up' the HD until someone told me about their update center and that I needed an update to fix that problem. MS was just so much work to install. All the security software that had to be installed, all the settings to change, the updates. IMO that has just gotten worse with every new MS OS. Just opening IE or MSMedia was a chore with all the questions that had to be answered before I could even use those programs. So then I had to search and install more user friendly programs like VLC and Firefox just adding to the hours of work to set up an MS system. Get a virus? have to do it all over again. Not mention the hours spent cleaning the computer and updating all the security software weekly.

    I went Ubuntu and it was great. As with MS I can no longer write programs with a superbly documented Basic language but it did what I wanted without all the work. I surf the net, use productivity (office, making DVDs or CDs) software from time to time, play a couple games, watch movies on my TV through the software and hardware on my PC.

    I don't hate Unity but it is a throwback to times when OSs required a lot of work to use and setup. As the tester in the video pointed out 'why hide things that you use?' for example. Searching for LIbre office to write a document is just classic. How can you search for things that you don't know the name of? Obviously selecting a drop down menu with programs clearly labelled, organized and pictured is much more intuitive.

    I can sit back in a chair in my family room with my wireless mouse and keyboard and select a movie to watch on my 42" TV while playing a game on my monitor screen. But not any more. Ubuntu lost the capability to use two monitors with their own resolutions at 11.04. So after much searching I found Mint Mate 13 which still has that option.

    MS 8 and Ubuntu 12.04 have more in common than they differ. Both take a lot of work to set up and use. It is very difficult and unintuitive to find programs. Neither allow the user to operate two monitors at their own resolutions. The TV can be the monitor. This is not moving into the future. This is sacrificing friendliness for trendiness. Today I watched a hockey game over the net on my big TV while surfing and taking part in a message board about the game on my PC monitor. Is that the future now because it was the past for over 10 years.

    I enjoyed your video. I had never seen Ubuntu 4 before but yeah the user friendliness and intuitiveness is so clearly presented along with some wonderfully logical observations by the tester. Nicely done. Well underlined of course by the impossibility of pushing those little buttons with fingers. Imagine a work station or desk with piles of documents between the user and the monitor or just the distance between my 42" TV and me on my chair. Looks like someone is going to have to re-invent the remote control. This time for PCs with supposedly futuristic OSs. Touch screen for PCs is not the future. It is a MacDonalds cash register. The past. Try again.
    Last edited by VietCanada; April 14th, 2013 at 12:10 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York, NY
    Beans
    1,091
    Distro
    Ubuntu 14.04 Trusty Tahr

    Re: Ubuntu 4.10 (2004) VS Ubuntu 12.10 (2012)

    Actually, unity is just a dock bar that happens to be on the left side of the screen (instead of the bottom as it is on mac osx...though one can take the mac osx dock bar and put it on the left, just like unity)...
    so, what is hard, or difficult or un-intuitive about it?

    I never liked the original ubuntu layout with the two panels...when surfing, it wastes screen real estate (the 2 panels) and there is no search menu, just a fan out menu listing all the applications, and that takes much longer to navigate than using unity and having all your favorites and frequently used apps on the bar for quick 1 click access...and you have the "dash" (search) for typing in the rarely used ones, and it brings them up real fast...

    For quite some time, i had switched to linux mint because even having a lower panel only with slab menu (that has a search) was easier to use...the introduction of unity on ubuntu actually brought me back!
    Last edited by craig10x; April 14th, 2013 at 03:18 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Beans
    7,554
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    Re: Ubuntu 4.10 (2004) VS Ubuntu 12.10 (2012)

    Not saying anything -- this video has nothing to do really with modern Ubuntu vs Old Ubuntu -- rather a comparison of Gnome2 vs Unity. I'm wondering if you redid the experiment and set your mom up with something lets say like Mate or Cinammon on "Modern Ubuntu" what she would say. If your comparing defaults "out of the box", I guess this video has some relevance, however I believe you would be able to tweak a modern install to something of your liking -- in addition to getting a lot more with the kernel, newer packages, etc.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Out in Left Field
    Beans
    900
    Distro
    Ubuntu 14.04 Trusty Tahr

    Re: Ubuntu 4.10 (2004) VS Ubuntu 12.10 (2012)

    Mothers are always right
    MB: Asrock Extreme4-M CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3770K CPU @ 3.50GHz Memory: Corsair Low Profile Vengeance 16.00 GB. GC On CPU HD4000 Platform: x86_64 Distribution:Ubuntu 14.04TrustyTahr with Cinnamon DE Boot: EFI File System:EXT4

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Xubuntu

    Re: Ubuntu 4.10 (2004) VS Ubuntu 12.10 (2012)

    There's a couple of things that can be pointed out.

    1. What's referred to as the original layout, didn't require two panels. One could easily delete one of the panels and gain back landscape. At least, for as long as I've used Ubuntu (7.04).

    2. Individual opinion is only relevant to said individual. With all the available Linux options, why complain about Unity or any DE. Try Xubuntu (it's still configurable) and I wonder how mum would enjoy that?

    Complaining here does little to inform the devs of one's opinion. Thus, the only feedback one will receive here is likely to be other Ubuntu (or other Linux flavor) users. The majority of which will probably support the product. If one's truly concerned and dissatisfied, I suggest they notify the Canonical devs directly. Anything here will probably not be viewed by said devs, as the forums don't regularly share information with them and to my knowledge - historically they haven't spend much time here.

    Just my $0.02
    "All change is not growth, as all movement is not forward."
    Ellen Glasgow

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York, NY
    Beans
    1,091
    Distro
    Ubuntu 14.04 Trusty Tahr

    Re: Ubuntu 4.10 (2004) VS Ubuntu 12.10 (2012)

    By the way, he has other videos...he has his mom trying a LOT of distros....she did like linux mint somewhat better then ubuntu w/unity i think (my impression from what she said) it reminded her more of the windows 7 style layout...but i also remember her mentioning that she thought unity wasn't bad and a heck of a lot better then Windows 8 (which she also tried on video)...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •