PDA

View Full Version : List of Ubuntu Derivatives (Which have you tried/used?)



HappinessNow
December 30th, 2009, 03:00 PM
List of Ubuntu Derivatives (Which have you tried?)


I know there is this page:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DerivativeTeam/Derivatives

and this page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_distributions#Ubuntu-based

and this list:
http://distrowatch.com/search.php?category=All&origin=All&basedon=Ubuntu&desktop=All&architecture=All&status=Active

What about the ones not included on the list above? do you know of anymore?

Which Ubuntu distributions have you tried?

Here's my short list from memory:

1. Kubuntu
2. Xubuntu
3. OzOS
4. Mint

That's about all I can remember, I guess I haven't tried that many. :P

One that doesn't appear on those list is:

Ylmf

XubuRoxMySox
December 30th, 2009, 07:12 PM
Ubuntu
Kubuntu (slow, complicated)
Mint (even slower, pretty, easy, horrible politics)
Crunchbang (still my favorite)
U-Lite (simple, fast, buggy)
Masonux (great, a little buggy on my 'puter)
Xubuntu (best kept secret, awesome, gorgeous, fast, much less buggy than the LXDE distros).

-Robin

Roasted
December 30th, 2009, 07:20 PM
Ubuntu - solid gnome distro. We all know what this one is.

Kubuntu - my personal favorite. As snappy as gnome on KDE 4.2 (I've done actual speed comparisons on identical hardware). Customizable, very user friendly, built on *buntu, debian based. I get more "ohh I get it!" reactions out of this from co workers, friends, family etc when I show them vs the others.

Xubuntu - really fast, very solid. Would be my primary choice for a desktop OS to be used as a server if I needed a server with a GUI.

Mint - Haven't seen the need to really give it a solid shot. Seemed the same as Ubuntu to me except green last I used it. Still a good release, just didn't use it extensively enough I suppose.

All of them are very solid in their own way. It's important to remember, some people like light beer, some like dark beer. But we're still havin a good time. :guitar:

handy
December 30th, 2009, 08:30 PM
1. Mint-Xfce - surprisingly quick considering it is based on Ubuntu, easiest installation of any system I've used in 24 years.
2. Crunchbang - fat & slow for Openbox (I've been spoiled by Arch/Openbox I guess).
3. Xubuntu - fat & slow for Xfce.
4. Kubuntu - poor implementation of KDE imho (I don't like KDE much anyway).
5. OzOS - buggy on my hardware.
[Edit:] I forgot:
6. UbuntuStudio - ok, but I really had no use for it.

Roasted
December 30th, 2009, 09:06 PM
4. Kubuntu - poor implementation of KDE imho (I don't like KDE much anyway).


As a frequent user of Fedora 12 KDE and Kubuntu 9.10, I fail to see how KDE is any different in Kubuntu than it is in Fedora - yet I've heard a few people say this before. I feel like a lot of people's opinions from KDE Hardy Heron are still lingering (where Kubuntu sucked with implementing 4.0 yet also offered KDE 3.5, which was weird). Since then, I've been quite pleased with how smooth it is.

unknownPoster
December 30th, 2009, 09:08 PM
I believe MoonOS is also Ubuntu based.

I haven't used it, but it's absolutely gorgeous.

Screenshots:
http://www.moonos.co.cc/?page_id=162

jollysnowman
December 30th, 2009, 09:17 PM
From Ubuntu I went to Xubuntu. I briefly tried Xubuntu with compiz instead of xfwm (this is what my gf uses now), then went to Xubuntu with openbox. From there I went to Crunchbang, and I'm pretty sure I'll stay there for a while.

Roasted
December 30th, 2009, 09:27 PM
I believe MoonOS is also Ubuntu based.

I haven't used it, but it's absolutely gorgeous.

