PDA

View Full Version : My thoughts on having 4 different distros which are all Ubuntu



user1397
June 21st, 2006, 12:22 AM
To tell you the truth, I don't really like what they've done with the naming of ubuntu distributions. I mean, there's ubuntu, kubuntu, xubuntu, and edubuntu. Doesn't that make everything so much more complicated? If it were up to me, I would just have one distribution, ubuntu, and if you wanted a different desktop environment, you would just download an ubuntu installation cd, and at the beginnning of the install, it would ask you if you wanted to install ubuntu with the server-package, the gnome-package, the kde-package, the xfce-package, or the edubuntu-package. No more of those packages named "kubuntu-desktop, xubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-desktop, edubuntu-desktop". So therefore, there would only be a one distribution, ubuntu, but with more options at the installation part.

matthinckley
June 21st, 2006, 12:25 AM
i agree with you that there should be a single install cd with all the options on it.. but I don't think it will all fit on a 650 MB CD.. this would be great for a DVD, but I could see multiple CD images still needing to be available..

G Morgan
June 21st, 2006, 12:26 AM
Wouldn't fit on one CD. One of the things with Ubuntu is the ship it program. If they had to ship 4 cds/OS to every user it obviously has 4 times the cost so can only reach a 1/4 of the people (a gross simplification I know).

//edit - also everyone doesn't have DVD players. Ubuntu aims to be equally available to all so CD's are a must for ship it//

aysiu
June 21st, 2006, 12:27 AM
Someone else proposed a week ago or so simply naming them in a way so as not to make people think they're separate distros:

Ubuntu Gnome
Ubuntu KDE
Ubuntu XFCE
Ubuntu Education

Something along those lines.

SSTwinrova
June 21st, 2006, 12:35 AM
Someone else proposed a week ago or so simply naming them in a way so as not to make people think they're separate distros:

Ubuntu Gnome
Ubuntu KDE
Ubuntu XFCE
Ubuntu Education

Something along those lines.
Hmmm...I wouldn't mind going to a system like that

user1397
June 21st, 2006, 12:36 AM
i agree with you that there should be a single install cd with all the options on it.. but I don't think it will all fit on a 650 MB CD.. this would be great for a DVD, but I could see multiple CD images still needing to be available.. i see your point, i guess it could only work for dvd's

Wouldn't fit on one CD. One of the things with Ubuntu is the ship it program. If they had to ship 4 cds/OS to every user it obviously has 4 times the cost so can only reach a 1/4 of the people (a gross simplification I know).

//edit - also everyone doesn't have DVD players. Ubuntu aims to be equally available to all so CD's are a must for ship it// i also see your point, shipit is a must for ubuntu, unless of course they use aysiu's guide on downloading and installing ubuntu! (which is in my sig:))

Someone else proposed a week ago or so simply naming them in a way so as not to make people think they're separate distros:

Ubuntu Gnome
Ubuntu KDE
Ubuntu XFCE
Ubuntu Education

Something along those lines.i like that idea much better. ubuntu should be viewed as one unified distribution, but with many options/choices. i also don't think it's fair on distrowatch, that ubuntu/kubuntu/xubuntu are always in the top 30, and taking up three valuable places where other distributions could be ranked. but of course, ubuntu is number one always, so it doesn't really matter :p

G Morgan
June 21st, 2006, 12:42 AM
Instead you'd have Ubuntu - GNOME at 1 and Ubuntu - KDE at 2. It's their rating system thats flawed in this case.

raublekick
June 21st, 2006, 12:44 AM
The thing is, each one is a seperate entity compared to other distros. Most distros focus on one DE to base all of their efforts. Suse used to be heavily KDE based, and although Gnome was available, it wasn't a Suse-Gnome fusion, it was just Gnome installed on top of Suse. Kubuntu and Xubuntu, although coming from the same repositories, are pretty well polished and much more than just KDE on Ubuntu or XFCE on Ubuntu.

user1397
June 21st, 2006, 12:54 AM
Instead you'd have Ubuntu - GNOME at 1 and Ubuntu - KDE at 2. It's their rating system thats flawed in this case.i wouldn't think so, because the only true distro would be called just ubunut, and on the facts about it down on the bottom, it would say "Preferred DE: -- "

The thing is, each one is a seperate entity compared to other distros. Most distros focus on one DE to base all of their efforts. Suse used to be heavily KDE based, and although Gnome was available, it wasn't a Suse-Gnome fusion, it was just Gnome installed on top of Suse. Kubuntu and Xubuntu, although coming from the same repositories, are pretty well polished and much more than just KDE on Ubuntu or XFCE on Ubuntu.very true, but they could still be called
Ubuntu - GNOME
Ubuntu - KDE
Ubuntu - XFCE
and edubuntu could just be a package which includes educational programs, which could be installed in any of the 3 DE's

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 12:55 AM
To tell you the truth, I don't really like what they've done with the naming of ubuntu distributions. I mean, there's ubuntu, kubuntu, xubuntu, and edubuntu. Doesn't that make everything so much more complicated? If it were up to me, I would just have one distribution, ubuntu, and if you wanted a different desktop environment, you would just download an ubuntu installation cd, and at the beginnning of the install, it would ask you if you wanted to install ubuntu with the server-package, the gnome-package, the kde-package, the xfce-package, or the edubuntu-package. No more of those packages named "kubuntu-desktop, xubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-desktop, edubuntu-desktop". So therefore, there would only be a one distribution, ubuntu, but with more options at the installation part.
The best idea has already been implemented in several Distros.

One version and upon install you choose the desktop you prefer.
The Distro name I don't remember but if I run across it again I'll post here. I remember it had about 10 or 15 different desktop choices and I choose fluxbox.

There should only be 2 Ubuntu distros

1. Ubuntu-upon install expand to all available desktops available. drop Kubuntu and Xubntu, this is just silly and limiting.

