Why Kubuntu???

[pansz]

Re: Why Kubuntu

I was wondering why everyone picked Kubuntu to run out of all the choices out there for distro's.

I think there's two reason: 1. Why ubuntu, 2. Why KDE.

1. Why ubuntu?

First, I'd say ubuntu and kubuntu are the same distribution with different desktops. The distribution gives me a package manager to access its repositories and nothing else.

Ubuntu-series has the best package manager and one of the best repositories in the world, that is the reason to choose ubuntu. and IMO that should be the only thing to concern when choosing a Linux distro.

2. Why KDE?

I'd tried almost all DEs available before I choose KDE and I found KDE is the best which suits my need. The most important "feature" of KDE is the "feature completeness", i.e. KDE3 has the most complete feature set among all other DEs.

And that obvious is the reason not to choose KDE4 now. IMO Kubuntu 10.04 will be the first version I go into KDE4 because I think that might be the first version of KDE4 which has the similiar level of feature completeness of KDE3.

Another import reason is that KDE3 does never try to hide any "advanced options" from "normal users", the basic philosophy of KDE3 is that most users will eventually be "advanced user" and all kinds of advanced options should be readily available in gui to all users at the first time.

I like that kind of philosophy because this encourages users to explore more features of the desktop environment and the more your explored, the more you'll like KDE. Of course, your mind may vary.

If I'll say the two most important virtues of KDE, that is above: feature completeness, and revealing all advanced options.

[Telengard]

Re: Why Kubuntu

I spent a lot of time on Debian, my first serious attempt to learn and use Linux. I did learn a lot, and although it was very frustrating at times, I came to respect it for its stability and useability. Eventually though I began to think that I wanted something a little more desktop focused and easier to use.

Ubuntu was very nice, and I'm always impressed by the way things just seem to work right out of the box. Printers, networking, and programs of all kinds are all automatically configured at my command, with few exceptions. The one thing I never liked about Ubuntu was GNOME. Don't get me wrong, GNOME is probably great for a lot of people, but not for me. It does things in ways that just annoy me.

Kubuntu gives me KDE, and all the good things that come with it. Mature programs, and a well designed, responsive user interface. Kubuntu is just as easy to configure and use as Ubuntu, and I still have access to most or all of the features I had in Debian.

At this point, I'm not so loyal to Kubuntu that I won't try other distros, but I am comfortable enough that I'm in no hurry to find a new one. It's not all perfect, but it is very nice.

[dayylin]

Re: Why Kubuntu

Hi,

I am running Ubuntu on my desktop and a winxp/kubuntu on my laptop. I chose Ubuntu for the fact that it works best for me with most of my computers and the major thing : the community has more support for each other than most. Again, that is just my opinion.

Brian aka Dayylin

[budr]

Re: Why Kubuntu

I've been using kde since the first betas. I've gone from slackware to suse to debian to knoppix, back to debian, and now to kubuntu. I've been quite comfortable with kde on all of them. I've tried gnome a couple of times and it never really excited me. Nothing in particular wrong with it, just not my cup of tea.

I tried several times over the years to get my better half interested in linux. I switched to knoppix so I could support her by having the same installation. She got familiar with linux and kde, but never really comfortable. Sooner or later she always drifted back to windows. About a year ago she downloaded an ubuntu cd and tried it out all by herself. She just settled in like she was home. She still has a windows partition on her drive, but I'll bet you she can't tell you when was the last time she booted it. I think it's safe to say that ubuntu and gnome have made a lifelong convert.

If my ramble has a point, it is that we are not all alike. What works for some of us doesn't necessarily work for someone else. I'm very happy with kde. I suppose, after watching my better half, that I could get comfortable with gnome if I wanted to or had to, but I'm glad I don't have to. Likewise, I imagine she would eventually have settled into kde, especially as the later kde3 releases got more and more solid and polished, but I'm glad she has settled into gnome so well. It just suits her, just as kde suits me.

[Snowhog]

Re: Why Kubuntu

Well said budr. Why anyone uses a particular Linux comes down, really, to just two things: familiarity and comfort (note, I didn't say 'ease of use').

Familiarity is, I think, a universal driving force. When you have been using a non-Linux OS for a long time, and decide (for what ever reason) to change/try Linux, you look for one that has a 'familiar look and feel.' In this regard, Linux offers many choices.

Comfort is a subjective 'state of mind' and can't be easily quantified. What is comfortable for one, may be a nightmare for another. In this regard too, Linux offers many choices. I've said this before, and so I'll say it again. Linux offers variants that range from nearly turn-key easy (install it, turn it on and use it) to 'kits' (remember those Radio Shack shortwave radio kits - got your soldering iron?) that require you to 'build it to your specifications' and so, require you to know the technical requirements of the hardware (and drivers) you intend to use it on.

