Would you rather?

[mamamia88]

Every distro i've tried had either too much crap preinstalled or not enough installed. here is my question if given the choice would you rather your distro of choise have a. not enough needed programs or b. too many programs that you have to trim the fat?

[VeeDubb]

For me, that's no contest. Start small and add what I want.

In a perfect world, we'd all like to have a distro that starts out with exactly what we want, which is why I use Ubuntu. Like all the others, it requires me to add a fair amount of software, and like all the others it requires a fair amount of "fat trimming." But, I find that it comes the closest to my needs.


If you were to take your example to the absolute extreme, say, a 150GB installation with everything you can think of installed, or a boot-strap system, my answer would stay the same. I wouldn't really want either one, but between the two, I'd take the boot strap and roll my own.

[chessnerd]

Too little.

However, there is a point where this becomes ridiculous. In my opinion, Arch Linux is beyond this point, but that's just my opinion.

Too much is difficult because it's hard to strip stuff away. On the other hand, you don't always know what to add. Here are some of the things I do to Ubuntu after I install it:

Remove:
Evolution Mail Client
Empathy/Pidgin
Ubuntu One
Gwibbler
Assistive Technologies
Other social networking features

Add:
Opera Web Browser
Sun Java JDK/JRE (or OpenJDK/JRE)
Eclipse IDE

Ubuntu is a good distro for what I use because it makes it easy to add the software I need. The only program I have installed that isn't in the repositories is Opera. However, it's hard to fully remove Evolution and Empathy.

You can't ask for everything from a distro. Some call it "settling" and frown on that. But it's better to settle someplace comfortable than to keep wandering around.

Should Ubuntu strip things down? Maybe. I think the social networking features can go out the window, but then again, I know people who use them...

[parn]

For Ubuntu - definitely more.

For experience users, it is not hard to remove packages that they do not need.

For inexperience/new users however, they have trouble finding what they want and many do not even know how to install apps.

*Personally I find destroying/removing things easier because I can do it without internet connection.

Since the goal of Ubuntu is to make it easy for newbies and promote Ubuntu as an alternative to other proprietary OS, it is best to come with things that experience users deem "fat".

For experience users who want to build from small - there are other distros for that.

[chessnerd]

For Ubuntu - definitely more.

For experience users, it is not hard to remove packages that they do not need.

For inexperience/new users however, they have trouble finding what they want and many do not even know how to install apps.

I agree with this for the most part. Most people are content with a system that comes with too much. That's the way that OEM's do it with Windows and people seem fine with that.


*Personally I find destroying/removing things easier because I can do it without internet connection.

You do need to be careful when removing without an Internet connection. It is possible to accidentally remove a system element that you were not expecting. For example, if you remove evolution-data-server you will find that you can no longer use the About Me program. Without an Internet connection, it can be hard to get such things back. (I'm sure there are better examples, but this is just off the top of my head)


Since the goal of Ubuntu is to make it easy for newbies and promote Ubuntu as an alternative to other proprietary OS, it is best to come with things that experience users deem "fat".

For experience users who want to build from small - there are other distros for that.

Again, I agree to some extent. I have no problem with easy to use, "fat" programs. However, I think that Ubuntu is overdoing the social networking apps. Yes, a lot of people are into social networking nowadays, but I don't think that such applications should be included by default in an operating system. I don't feel Gwibber is necessary. (I'm not saying that Gwibber isn't a good program, I'm just saying that it doesn't need to be there by default.)

Instead of including this, I think Ubuntu should work to emphasize the Software Center. The Software Center's Featured Applications is then where such programs can be prominently placed.

[kelvin spratt]

Minimal install gives you total control of your system.

[Khakilang]

I prefer too much install. Since I am a newbie. I like to play around with those software until I know what I want than only I start trimming those I don't need. If its too little than I have no idea what kind of software I need and have to install and uninstall them which is much of a hassle to me since I am not so good in the command line section.

[Dkkline]

I would say too little, rather install a few things, than remove a few things,

when ever I'll have problems in future I'll sit and think: "was that because I removed some default installed programs?"

But then again if a lot of things is missing I would never get started...

[clanky]

For me too little is the way to go, I would rather start with a minimal install and add the things that are useful to me. For a distribution like Ubuntu which is aimed at new Linux users then more is better.

If you have to manually install the bits that you want to use then you will end up with a system that only has stuff you want because you are not going to install a load of rubbish that you don't want.