2. Edubuntu-specilized for education of course

keep of course the different hardware options and expand into tablets.

Now I know the nah sayers will say that will make the install too confusing, not so when I come upon a distro that includes this they will also have instructions. The most intelligent Distros will give you all the options and the tools to make an educated choice. I don't believe in dumbing down the distro, leave that option to windows.


Forget the renaming bit this isn't the answer.

G Morgan
June 21st, 2006, 12:59 AM
It still has to fit on one CD. Not everyone has Broadband access. Personally I think Ubuntu may be better off moving to a OLPC model where they sell CD sets to those who can afford them then use the money generated to give discs away to those who can't (If I bought a CD set for 30, how many less fortunate can get the same package for free). The real difficulty would be deciding who is less fortunate and who is not.

Obviously you could still get the ISOs for free.

BWF89
June 21st, 2006, 01:01 AM
The thing is, each one is a seperate entity compared to other distros. Most distros focus on one DE to base all of their efforts. Suse used to be heavily KDE based, and although Gnome was available, it wasn't a Suse-Gnome fusion, it was just Gnome installed on top of Suse. Kubuntu and Xubuntu, although coming from the same repositories, are pretty well polished and much more than just KDE on Ubuntu or XFCE on Ubuntu.
Agreed. I like the idea of having K/X/Ubuntu instead of just Ubuntu.

I think EdUbuntu is kinda stupid tho, its just Ubuntu with Gnome with some school oriented apps. Why not do a Ubuntu install and apt-get the packages you need?

user1397
June 21st, 2006, 01:05 AM
The best idea has already been implemented in several Distros.

One version and upon install you choose the desktop you prefer.
The Distro name I don't remember but if I run across it again I'll post here. I remember it had about 10 or 15 different desktop choices and I choose fluxbox.

There should only be 2 Ubuntu distros

1. Ubuntu-upon install expand to all available desktops available. drop Kubuntu and Xubntu, this is just silly and limiting.

2. Edubuntu-specilized for education of course

keep of course the different hardware options and expand into tablets.

Now I know the nah sayers will say that will make the install too confusing, not so when I come upon a distro that includes this they will also have instructions. The most intelligent Distros will give you all the options and the tools to make an educated choice. I don't believe in dumbing down the distro, leave that option to windows.


Forget the renaming bit this isn't the answer.i agree with you, and i just thought about something. instead of having different ubuntu images like the ones i mentioned before ( Ubuntu - GNOME, Ubuntu - KDE, Ubuntu - XFCE), couldn't the ubuntu install cd (text-mode) let you choose first what DE you want, then if you want the educational package installed, and then couldn't it download from the dapper repositories the corresponding packages? is that possible? then you would only really need one install cd, but for live cd's, i don't know what they could do.

Jucato
June 21st, 2006, 01:10 AM
I wouldn't mind if things were called Ubuntu - (insert DE of choice. If that's the case, Edubuntu should be called Ubuntu-Ed. Unfortunately, you'd still be stuck with the different install CD's for different "versions". Also, Kubuntu and Xubuntu are inline with KDE's and Xfce's naming conventions, where most things are prefixed by K or X.

Also just because most other distros that offer multiple desktop environment options do it like that (SUSE, Fedora, Debian, etc.), does it mean that Ubuntu is not free to do things differently?

Btw, Kubuntu and Xubuntu are not separate distos. Heck they aren't even separate projects, at least for the Ubuntu devs, it seems. Check out /usr/share/example-content/oo-derivatives.doc:

Derivatives of Ubuntu

Ubuntu is designed to be a solid foundation for creating further derivatives. In the case of the Official derivatives, all the packages used are from the main Ubuntu repositories, so a user from any variant can seamlessly install packages from any other, and even convert completely to a different variant.

Kubuntu
Kubuntu is a user friendly operating system based on KDE, the K Desktop Environment. Kubuntu and Ubuntu are not meant to be seen as distinct projects; Kubuntu is part of the Ubuntu project, and they are both part of one development team that contributes to the whole. Kubuntu is Ubuntu with a different default set-up, the Ubuntu CD contains only GNOME as a desktop environment; the Kubuntu CD contains only KDE, this is the primary difference.

Gijith
June 21st, 2006, 01:16 AM
Someone else proposed a week ago or so simply naming them in a way so as not to make people think they're separate distros:

Ubuntu Gnome
Ubuntu KDE
Ubuntu XFCE
Ubuntu Education

Something along those lines.

Great idea. I can't figure out why this hasn't happened yet.

zachtib
June 21st, 2006, 01:25 AM
Someone else proposed a week ago or so simply naming them in a way so as not to make people think they're separate distros:

Ubuntu Gnome
Ubuntu KDE
Ubuntu XFCE
Ubuntu Education

Something along those lines.

I would highly support going to this. It would help IMO to unify the distros more.

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 01:26 AM
i agree with you, and i just thought about something. instead of having different ubuntu images like the ones i mentioned before ( Ubuntu - GNOME, Ubuntu - KDE, Ubuntu - XFCE), couldn't the ubuntu install cd (text-mode) let you choose first what DE you want, then if you want the educational package installed, and then couldn't it download from the dapper repositories the corresponding packages? is that possible? then you would only really need one install cd, but for live cd's, i don't know what they could do.
Other Distro are fitting 10+ different desktops onto one CD image. So this should not be a problem. I like your idea of only one CD. Upon install you could choose Edubuntu and then choose the desktop preference.

Again I don't think renaming the Distro will help this will only lead to confusion and out migration to other Distros like Mepis and PCLinuxOS.

I think this was the downfall of the Drake with the renaming of the CD's from Live to Desktop and Install to Alternate. Most people not fimiliar with Ubuntu it just scared the hell out of them. Check the stats on Distrowatch and you see a jump in Distros like Mepis and other Distros.

even the Kubuntu and Xubuntu thing is confusing for most new people to Linux why scare them away even more by changing the names to Ubuntu-KDE, Ubuntu-Gnome, etc

So the best solution is to simplify!