Linux isn't a 'one size fits all' OS. Never was. Never will be. Desktop variants are the same.

[MoonRise]

Re: Why Kubuntu

I agree with budr. Well said indeed!

[beast2k]

Re: Why Kubuntu

Because Ubuntu (gnome) is boring, I had it installed for ages and to be honest I am sick of it. Don't get me wrong here, Ubuntu (gnome) works amazingly well and is rock solid but it's just so plain looking compared to Kubuntu (Kde4). For office use it's Ubuntu for home use it's Kubuntu + Kde4 all the way. IMHO

[Monster_user]

Re: Why Kubuntu

I picked Kubuntu because,...

* It is a Debian APT based distribution. Which means its easy to find, and install a wide variety of software.

* After having used KDE for years, I've feel kind of attached to it. (KDE 2.0 Mandrake 7.2, then Knoppix, then Xandros).
I've got not complaint against Gnome, in fact I enjoy using it, and often have a Gnome variation installed to keep up with the changes.

* It is more up-to-date than many other distributions I've used, has a better support wiki, and has an LTS edition. (Its bad when the LTS edition is more up to date than a competitor...)

[SCBrazil]

Re: Why Kubuntu

I used KDE on Slax and liked it.
I also liked the name 'Kubuntu' - a pretty futile reason I know but there you go.

[ktech]

Re: Why Kubuntu

I never liked Gnome's interface (interface counts a lot to me)

I like Kubuntu because of its looks. Updates in KDE cause a change in features not just bugfix like in GNOME see my thread here and Ubuntu fans replies
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1221645

Same thread here on Kubuntuforums
http://kubuntuforums.net/forums/inde...opic=3105295.0

[GilGib]

Re: Why Kubuntu

I was reading about how win7 looks like Kubuntu. So last march I installed Kubuntu 8.10 dual booting
with winxp. Now I have 2 computers running Kubunyu 9.04 . The third one still ha xp on it because
my wife is a semi-retired Chiropractor and I can't seem to find a linux chiropractic billing program.

By the way I used to use Unix at work back in the early 90's. Command line Only. I also used CPM-80,
Ms-Dos, and OS/2

[DanteAshton]

Re: Why Kubuntu

I've tried other distros. I've never really been able to feel that 'close' to them, if you know what I mean.

Mandriva, for instance, has a very disjointed user experience, at times you are covered in idiot-proof cotton wool, at other times your left stark naked on the sidewalk....ok, I think I need some sleep...going on..


Kubuntu has that fresh feeling about it, it dosent do much to KDE (which is all fine and dandy to me!) as everyone else seems to just modify KDE to their hearts content. I've been pretty much relient on user-friendly debian/ubuntu based distros. .rpm's, in my own experience, are far too difficult to use or understand.

Why KDE?

I've tried GNOME, I've tried XCFE...I need good apps, glitz and experimental technology, otherwise I don't feel 'home'. GNOME is far too conservitive for my liking, XCFE is far too minimlist (though beautiful, in it's own way)

Also, the default apps on KDE, Kopete; etc. are ruddy brilliant. I wasnt expecting applications that do their best to do the job, I was only really expecting applications to do it very basically...

[Monster_user]

Re: Why Kubuntu

I guess that depends on your definition of basic.

I guess it varies with different protocols, but in my experience Kopete falls short of its official Windows based competitors. Pidgin has seemed to advance slightly faster, but still lacking.

I haven't heard that Windows 7 looks like KDE. If anything it looks like Vista.

Windows 7 still has the same basic layout as Windows 2k/XP, although slightly tweaked in Vista and Windows 7, to add a more Mac like touch.

KDE has always been similar to Windows' desktop. This has been intentional, in keeping the same desktop paradigm, while enhancing the capabilities of the destkop.

[GreyGeek]

Re: Why Kubuntu

I began using Linux with RH 5.0 in May of 1998. In September of 1998 I switched to SuSE (I've forgotten the version number) and stayed with it for 22 purchased BOXED sets, until Novell bought SuSE and changed it to SUSE. Back then help forums were on UseNet. The first thing Novell did was to announce that those who bought SUSE could make only ONE archival copy of it IF they had written permission from some gal. They gave her name, email and phone number in the UseNet notice. I started a firestorm when I post a msg saying that the "one archive" rule was a violation of the GPL. Novell finally reversed themselves but i didn't stay around to find out. I began looking for another distro to call home.

