Is Ubuntu Still too thin?

[Nick_Jinn]

So we cant post directly to recurring discussions? We can only post there by 'getting in trouble' so to speak? Thats kind of silly.

Anyway, I think the Ubuntu CD is just right....Why not use all of the space that fits on the disk? Its not like 700mb, even unpacked, is going to bog down a modern low end system from the last 7 years....and that is the majority of people in the western world, so its a good idea to have a full featured and rich OS for the masses rather than trying to make your ultra light weight version the default....other groups have that focus and its fine that they do.


But what about the Ubuntu DVD version? What if I want a much fatter installation just loaded with support for anything i can think of, and an impressive array of useful apps depending on my needs.....The only version that is "fat enough" here is Ubuntu Studio.....but what about a fully loaded office version, developer version or gamer version? What if you have dial up and want it all on the DVD instead of your network connection?

I think we need some fatter specialty distros just loaded with codecs and drives, to the extent that is legal, and allow the rest to be in Multiverse with a disclaimer to check your local laws first.

[Naiki Muliaina]

I use Ubuntu Studio for my home PC, with basic Lucid on all my 5 other back up drives at the moment.

Theres a gaming remix somewhere (Ubuntu Ultimate editon) an all formats remix (Mint) developer version... Aside from odd programming tools, Ubuntu Studio covers it mostly. Developers tend to be picky about software too.

[theraje]

Its not like 700mb, even unpacked, is going to bog down a modern low end system from the last 7 years....

It doesn't take a large program to eat up all your resources. A program that is a few KB on your hard drive can use up megs and megs of memory and drive the processor to its maximum.

In other words, 700 MB is not much in regards to storage space, but there is a lot more to consider than hard drive real-estate.

[NightwishFan]

I would like an 'offline install capable' DVD such as OpenSUSE has. That is pretty fat. :D

[forrestcupp]

I would like an 'offline install capable' DVD such as OpenSUSE has. That is pretty fat. :D

fat or phat? :)

Yeah, an offline DVD would be nice.

[ajgreeny]

As far as I'm concerned the problem with any download of a CD or DVD image file, is that having first downloaded, secondly burned to disk, and thirdly installed to hard disk, there is then always the first huge download straight away of maybe hundreds of MBs of upgrades and updated applications, some of which I do not use and perhaps do not want.

The bigger the installation, the bigger the size of the download of upgrades needed; great for those with no download cap, but for some of us that could be a problem.

Stick with what we have now, in my opinion.

[Sef]

So we cant post directly to recurring discussions?

Click here (http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=302) and then click on' New Thread' to start a new post in Recurring Discussions.

If you were having a problem getting to the site, something seems to have been down, but it works for me.

[Elfy]

So we cant post directly to recurring discussions? We can only post there by 'getting in trouble' so to speak? Thats kind of silly.You can report your own thread to be moved - no mention of trouble.


Click here (http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=302) and then click on' New Thread' to start a new post in Recurring Discussions.
Works for us Sef - but not normal users.

[undecim]

So we cant post directly to recurring discussions? We can only post there by 'getting in trouble' so to speak? Thats kind of silly.

*SNIP*


If it's a recurring discussion, why don't you just reply to one of the discussions in recurring discussions?

[murderslastcrow]

I think you underestimate how many Ubuntu users are NOT in the modernized West.

Also, quite enough software fits onto the CD. I find that everyone installs different things after they're done with the installation (outside of restricted extras). So it would be pointless to have a larger DVD, since it wouldn't have the applications you want on it anyway.

Oh wait, GIMP isn't included anymore... DVD ALL THE WAY!! (jk, I think it's more important to keep it down to size, many people who use Ubuntu have it on older computers that can't take a DVD)

I dunno', the server space and bandwidth to maintain a whole other version... just use a spinoff with the applications you like. We're making it hard enough for Canonical as it is. :\

[kaldor]

fat or phat? :)

Yeah, an offline DVD would be nice.

4 gigs fat. :)

[Nick_Jinn]

I think you underestimate how many Ubuntu users are NOT in the modernized West.

Also, quite enough software fits onto the CD. I find that everyone installs different things after they're done with the installation (outside of restricted extras). So it would be pointless to have a larger DVD, since it wouldn't have the applications you want on it anyway.

Oh wait, GIMP isn't included anymore... DVD ALL THE WAY!! (jk, I think it's more important to keep it down to size, many people who use Ubuntu have it on older computers that can't take a DVD)

I dunno', the server space and bandwidth to maintain a whole other version... just use a spinoff with the applications you like. We're making it hard enough for Canonical as it is. :\



This post was semi-tongue in cheek in response to Ubuntu getting fat.


Obviously I want it to be efficient with system resources. It has to be a balance between functionality, hardware and software support, eye candy and foot print.

Totally true about system resources not being directly linked to hard drive footprint, though I keep seeing the 'size' of the image as being used for 'light weight', and that is becoming less and less of an issue, even in the developing work.....I am not saying to be wasteful though.


And I dont want the main version to get arbitrarily heavier. Rather, I just want some optional themed versions that have more apps already installed.



This whole post was only half serious....though I do like Ubuntu studio.