One Distro to rule them all, One Distro to bind them, One Distro to run my PC.

Ubuntu
then put the desktop and edubuntu options in the install, it can be kept on one CD.

it is a no-brainer.

user1397
June 21st, 2006, 01:27 AM
Unfortunately, you'd still be stuck with the different install CD's for different "versions"not unless it could be installed the way i described before:
couldn't the ubuntu install cd (text-mode) let you choose first what DE you want, then if you want the educational package installed, and then couldn't it download from the dapper repositories the corresponding packages?

user1397
June 21st, 2006, 01:29 AM
Other Distro are fitting 10+ different desktops onto one CD image. So this should not be a problem. I like your idea of only one CD. Upon install you could choose Edubuntu and then choose the desktop preference.

Again I don't think renaming the Distro will help this will only lead to confusion and out migration to other Distros like Mepis and PCLinuxOS.

I think this was the downfall of the Drake with the renaming of the CD's from Live to Desktop and Install to Alternate. Most people not fimiliar with Ubuntu it just scared the hell out of them. Check the stats on Distrowatch and you see a jump in Distros like Mepis and other Distros.

even the Kubuntu and Xubuntu thing is confusing for most new people to Linux why scare them away even more by changing the names to Ubuntu-KDE, Ubuntu-Gnome, etc

So the best solution is to simplify!

One Distro to rule them all, One Distro to bind them, One Distro to run my PC.

Ubuntu
then put the desktop and edubuntu options in the install, it can be kept on one CD.

it is a no-brainer.
yes!!!!!!! :D

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 01:33 AM
yes!!!!!!!
run the stats for the last 30 days on Distrowatch.

You would expect a spike with the Dapper release instead there is a drop.

Other non-Ubuntu forums have been slamming Ubuntu.

It's time to cut the fat this isn't a government organiztion supported by taxpayer.

look who as been benefiting at Ubuntu expense:

again run the 30 day stats on Distrowatch for a sample:

1 Ubuntu (http://distrowatch.com/ubuntu) 3324http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 2 SUSE (http://distrowatch.com/suse) 1795http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 3 Fedora (http://distrowatch.com/fedora) 1205http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 4 MEPIS (http://distrowatch.com/mepis) 1045http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 5 Mandriva (http://distrowatch.com/mandriva) 775http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 6 KNOPPIX (http://distrowatch.com/knoppix) 769http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 7 Damn Small (http://distrowatch.com/damnsmall) 761http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 8 Debian (http://distrowatch.com/debian) 734http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 9

Jucato
June 21st, 2006, 01:35 AM
not unless it could be installed the way i described before:

That would only work if you have an active and fast internet connection. However, some internet connections need to be configured first before they can be used (dial-up, A/DSL, etc).

One of the good things about Ubuntu is that everything that you would basically need/want would fit into one CD. If you want Ubuntu with GNOME, just download that. If you want KDE, download the Kubuntu (or Ubuntu - KDE) CD. Other distributions would make you download 3-5 CDs, for stuff that you only need on CD 2.

@yozef: which distros would those be? the ones that have 10+ DE's in one CD?
IIRC, so far there are really only 4 DE's in Linux: GNOME, KDE, Xfce, and Mezzo. You might be referring to Window Managers (openbox, fluxbox, etc.) which are absolutely lighter/smaller than Desktop Environments. But you still need the DE to use them. at least AFAIK.

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 01:39 AM
9 Kubuntu (http://distrowatch.com/kubuntu) 682http://distrowatch.com/images/other/alevel.png 10 PCLinuxOS (http://distrowatch.com/pclinuxos) 581http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 11 Gentoo (http://distrowatch.com/gentoo) 547http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 12 Slackware (http://distrowatch.com/slackware) 540http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 13 Xubuntu (http://distrowatch.com/xubuntu) 521http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 14 Puppy (http://distrowatch.com/puppy) 496http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 15
It's time to wake up and smell the stats, if Ubuntu's sole role is to benefit other Distros your on the right road.

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 01:43 AM
That would only work if you have an active and fast internet connection. However, some internet connections need to be configured first before they can be used (dial-up, A/DSL, etc).

One of the good things about Ubuntu is that everything that you would basically need/want would fit into one CD. If you want Ubuntu with GNOME, just download that. If you want KDE, download the Kubuntu (or Ubuntu - KDE) CD. Other distributions would make you download 3-5 CDs, for stuff that you only need on CD 2.

@yozef: which distros would those be?
Again You are wrong other Distro only run all the desktop options on 1 CD.

Again I would have to throw some CD in and do a mock install to find out, I have tested out so many distros I would only be guessing at this point. I don't have access to the computer I usually use to test on my wife is using it today but I may be able to research past post I may have made mention of at least one of the Distros here in the forum.

Of course you could always do a default install of of Gnome or XFCE and then have a install option of other Desktops but if you did it this way it would have to be easy for people new to Ubuntu.

user1397
June 21st, 2006, 01:49 AM
so, yozef, can you give me an example of a distribution that offers 10+ DE's on one cd? (i truly can't believe that, how is that possible? I want to believe it, but it just seems so impossible, since DE's are supposed to be 100's of MB supposedly.)

Jucato
June 21st, 2006, 01:50 AM
@yozef: I added something to my post above.

G Morgan
June 21st, 2006, 01:53 AM
You could probably get GNOME, KDE, Ubuntu base and prehaps Fluxbox, EvilWM and IceWM on there but without any extras with respect to apps (no OOo etc).

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 02:22 AM
don't hold me to it but it may have been dyne:bolic, again I going off my memory which sucks.

If it wasn't Dyne:Bolic maybe Goblinx I've tried so many damn distros I feel like a distrodrunk.


give those a try and let me know if my memory is still holding up.

I remember I tried fluxbox and someone else here tried a different version desktop.