I tried several interesting ones: LibraNet, Debian, Xandros (I am not against commercial distros or applications, only those which try to restrict my freedoms and rights), KNOPPIX, Kanotex, Mint, and settled on Mandrake 7 through 10, which blew optical drives when some folks tried to install it. I wasn't going to take a chance so I switched to Mepis 6. I was with Mepis about a year and left about the time they began building off of the Debian repositories, primarily because Woodford had to leave it for a while to support his family, and his absence showed. It was about then I found PCLinuxOS .p93, which was the first LiveCD which detected ALL of my hardware and "just worked". I stayed with PCLinuxOS nearly three years, through 2007 and left because TexStar was absent for almost a year because of the hurricane that hit Huston, and the distro showed it. He's back now, and last week I tried PCLinuxOS 2009.2, but the LiveCD wouldn't boot on this notebook. I went to Mandriva 2009 PWP when I purchased this notebook last August, and was with Mandriva from Aug 2008 til Feb 2009. I had to use VESA because Mandriva's Intel video driver couldn't turn on 3D accelerated video on the GM45 chip in this notebook. I filed a bug report in Sept or Oct with Xorg's bugzilla and was following its progress. They found a fix just as Kubuntu 9.04 ALPHA5 was released. Mandriva used KDE4.1.x and Jaunty featured 4.2.1. So I tried Jaunty to see how KDE 4.2.1, not anticipating that Jaunty LiveCD would set up 3D accelerated video on my notebook. When it did I was stunned. I also LOVED KDE4.2 and so I replaced Mandriva with Kubuntu.

On my notebook Jaunty was great from the start, but in the last 6 months Kubuntu updates have made Jaunty better and better. My Jaunty installation is running KDE4.2.4, the 2.6.30 kernel, has the "bleeding edge" GM45 configuration and is the fastest, most stable and beautiful desktop that I have ever used since I began using a PC (Apple ][+) in the Fall of 1978.


I spent the entire day today playing with Kubuntu 10.4 Karmic ALPHA3 running the LiveCD on this notebook and it has been running perfectly. It has KDE 4.3 and the 2.6.31 kernel. Karmic on this GM45 chip is giving me a video acceleration that is about all that this midrange GM45 can deliver. The sound, webcam, etc., all work. Nothing has crashed or hung. The only thing that hasn't worked is the knetworkmanager app. It won't accept a WPA-PSK password. Interestingly, using iwconfig in a konsole, the same problem exist.

There is another reason why I like Kubuntu, and it is the same reason why I like PCLinuxOS and MEPIS, besides the fact that they are excellent distros. The forums that support these distros have some important attributes:

• 1) The participants are very friendly, but repeated trolling is not tolerated
• 2) Bashing other distros or Windows, is frowned upon, although critical and thoughtful analysis of any of them is not,
• 3) The advice given is of the highest caliber, often EQUAL OR BETTER than that given on PAID support forums,
• 4) The forum software is topnotch and excellently maintained.

[abalone]

Re: Why Kubuntu

It helped that I had already figured out Xinerama and/or Twinview in Suse or Mandrake. It helped that I had ditched AOL and the Winmodem for DSL. It helped that I had an Nvidia card now. I was readier than before, I suppose.

And Ubuntu ran surprisingly well "out of the box". The text-mode installer was both responsive and beginner-friendly, and my hardware, by and large, ran. Not quite as well as in Windows after fishing for the usual half dozen+ official drivers... and distro version upgrades weren't safe, either... but the initial experience was positive. So when something went wrong I tried to fix it instead of just giving up on Linux again.

apt and Synaptic were a huge part of that, too. They sure beat RPM. And there's a lot of software in the official and unofficial repositories... and, by now, on third-party websites. Variety and comfort. (I did get a lot better at compiling from source -- but not everything works. (I just wish software weren't so incredibly version-dependent in Linuxland.))

Ubuntu Studio was the first prepackaged audio production environment I had encountered. Though it seems it hasn't had a stable rt kernel since Hardy. So if I did more with audio, I might switch or at least downgrade. I don't really want to juggle special purpose operating systems.

Anything else? Impatience, I suppose. There're so many things I have to try to get working every time just to find out if some distro works for me. It's tedious. So I stick with Ubuntu. (But I guess I could find room and try other distros on the side.)

As for KDE... I've always enjoyed it. Whether I wanted a Windows-like environment or an auto-hiding vertical panel or a menu-centric desktop without a taskbar, KDE could be turned into it with relative ease. And the features I wasn't using were still there, waiting. Even when I'm using Fluxbox I'm running Konsole, Kmail, Knode, Kate, Kopete... though I've never used Krita or Kword much.

(As for KDE 4... I haven't really made up my mind about it yet.)