Although it is possible to uninstall stuff from a system which comes with all the bells and whistles in practice most people don't bother because it is sitting there doing no harm.

There is a place for both, a minimal system for those who know what they want, and an all singing, all dancing system for those who want to try lots of different stuff and see what they like.

That's why there are so many Linux distros (that and the fact that people think it would be cool to remastersys Ubuntu eleventeen million times)

[parn]

You do need to be careful when removing without an Internet connection. It is possible to accidentally remove a system element that you were not expecting. For example, if you remove evolution-data-server you will find that you can no longer use the About Me program. Without an Internet connection, it can be hard to get such things back. (I'm sure there are better examples, but this is just off the top of my head)

Heh - what I mean is, it is faster to remove something because it does not need say internet connection. Like it is faster to remove my netbeans than to download and install it :P

Maybe you are talking about a balance here. I am sure nobody love to install ArchLinux, yes you have absolute control over your box but it is painfully time consuming.

Basically everyone I know have their own preferences when it comes to apps and no distro can satisfy anyone, you just prefer one distro over the other because they are more to your preference.

In my opinion, Too little and Too much are relative to the user, what is too much for one maybe too little for another and vice versa XD

[julio_cortez]

I'd rather have a system that works (desktop environment and drivers plus minimal managing tools) but has no office suite, no internet browser, no mail client, no IM client, no flash or java, no audio player, no image editing suite, no burning software.

This way I could be free to install only what I really need:
OpenOffice.org, Firefox, Thunderbird, Kopete, Kubuntu Restricted Extras, Amarok, Gimp, Brasero or K3b..
Plus various things like PyRenamer, Easytag, Mixxx, Audacity, Eclipse, Xsane and so on..

I don't mind spending half an hour installing packages via apt-get, if I'm sure I'll then have a system that has installed only the things I need.
And, on a different note, everything else I may need would be only a sudo apt-get install far.

[98cwitr]

id rather have a baseline to work with than bloatware.

[ubunterooster]

Start with too much, then strip it down.

[RiceMonster]

Too little. I'd rather add stuff I want than remove stuff I don't want.

What would actually be perfect for me would be a distro like Fedora, OpenSUSE, Ubuntu, Mandriva, etc that gives you a nice preconfigured system, but doesn't come with all kinds of applications by default. Maybe just a desktop environment, a web browser and a bunch of configuration tools. That way I don't have to remove tons of stuff and can install just what I want. I also don't have to go through setting up a system from the ground up like in Arch, Gentoo or something similar (which I have no interest in anymore).

[uRock]

Every distro i've tried had either too much crap preinstalled or not enough installed. here is my question if given the choice would you rather your distro of choise have a. not enough needed programs or b. too many programs that you have to trim the fat?
After trying a few of the "minimal" OSes, I'd say the bloat is better for me. It just makes life easier. Ubuntu is my drink of choice.

If we are talking about installing everything off of Debian's 5 DVD set, then yeah, that is a bit much.

[donkyhotay]

Personally I prefer minimalist but with really large repos to make it easy to add what I want. I agree with previous mentions that arch goes a little too far though. Personally I'd like a desktop, a browser, and a package manager. Everthing else would be optional.

[Dark Aspect]

I prefer too little since I enjoy building a system from scratch, thats why I love Arch Linux. However, I have yet to get FreeBSD working the way I wanted; it hates my video card. Haven't tried Gentoo yet.

[Phrea]

I voted 'too little', but not too too little.

I'd love to have an Ubuntu version with basic stuff added to easily build up the rest of it, so it should have [a full] Gnome [or KDE if that's your cup of coffee], the Canonical specific tools, like Software Center etc, and maybe a browser.
But other than that, I'd love to see it be stripped of OOo, IM etc. It is very easy to install software, and I'd rather install software than go and uninstall unwanted software.

[apjone]

Start with a dough base then add the toppings..... Have you tried to remove Cheese and tomato sauce from a pizza base?

btw I voted 'too little'

[Frogs Hair]

As a green bean I prefer too much , but adding or removing applications is not a big deal. The instant message apps are the first to go on my computer. but many use them and I think new users that are so inclined like to see them installed.