It happened in the past week and was trying every Distro I could get my hands on.

I gaurentee there is at least one distro that does this on one CD.

After burning and wasting CD's on SUSE, Scientific Linux and Fedora I stopped wasting perfectly good blank CD's

So I only test Distros now that require one CD, I remember I and the one other person here in the forums was impresses with the extensive desktop list, the big 3, Gnome, KDE, XFCE, but it included a lot of others, again I choose fluxbox, but it also had enlightenment and others too.

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 02:27 AM
@yozef: which distros would those be? the ones that have 10+ DE's in one CD?
IIRC, so far there are really only 4 DE's in Linux: GNOME, KDE, Xfce, and Mezzo. You might be referring to Window Managers (openbox, fluxbox, etc.) which are absolutely lighter/smaller than Desktop Environments. But you still need the DE to use them. at least AFAIK.
Yes you may be correct here. (but it did include atleast Gnome/KDE/XFCE that Ubuntu would need to include) but again take a look at dyne:bolic, I may be rembering wrong but I hope not.

G Morgan
June 21st, 2006, 02:28 AM
Dyne:Bolic is a very specialised Distro so likely won't have a great deal of apps as standard (its an arts distro isn't it). The various WM's take up about 100K each so could easily be fitted on a floppy. The DE's take up a huge amount of room in comparison.

Thats the gap essentially. When you installed Dyne:Bolic did it have OOo etc.

MetalMusicAddict
June 21st, 2006, 02:36 AM
I agree with the "Ubuntu-DE" renaming. ;)


Other non-Ubuntu forums have been slamming Ubuntu.
Just like people here do with MS. The big/popular guy is an easy target. Not that it matters but what are they crying about? :)

Ive tried lots of distros as well. Ubuntu simply has the best default install for me. In the end its just as powerful as 99% of the ones Ive tried. Too many to count. "From-scratch" distros make up that 1%. ;)

I look at distro choice almost like religious choice. A personal one.

Jucato
June 21st, 2006, 02:42 AM
AFAIK, fluxbox, openbox, fvwm, etc, are not desktop environments. They are window managers. Granted that the distinction between WMs and DEs are a bit blurry, still window managers do not offer the same level of integration as full blown DEs do. That's why they are small. That's why you can cram as much as you want in one CD.

But we are talking about true full blown DEs: GNOME, KDE and Xfce. You can't definitely put them all in one CD. If it could have been done, it would have been done before.

EDIT: dyne:bolic uses fluxbox WM, and says it's using WMaker as the DE. but I'm curious about that because the WMaker website says that WMaker is a window manager, not a desktop environment (www.windowmaker.info).

ZephyrXero
June 21st, 2006, 02:49 AM
I know it's already been mentioned that someone already suggested this, but I don't think I saw any actual links to he Original thread on this topic, so here ya go: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=191011

I think the solution's fairly simple as far as the CDs go. Offer a Gnome, KDE, and XFCE specific CD just as is already done, but then offer a DVD with all 3, or a single CD that requires a network connection, and you just download the packages as needed.

I'm still not sure how Edubuntu should be handled, I mean there's a very specific reason they made it seperate with all that stuff preinstalled and ready to go for schools and whatnot. I don't know if you could just stuff the Edu stuff into the 3 DE specific discs or not, but you could at least offer it at install time, optionally on the DVD and network CD.

Compucore
June 21st, 2006, 03:03 AM
I could see the way of the dvd edition with all four of them in there. But isn't the four of them just the xwindows enviroment for the ubuntu version of things. 1 being gnome, 2 kubuntu- 3 xfce and the educationd the fouth of them. Correct me if I am wrong on this. These are just the gui interface to make things feel graphical not exactly like windows but thats besides the point. Who would want something exactly like windows or like OSX right. Everything else as for the kernel and the command line is all the same right or have they really have that much of a difference betwen all four of them in the command line interface as well? From what I remember reading up from the linux magazines that the command line is almost all the same between other distros with minor things between them. But yet they all function the same way. Correct me if I am wrong on this. I remember from hearing that from Maximum linux and a few others all those years ago.

Compucore


Someone else proposed a week ago or so simply naming them in a way so as not to make people think they're separate distros:

Ubuntu Gnome
Ubuntu KDE
Ubuntu XFCE
Ubuntu Education

Something along those lines.

aysiu
June 21st, 2006, 03:11 AM
Here's the thread I was referring to earlier:
Ubuntu/Kubuntu Naming and Configuration (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=193458)

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 03:12 AM
It may or may not have been dyne:bolic,...I got a little side tracked and I am using Gentoo, it amazes me every time I use Gentoo how fast and easy the live CD boots.

It's my understanding that Gentoo doesn't come with a DE, but this live CD sure seems to have Gnome, looks and acts just like Ubuntu.

Jucato
June 21st, 2006, 03:30 AM
Here's the thread I was referring to earlier:
Ubuntu/Kubuntu Naming and Configuration (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=193458)

Looking back at that thread, I realized that over that short span of time, I might have changed my mind, although not completely. I still think that the *ubuntu naming convention is a fresh change from the common/standard, non-DE specific naming styles. But as seeing that some people are really asking the same questions again and again and again (what's the difference between Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu), it also might be wise to change.

@Compucore: you're basically right. All Linux distros are the same at the command line. But not everybody uses the command line without any graphical interface. In fact, Ubuntu is focused on regular desktop users, who usually don't want (but sometimes do) use the command line. They would definitely want something like GNOME, KDE, or Xfce. Desktop environments are not just graphical eye-candies for the command line, although most of the application do act a sort of graphical front-end to command line back-ends. They don't just make things graphical. They also provide a very deep level of integration of all the parts of the operating system. without the DE's, Linux would look like a quilt, with individual and separate applications as patches of different colors/designs, sometimes patched at random. DE's make sure that all of these individual parts form an organic and coherent whole.