[Windows Nerd]

But what about the Ubuntu DVD version? What if I want a much fatter installation just loaded with support for anything i can think of, and an impressive array of useful apps depending on my needs.....The only version that is "fat enough" here is Ubuntu Studio.....but what about a fully loaded office version, developer version or gamer version? What if you have dial up and want it all on the DVD instead of your network connection?

I think we need some fatter specialty distros just loaded with codecs and drives, to the extent that is legal, and allow the rest to be in Multiverse with a disclaimer to check your local laws first.
Unfortunately for you, that is not part of the Linux Philosophy and the way it does stuff. Linux is all about choice and freedoom, and rather than install a whole myriad of applications and programs along with their libraries and dependencies, Linux chooses to install the basics that almost all people will use or request be installed by default. The user then installs the programs and applications they want, exactly how they want them, rather than having to uninstall and remove applications you don't want (and then have some libraries and clutter left over in your system.

Ubuntu is already considered a "fat" or "heavyweight" distribution, because of the resources it requires, (and the millions of GNOME dependencies and libraries). Compared to other distributions (May I mention Arch and Gentoo), Ubuntu doesn't offer much choice over the installation process anyways.

There are some "fatter" distributions that have many different apps and other stuff added to them anyways, such as Ubuntu Studio, or Linux Mint (which is based off of Ubuntu).

Scott

[Nick_Jinn]

I guess you missed the 'facetious post' comment'.


I dont use old hardware so Ubuntu is great for my purposes. I think its 'just right'.

There are light weight versions of Ubuntu and other distros that focus on being lite weight though.




I use Mint XFCE version for my USB distro. That and E-17, either Ozos or MoonOS.

[forrestcupp]

As far as I'm concerned the problem with any download of a CD or DVD image file, is that having first downloaded, secondly burned to disk, and thirdly installed to hard disk, there is then always the first huge download straight away of maybe hundreds of MBs of upgrades and updated applications, some of which I do not use and perhaps do not want.

The bigger the installation, the bigger the size of the download of upgrades needed; great for those with no download cap, but for some of us that could be a problem.

Stick with what we have now, in my opinion.

That's why it should be a choice. Most people would still download the CD.

But there are some people who still have dial-up or who don't have internet at all that may be able to have internet access long enough to download a DVD, or have someone burn a copy for them. Those people don't have the option to download programs from the repos as the need arises. If they had a nice DVD, they could just install things from that when they need them.

I don't think we're talking about having everything on the DVD installed. It's more like having a normal install, but having the offline availability to install things at a later point from the DVD.

[NightwishFan]

The CD is a perfect default, but the SUSE DVD for example saves a lot of time if you install on multiple machines as the base install, extra kernels, and a lot of common packages are available, as well as many desktop environments.

Say for instance we take a leaf from the WUBI installer and offer Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu/Server choices before the install starts as a step. Such a large amount of packages may be possible with LZMA compression and etc.

[theraje]

But there are some people who still have dial-up or who don't have internet at all that may be able to have internet access long enough to download a DVD, or have someone burn a copy for them. Those people don't have the option to download programs from the repos as the need arises. If they had a nice DVD, they could just install things from that when they need them.

I am in this boat. I'm on dial-up, so downloading anything the size of a CD, or even half that, is out of the question. I was under the impression, though, that a DVD version of Ubuntu was available. In fact, I think I actually pointed someone to it to download it for me and burn it to a DVD. That version comes with a lot of "optional" packages.

I may be confused with the DVD I got that was enclosed in a copy of "The Official Ubuntu Book", but I am pretty sure that there's a matching download for it somewhere on the site.

Of course, there is always the option of ordering discs from places like On-Disk, who are able to download pretty much anything and burn it to optical or flash media for you.

[Nick_Jinn]

There is a DVD version. I dont think its anything close to the repository disks that Debian has though. I guess you could get the debian disks, but there isnt a good 'how to' for that made available on the Ubuntu download pages.

[desnaike]

You can get anything you want here http://linuxcd.org/. That's if 4.95 is not to expensive.

[ubunterooster]

I like thin, I start minimal, slowly bloat it then reinstall every month or so

[Khakilang]

I prefer thin. Use it and than install what I need. Everything I need come from the CD except GIMP and multimedia codecs but that can be download at my own time. I get most of the Distro DVD from magazine anyway.

[Nick_Jinn]

I think that maybe Ubuntu should put its repositories on DVD, at least via torrent, so that people without the internet can install deb files via CD and SD card more easily.



This thread was made in jest. I wasnt seriously advocating unnecessary bloatware....however, a lot of new users dont really want to 'choose' their desktop specifics. They just want it to be intuitive and already done for them. They work hard, come home, they want to plop in a CD and it works.....with Wine and automatic .exe execution if thats what it takes, and to install deb files with CD or SD card without having to compile tar files from source.

The longer I use linux the less I fit into the above category. I enjoy tinkering and customizing. However, that is still the reality for the mainstream Ubuntu wants to reach.


But I dont want my OS to eat up my ram or CPU....but I AM willing to sacrifice some hard disk space for the desktop edition.