Screenshots:
http://www.moonos.co.cc/?page_id=162

That looks pretty sick man. I might have to give that a shot.

toupeiro
December 30th, 2009, 10:12 PM
I've used ubuntu, kubuntu, xubuntu, and ubuntu studio. Anymore, I install ubuntu and add the additional desktops I want since there is virtually no difference at all in the backend between ubuntu/kubuntu/edubuntu. Xubuntu is a bit more stripped down and if I had an older system to install linux on, I'd still choose to install xubuntu natively from ISO the way it was configured to install. Same goes for ubuntu studio which uses a low latency kernel that default ubuntu does not use.

handy
December 31st, 2009, 12:58 AM
As a frequent user of Fedora 12 KDE and Kubuntu 9.10, I fail to see how KDE is any different in Kubuntu than it is in Fedora - yet I've heard a few people say this before. I feel like a lot of people's opinions from KDE Hardy Heron are still lingering (where Kubuntu sucked with implementing 4.0 yet also offered KDE 3.5, which was weird). Since then, I've been quite pleased with how smooth it is.

PC-BSD had by far nicest KDE 3.5 I had ever used, (still don't like KDE though). Until I used Sabayon, which then had the nicest of both Gnome & KDE (including 3.5 & 4.*) I've used.

I've just downloaded overnight the Sabayon 5.1, released 11 days ago, so I'll see what they are up to now on the liveDVD. I have no desire to install it on No.2. box, as Mint-Xfce has superseded Sabayon there, as Mint-Xfce is just too easy to install, use & maintain for my purposes; it is only used when I need to reference the web to make serious changes on No.1. box anyway, which is usually a very rare occurrence.

The KDE thing (perhaps in particular) comes down to personal taste. I love Arch/Openbox/xfce4-panel, setup with no icons, a black screen background, a very simple Openbox menu & the xfce4-panel which uses 4 plugins;- clock, sound volume control, screenshot, desktop switcher (with 6 desktops). It fits nicely across a 24" screen.
Which I'm sure most would consider to be VERY boring. :) To my mind, such a setup is the antithesis of KDE. There is no accounting for taste. :popcorn:

jrusso2
December 31st, 2009, 01:06 AM
I have used Mint which I was the one that termed Ubuntu done right for it.

Also have tried xubuntu, which was much too heavy for a lightweight OS

and Kubuntu which I didn't like the selection of programs that were default.

NormanFLinux
December 31st, 2009, 01:26 AM
ZevenOS - Ubuntu clone based on the old BEOS. The base system is XFCE modified with a Sawfish window manager.

Gramps
December 31st, 2009, 02:50 AM
I use mostly Ubuntu,I have looked at
Kbuntu - like others have said I'm not really a fan of KDE for some reason.
Xbuntu - didn't really do anything for me
Mint - Not a real green person but Imust say multimedia just worked not sure I really like the mintmenu but that can be changed along with the color. It will be interesting to see what happens when they go out on their own and base it off straight debian.

Been playing with the mini.iso and it is slowly becoming my favorite. I can install just what I want or need and it foorprint is much smaller than any of the out of the box installs. More work but I am working on a script that after the base will install all the rest of the stuff I want.

Crunchy the Headcrab
December 31st, 2009, 02:52 AM
I've used:

Ubuntu - good stuff
Kubuntu - bleh, bleh, eck, barf
Xubuntu - Underwhelming, miss my gnome

That is all. I haven't used any unofficial derivatives. I've used Debian, so I've used Ubuntu's daddy :)

premamotion
December 31st, 2009, 11:28 AM
Ubuntu
Kubuntu (slow, complicated)
Mint (even slower, pretty, easy, horrible politics)
Crunchbang (still my favorite)
U-Lite (simple, fast, buggy)
Masonux (great, a little buggy on my 'puter)
Xubuntu (best kept secret, awesome, gorgeous, fast, much less buggy than the LXDE distros).

-Robin

I have tryed Linux Mint 6 & 8... was sweet but I gave up... a little slower than Ubuntu.

I have tryed Kubuntu... so OVER - complicated (OMG!!!!), full of bugs and problems...

Now, after reading what Robin posted, I tried Xubuntu, and I totally dislike it!