@yozef: probably Gentoo doesn't come with a DE because you have to compile/download your DE of choice? either way, you would still need to have an internet connection or a working knowledge of Linux to do that. Something not all users would want or have.

Compucore
June 21st, 2006, 03:48 AM
And I agree with you on that Fenyx. And there should be given a choice of the four tha are available. I wasn't trying to say stick with the command line only. That is only part of what Linux and Ubuntu is all about. Sometimes like it or not we like the eye candy that comes with Gnome, Kubnutu, edubuntu, or xfce. Its just a matter of saying okay if you want your computer to look like this, that, the other. Just lead it up when it starts to boot into linux and ask. And I am going to use the four that we have to choose from, Gnome, kunubut, edubuntu or xfce. And from there let it do it's thing and your system is ready. Sorry if it sound like an arguement was going to happen. Didn't want to make it sound that way either. And I just wanted to make sure as well that I didn't sound like a really old folgy here too. O:)




@Compucore: you're basically right. All Linux distros are the same at the command line. But not everybody uses the command line without any graphical interface. In fact, Ubuntu is focused on regular desktop users, who usually don't want (but sometimes do) use the command line. They would definitely want something like GNOME, KDE, or Xfce. Desktop environments are not just graphical eye-candies for the command line, although most of the application do act a sort of graphical front-end to command line back-ends. They don't just make things graphical. They also provide a very deep level of integration of all the parts of the operating system. without the DE's, Linux would look like a quilt, with individual and separate applications as patches of different colors/designs, sometimes patched at random. DE's make sure that all of these individual parts form an organic and coherent whole.


Compucore

Jucato
June 21st, 2006, 04:08 AM
@Compucore: no need to apologize. No argument here. I was just trying to explain. :D

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 04:21 AM
If numbers mean anything Distrowatch stats shows Ubuntu down in the past 7 days also:

1 Ubuntu (http://distrowatch.com/ubuntu) 2414http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 2 SUSE (http://distrowatch.com/suse) 1581http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 3 Fedora (http://distrowatch.com/fedora) 1321http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 4 MEPIS (http://distrowatch.com/mepis) 1078http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 5 Nexenta (http://distrowatch.com/nexenta) 829http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 6 Damn Small (http://distrowatch.com/damnsmall) 818http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 7 Mandriva (http://distrowatch.com/mandriva) 707http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 8 Debian (http://distrowatch.com/debian) 655http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 9

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 04:23 AM
10 Slackware (http://distrowatch.com/slackware) 594http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 11 KNOPPIX (http://distrowatch.com/knoppix) 554http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 12 Gentoo (http://distrowatch.com/gentoo) 515http://distrowatch.com/images/other/alevel.png 13 GParted (http://distrowatch.com/gparted) 430http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 14 Puppy (http://distrowatch.com/puppy) 426http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 15 Kubuntu (http://distrowatch.com/kubuntu) 379http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 16 FreeBSD (http://distrowatch.com/freebsd) 375http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 17 Musix (http://distrowatch.com/musix) 366http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 18

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 04:25 AM
19 CentOS (http://distrowatch.com/centos) 334http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 20 Xandros (http://distrowatch.com/xandros) 325http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 21 PC-BSD (http://distrowatch.com/pcbsd) 322http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 22 Zenwalk (http://distrowatch.com/zenwalk) 321http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 23 SLAX (http://distrowatch.com/slax) 319http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 24 RR4/RR64 (http://distrowatch.com/rr4) 292http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 25 KANOTIX (http://distrowatch.com/kanotix) 282http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 26 Xubuntu (http://distrowatch.com/xubuntu) 279http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 27

Compucore
June 21st, 2006, 04:29 AM
Thats okay then. As jim carey had said in one of his movies "Alrighty then".:) Just kidding and if we are at opposite ends we can also agree to disagree too. But it's good that we can talk like this in a civil matter like this. no wonder I enjoy this place too much here. Everyone is helping everyone else here.

Compucore


@Compucore: no need to apologize. No argument here. I was just trying to explain. :D

PsychoTrauma
June 21st, 2006, 04:33 AM
The stats from distrowatch don't really mean much. I'm not sure why you hold them is such high regards.

To keep on topic:
I think the naming scheme is just fine.

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 04:35 AM
The stats from distrowatch don't really mean much. I'm not sure why you hold them is such high regards.

To keep on topic:
I think the naming scheme is just fine.

Don't hold them high just find them interesting.

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 04:37 AM
AFAIK, fluxbox, openbox, fvwm, etc, are not desktop environments. They are window managers. Granted that the distinction between WMs and DEs are a bit blurry, still window managers do not offer the same level of integration as full blown DEs do. That's why they are small. That's why you can cram as much as you want in one CD.

But we are talking about true full blown DEs: GNOME, KDE and Xfce. You can't definitely put them all in one CD. If it could have been done, it would have been done before.

EDIT: dyne:bolic uses fluxbox WM, and says it's using WMaker as the DE. but I'm curious about that because the WMaker website says that WMaker is a window manager, not a desktop environment (www.windowmaker.info) (http://www.windowmaker.info%29).

It could have been GoblinX but at this point I'm grasping for straws, but I think the point was made.

richbarna
June 21st, 2006, 04:46 AM
If numbers mean anything Distrowatch stats shows Ubuntu down in the past 7 days also:

1 Ubuntu (http://distrowatch.com/ubuntu) 2414http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 2 SUSE (http://distrowatch.com/suse) 1581http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 3 Fedora (http://distrowatch.com/fedora) 1321http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 4 MEPIS (http://distrowatch.com/mepis) 1078http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 5 Nexenta (http://distrowatch.com/nexenta) 829http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 6 Damn Small (http://distrowatch.com/damnsmall) 818http://distrowatch.com/images/other/aup.png 7 Mandriva (http://distrowatch.com/mandriva) 707http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 8 Debian (http://distrowatch.com/debian) 655http://distrowatch.com/images/other/adown.png 9

Nice to see Damn Small on the up !!
Whole distro 50 Mb so that leaves 600 Mb for DE's, you could cram at least five onto one cd.