[JohnnyC35]

just give me a gui interface, a working internet connection, and the terminal or synaptic and I'll be happy

[cariboo]

Where's the not enough option? I add at least another 200 packages after a default install. I don't bother removing anything I don't use, as it really doesn't make that much difference, the system doesn't run any faster and the few megabytes it saves in hard drive space aren't worth the effort to remove them.

[forrestcupp]

Too much.

What's the point of having 500 GB and 1 TB hard drives if we're just going to try to fit everything in 5 GB?

[JohnnyC35]

the system doesn't run any faster and the few megabytes it saves in hard drive space aren't worth the effort to remove them.




What's the point of having 500 GB and 1 TB hard drives if we're just going to try to fit everything in 5 GB?


Not sure about you guys but I don't save a few megabytes by removing stuff. I save about 2 gig. and i can use that storage for a bunch of music, a couple tv episodes or a movie. Not including my home directory my root is about 2.2Gb.

[ubunterooster]

I organize my menus manually, so I don't want anything I won't use. Still the idea of needing to add stuff later creeps me out even more. Give me the whole pizza, I can pick off the pepperoni myself! :D

[chriswyatt]

And here was me thinking this would be a thread for "would you rather" questions. If it was it probably would've been locked by now.

:guitar:

[3Miro]

I remember in Mandrake long time ago the installer would let you select everything down to individual packages. I know that Ubuntu alternative does that, but I wouldn't mind an "advanced" option to select what you want/don't want on install.

As long as I can install something with one click from the repos, I guess I will go with too little, but overall I believe in balance. Whatever distro comes up, it will always be too much or too little for some people, but overall people should only have to add/remove several programs (not everything).

[gnomeuser]

If you look at "too little" providers, e.g. Fedora where everything is a separate package. You have great modularity and customization, at the cost of complicated dependencies and often very poorly selected defaults as assumptions cannot be made.

Too much (as seen in e.g. openSUSE) you tend to have over simplified dependencies bringing with it lots of additional crap. E.g. my last openSUSE adventure by default gave me openoffice, abiword, gnumeric and many other such duplicates. On the plus side allowing for selecting hard defaults the product feels better assembled.

Neither really give a desirable outcome, I want just right. Ubuntu comes very close to delivering this.

I guess to little is easier to fix in some sense, or at least a better place to start when building "just right" solutions.

[forrestcupp]

Not sure about you guys but I don't save a few megabytes by removing stuff. I save about 2 gig. and i can use that storage for a bunch of music, a couple tv episodes or a movie. Not including my home directory my root is about 2.2Gb.

True, but do you have enough music that you have filled up your other 496 GB and you really need that 2 GB? I know I've never even come close to filling all my space, even with all of my CD's ripped and me working with videos.

[JohnnyC35]

True, but do you have enough music that you have filled up your other 496 GB and you really need that 2 GB? I know I've never even come close to filling all my space, even with all of my CD's ripped and me working with videos.


hehe I need all the space I can get for my music, and other things. I have my RAID5 almost full, and 2 of my 3 1Tb drives full.

[cariboo]

My ripped cd and dvd collection reside on a server, so hard drive space is never a problem. Actually I have a 160Gb hard drive in my netbook, I'm thinking of getting a 64Gb SSD drive, as I don't need that much hard drive space on a netbook.

[kk0sse54]

When I install an OS I prefer it to install nothing but a minimal base install of the OS with no software installed by default. Let me the user decide what I'm going to install and how I'm going to install it. I find that it's much easier to setup my system that way but each person has their own personal preference.

[-Jeremy-]

I voted for too little because that way you can just install the programs that you actually want to have and keep a minimal system. That's one of the things I really like about Arch Linux for example: there is nothing I don't want to be there on my system.

[uRock]

My ripped cd and dvd collection reside on a server, so hard drive space is never a problem. Actually I have a 160Gb hard drive in my netbook, I'm thinking of getting a 64Gb SSD drive, as I don't need that much hard drive space on a netbook.

I have been looking at that option, too. I wanna see the speed that change will bring. A lot of my files are backed up to the netbook. I don't make changes to that as often as I do my desktop.

[MisfitI38]

When I install an OS I prefer it to install nothing but a minimal base install of the OS with no software installed by default. Let me the user decide what I'm going to install and how I'm going to install it. I find that it's much easier to setup my system that way but each person has their own personal preference.

Agreed, as usual.
Kernel, toolchain, shell, and package manager.
Some people find it preferable to strip down a bulky system, but I'm not one of 'em.