As for Desktop environments for ubuntu, I like the idea of the server install that will give you a choice and then apt-get/ aptitude install the DE (ok if you've got bradband)

If you look at aysiu's site he's got the "pure xfce/ KDE/ Gnome" options, surely someone could come up with a script that could do that ?

Most new users want to install and have an out of the box experience, so I suppose the default Gnome desktop is the best idea with an option to change desktops later (via a small program/ Gui/ Script) that would completely remove Gnome and download and install KDE for example. (again broadband)

Then we would only need 1 Ubuntu, and swap and choose the desktop during/ after install.

For some reason I have fewer install problems if I do the server / add desktop later option.

aysiu
June 21st, 2006, 04:50 AM
Well, what you're talking about already exists.

If you do a server install from the Alternate (as opposed to the Desktop) CD, you can log in in text mode and type
sudo aptitude update
sudo aptitude install kubuntu-desktop and have KDE. Same thing for xubuntu-desktop or ubuntu-desktop.

Jucato
June 21st, 2006, 04:50 AM
It could have been GoblinX but at this point I'm grasping for straws, but I think the point was made.

Which point?z

If you mean that Ubuntu would become a minimalistic distro, or one that specializes in a certain field of interest (like dyne:bolic specializing in multimedia, etc), then yes, you are right. You could probably squeeze in fluxbox, openbox, and all the *boxes and WM you can in one CD. The down side would be that there will be no full DE.

But if Ubuntu remains on the path it set out to travel, that is catering to regular desktop users who need fully featured and deeply integrated desktop environments, you'd have to include GNOME, KDE, or Xfce. But you can't have all in one CD.

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 04:52 AM
Nice to see Damn Small on the up !!
Whole distro 50 Mb so that leaves 600 Mb for DE's, you could cram at least five onto one cd.

As for Desktop environments for ubuntu, I like the idea of the server install that will give you a choice and then apt-get/ aptitude install the DE (ok if you've got bradband)

If you look at aysiu's site he's got the "pure xfce/ KDE/ Gnome" options, surely someone could come up with a script that could do that ?

Most new users want to install and have an out of the box experience, so I suppose the default Gnome desktop is the best idea with an option to change desktops later (via a small program/ Gui/ Script) that would completely remove Gnome and download and install KDE for example. (again broadband)

Then we would only need 1 Ubuntu, and swap and choose the desktop during/ after install.

For some reason I have fewer install problems if I do the server / add desktop later option.

I haven't tried Damn Small yet actually is it at all like Puppy.

Puppy has a new version out that includes Opera as the default browser, Thats one cool Puppy.

aysiu
June 21st, 2006, 04:53 AM
I haven't tried Damn Small yet actually is it at all like Puppy.

Puppy has a new version out that includes Opera as the default browser, Thats one cool Puppy.
Well Damn Small and Puppy are similar only in that they're both small.

Damn Small is Debian-based. Puppy is... I don't know what it is.

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 04:55 AM
Well, what you're talking about already exists.

If you do a server install from the Alternate (as opposed to the Desktop) CD, you can log in in text mode and type
sudo aptitude update
sudo aptitude install kubuntu-desktop and have KDE. Same thing for xubuntu-desktop or ubuntu-desktop.
aysiu what about a graphical GUI that works as an installer for all available desktops of the individuals choosing.

deliver Ubuntu with the fastest possibly desktop as default like Xubuntu and then have some kind of easy way for "new" people to linux to pick any desktop they choose?

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 04:58 AM
Well Damn Small and Puppy are similar only in that they're both small.

Damn Small is Debian-based. Puppy is... I don't know what it is.
Puppy is Independently Developed.

atleast according to this chart:
http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=independence

aysiu
June 21st, 2006, 05:00 AM
aysiu what about a graphical GUI that works as an installer for all available desktops of the individuals choosing.

deliver Ubuntu with the fastest possibly desktop as default like Xubuntu and then have some kind of easy way for "new" people to linux to pick any desktop they choose? You're welcome to disagree with me on this, but I don't think it's worth the effort.

Right now, for anyone who knows enough to even consider a different desktop environment, there's already a graphical way to choose another desktop environment--Synaptic Package Manager. Just mark ubuntu-desktop for installation, and you have Gnome.

Anyone who can't do that probably has other things to worry about than what desktop environment to use (generally getting around, configuring wireless/monitor/sound, installing software, etc.).

richbarna
June 21st, 2006, 05:07 AM
aysiu what about a graphical GUI that works as an installer for all available desktops of the individuals choosing.

deliver Ubuntu with the fastest possibly desktop as default like Xubuntu and then have some kind of easy way for "new" people to linux to pick any desktop they choose?

My sentiments exactly !!!! =D>

Imagine a GUI called "De Changer" where you have the option to install/remove/keep desktops. Like Synaptic, but it would remove the WHOLE desktop in one go, Like aysiu's "Pure xfce/kde/gnome".

That would be good.

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 05:08 AM
You're welcome to disagree with me on this, but I don't think it's worth the effort.

Right now, for anyone who knows enough to even consider a different desktop environment, there's already a graphical way to choose another desktop environment--Synaptic Package Manager. Just mark ubuntu-desktop for installation, and you have Gnome.

Anyone who can't do that probably has other things to worry about than what desktop environment to use (generally getting around, configuring wireless/monitor/sound, installing software, etc.).

Actually your probably right. It is proably best to leave things as is, including the names.

I always found the Ubuntu naming system cool and unique, different from the other hundreds of Distros.

Ubuntu should make it's own path including in naming and in saying that I am glad they changed the Live/install CD names also.

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 05:09 AM
My sentiments exactly !!!! =D>

Imagine a GUI called "De Changer" where you have the option to install/remove/keep desktops. Like Synaptic, but it would remove the WHOLE desktop in one go, Like aysiu's "Pure xfce/kde/gnome".

That would be good.
Like the one to change themes?

System>preferences>themes

so it would be:

System>preferences>(or administration)>Desktop Environment>choose KDE/Gnome/Xfce/others(password required of course)

user1397
June 21st, 2006, 06:56 AM
So it basically boils down to "whatever, ubuntu's naming style is unique, and so should stay that way, and even if they did change the names of everything, that would just confuse everyone even more (like old-time users). Plus, if they have the resources to have 5 different versions of their OS (K/X/Ed/Ubuntu and Ubuntu server), their's no point in making it "easier for them" by petitioning a change of names. Hell, Shuttleworth is not a poor man at all!

Jucato
June 21st, 2006, 07:13 AM
So it basically boils down to "whatever, ubuntu's naming style is unique, and so should stay that way, and even if they did change the names of everything, that would just confuse everyone even more (like old-time users). Plus, if they have the resources to have 5 different versions of their OS (K/X/Ed/Ubuntu and Ubuntu server), their's no point in making it "easier for them" by petitioning a change of names. Hell, Shuttleworth is not a poor man at all!

No it's not really like that. As you've seen, there are different views on the matter. Some like changing the names, some don't. I guess in this case, it will be up to the Mark Shuttleworth to decide.

But just how exactly will it make things "easier for them" to have a change of names? As the discussions have proceeded, changing the names doesn't really mean that they would change the way the system, the CDs and the desktop environments are delivered. All that will happen will be a change of name, website contents, filenames, directories, links, etc.

purdy hate machine
June 21st, 2006, 08:13 AM
I like the idea of having Ubuntu as a single name for the distro. I can see things getting worse as time goes on. We already have two different groups trying to use the name Nubuntu for two very different projects. #-o

nUbuntu (http://www.nubuntu.org/)

Nubuntu (http://h4x0rztrab.googlepages.com/)

prizrak
June 21st, 2006, 09:45 AM
I will confess to not reading all 6 pages of this thread, however I would like to point something out. Kubuntu and Xubuntu are/were mostly community projects. Canonical came out with Ubuntu first and have been concentrating on that, Kubuntu was a project started by the community and is now also supported by Canonical. Xubuntu is not even supported by Canonical as far as I know (aside from hosting dl mirrors) it was also a community effort for older systems. The names were basically chosen by community champions who started the projects and I guess Mark didn't think that changing the name would be a good idea. Edubuntu is the only one that was in the works at the lab to begin with and I think it makes sense for it to be called different.

Jucato
June 21st, 2006, 10:42 AM
Xubuntu is not even supported by Canonical as far as I know (aside from hosting dl mirrors) it was also a community effort for older systems.
Xubuntu is now also supported by Canonical, not just by hosting mirrors. Check the main Ubuntu website (www.ubuntu.com). It now has a link to the 3 "official" related projects. Also check the contents of /usr/share/example-content/oo-derivatives.doc.

bruce89
June 21st, 2006, 11:44 AM
I agree that it is a bit confusing, but then all 4 couldn't fit on 1 CD, which is the whole point of *Ubuntu. A DVD with all 4 would be a good idea, I thought about it myself.

I remember that one KDE person was annoyed about the situation, as they claimed they can't promote Kubuntu without promoting GNOME, which they won't do. That is rediculous, they should promote free software, not their personal preferences. They also challenged Mark to rename Kubuntu to Ubuntu-KDE, and they claimed that would make it the most popular distribution. See the news story here - http://dot.kde.org/1149158725/.
Choice moments:

I like KDE so much. It is a fantastic desktop. I feel that KDE 4 could be released too late and KDE 3.5.3 will be outdated then. This gives Gnome an opportunity to take over.

Kubuntu is a publicity failure for KDE — whenever someone mentions Kubuntu, they are also publicizing Ubuntu, a GNOME desktop. The result is that it is impossible to promote KDE without promoting GNOME. The reverse (promoting GNOME and not KDE) happens all the time (after all, Kubuntu is not a substring of Ubuntu). Even KDE devs often leave out the K, thereby promoting GNOME, when in fact they are referring to the KDE desktop. The current situation is a publicity disaster for KDE.

There's a very simple solution to solving this unfair naming: call the the KDE desktop Ubuntu KDE and the GNOME desktop Ubuntu GNOME. If that happens, KDE will *immediately* become the most popular desktop on the Ubuntu platform. Mr. Shuttleworth, all I'm asking is that you give the KDE desktop a fighting chance by naming it fairly! (from http://dot.kde.org/1149158725/1149162603/1149183481/)
Thankfully, somebody told him to get a life!

23meg
June 21st, 2006, 11:56 AM
I guess this is the relevant post: http://dot.kde.org/1149158725/1149162603/1149183481/

And this is the main case the poster is making:

Kubuntu is a publicity failure for KDE — whenever someone mentions Kubuntu, they are also publicizing Ubuntu, a GNOME desktop.Which fails to make any sense on my part. My objections:

- Ubuntu and Kubuntu are separate distros and just because Kubuntu includes or sounds like the name Ubuntu doesn't mean that it rings a GNOME bell in everyone's mind.

- GNOME and KDE aren't enemies (in connection with above).

- No distro has to be a publicity stunt for any open source project, no matter how big, including desktop environments.

Jucato
June 21st, 2006, 01:34 PM
I remember that some KDE people were annoyed about the situation, as they claimed they can't promote Kubuntu without promoting GNOME, which they won't do.

Please be careful in making umbrella statements such as this. One person (AC) does not represent "some KDE people" nor the sentiments of KDE/Kubuntu users. I think the responses that he got is evidence enough. AFAIK, AC is a frequent poster in dot.kde.org and slashdot, and is not in anyway directly connected to KDE, except as a KDE user.

The issues that KDE/Kubuntu users have with Kubuntu has very little to do with the name and more to do with development and polish. Besides, the name Kubuntu perfectly fits with the KDE naming convention.

@23meg: if you look at an earlier post I made, it seems that Ubuntu devs don't see Kubuntu and Xubuntu as separate distros, but as derivative (not separate) projects under the wide umbrella of the Ubuntu project. Admittedly, the distinction between "separate distro" and "derivative project" is blurry. But don't take my word for it. AFAIK, there is no "official" and "unambiguous" statement yet regarding the relationship of Kubuntu/Xubuntu/Edubuntu with Ubuntu.

John.Michael.Kane
June 21st, 2006, 02:20 PM
Those who want an all-in-1 CD/DVD theres howto's on this subject. Where you can make your own, be it an ubuntu-4-in-1 or whatever other distos you want. with this being about freedom of choice/ect. do you really feel it's right to force everyone to use an all-in-1 distro when there maybe those who might not want too?.


Just my thoughts..

RAV TUX
June 21st, 2006, 08:53 PM
Those who want an all-in-1 CD/DVD theres howto's on this subject. Where you can make your own, be it an ubuntu-4-in-1 or whatever other distos you want. with this being about freedom of choice/ect. do you really feel it's right to force everyone to use an all-in-1 distro when there maybe those who might not want too?.


Just my thoughts..

Awesome Idea Freedom of choice would be the best option overall.

G Morgan
June 21st, 2006, 09:52 PM
Those who want an all-in-1 CD/DVD theres howto's on this subject. Where you can make your own, be it an ubuntu-4-in-1 or whatever other distos you want. with this being about freedom of choice/ect. do you really feel it's right to force everyone to use an all-in-1 distro when there maybe those who might not want too?.


Just my thoughts..

Is there a howto on getting universe onto a DVD. Thats something I would really like given that a broadband connection isn't always a given.

prizrak
June 21st, 2006, 10:19 PM
Xubuntu is now also supported by Canonical, not just by hosting mirrors. Check the main Ubuntu website (www.ubuntu.com). It now has a link to the 3 "official" related projects. Also check the contents of /usr/share/example-content/oo-derivatives.doc.
Cool thx for the info. I wonder how the K and X projects will pin out since I don't think Canonical has the man power to give all 4 derivatives equal time.

bruce89
June 21st, 2006, 10:38 PM
Please be careful in making umbrella statements such as this. One person (AC) does not represent "some KDE people" nor the sentiments of KDE/Kubuntu users. I think the responses that he got is evidence enough. AFAIK, AC is a frequent poster in dot.kde.org and slashdot, and is not in anyway directly connected to KDE, except as a KDE user.

The issues that KDE/Kubuntu users have with Kubuntu has very little to do with the name and more to do with development and polish. Besides, the name Kubuntu perfectly fits with the KDE naming convention.
True, I have fixed it.

MetalMusicAddict
June 21st, 2006, 10:49 PM
Is there a howto on getting universe onto a DVD. Thats something I would really like given that a broadband connection isn't always a given.
Look HERE (http://cargol.net/~ramon/ubuntu-dvd-en).

RAV TUX
June 22nd, 2006, 01:50 AM
Lets not forget about UbuntuLite

http://www.ubuntulite.org/dokuwiki/doku.php

ZephyrXero
June 22nd, 2006, 07:58 PM
As far as Canonical's relation to Xubuntu and Kubuntu, I'm pretty sure they're still for the most part community led projects. It's just that Canonical own's the trademark now it would appear and they're going to offer support, this does not necessarily mean they're paying developers to work on either one specifically ;)

heroticpaladin
June 22nd, 2006, 11:01 PM
Personnaly I prefer Ubuntu, Kubuntu & EdUbuntu!

It has plenty of style.
And it's a lot more creative than Ubuntu, Ubuntu KDE & Ubuntu Education.
Or than Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows 2000, Windows XP ...

Jucato
June 22nd, 2006, 11:06 PM
As far as Canonical's relation to Xubuntu and Kubuntu, I'm pretty sure they're still for the most part community led projects. It's just that Canonical own's the trademark now it would appear and they're going to offer support, this does not necessarily mean they're paying developers to work on either one specifically ;)

As far as Kubuntu is concerned, I'm definitely sure that Canonical pays at least one developer to work on it, Jonathan Riddell (http://behindubuntu.org/interviews/JonathanRiddell/). I'm not so sure about Petr Rockai, the creator of Adept (http://people.kde.nl/mornfall.html). And in one of Mark's talks, he mentioned plans about hiring more developers, including KDE developers, to work at Canonical.

I'm not exactly sure about the situation with Xubuntu, though.

DrSturgeon
June 22nd, 2006, 11:32 PM
If the issue is that newcomers to linux don't know whether to choose ubuntu or kubuntu (or xubuntu), then I think renaming them is the wrong approach.

To a Normal User who doesn't commonly have five terminals open, the DE is the operating system. That plus the applications.

Gnome and KDE offer completely different desktop environments, and a completely different suite of applications to go with them.

Here's a thought experiment:

Put a computer literate (but not computer expert) user in front of 5 different computers. Tell him that two of the five are the same operating system. In reality, the five are:

1. Windows
2. OSX
3. Linux running Gnome
4. Linux running KDE
5. BSD running KDE

Every time, they'll pick the two KDE systems, because they look and work the same, even though in reality, it's the two linux systems.

Kubuntu and Ubuntu are completely different operating systems. If anything, the names should be separated (change Kubuntu so it doesn't have Ubuntu in it), not consolidated (Ubuntu - Gnome; Ubuntu - KDE).

The other option is to integrate the two desktops -- provide the application that's best for the task in either case, not the one specific to the DE. And make it so KDE doesn't take over Gnome when you install it. Then switching between would be just like a major theme change.

This has been discussed before, and the usual conclusion is that using gtk applications in KDE or Qt applications in Gnome never provides for the best user experience.

Keep them separate.