Kubuntu versus Ubuntu+KDE claim spotted on Slashdot

[fdv]

I was reading a topic on Slashdot about a new distro based on Kubuntu.
Buried in the comments was a claim agreed upon by three people, I wanted to ask here to see if it's utter BS or not...

It runs like this:

Although Kubuntu IS Ubuntu but just with KDE and not Gnome, you're better off installing Ubuntu and then KDE, instead of installing Kubuntu, because Kubuntu is buggier.

(I want to emphasize that this is not what I believe, I'm just asking.)

Is this utter crap? Is there an element of truth? There is no point in linking the posts, as no examples of what they're talking about are given. But it got me wondering since Ub and Kub are maintained by different folks.

Thanks for any input...

[dibl]

Re: Kubuntu versus Ubuntu+KDE claim spotted on Slashdot

This seems slightly more authoritative:

http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/kde-core

[kubicle]

Re: Kubuntu versus Ubuntu+KDE claim spotted on Slashdot

Is there an element of truth?

Depends on what they mean.

If they mean to install a server version (no GUI) of ubuntu (or kubuntu) and then installing 'barebone' kde on top of it, then possibly. Note you can use the kubuntu server installation just as well as ubuntu. (This way the kubuntufications of kde, good or bad, won't get installed...along with additional software. Only recommended if you're familiar with kde/linux, so you can edit the 'barebone' kde installation to your liking)

If they mean installing full blown ubuntu (with gnome) and then kubuntu-desktop on top of it, then it's not likely. As the basic system is the same, you'll just end up with (k)ubuntu with both gnome and kde (which is great if you want to test both desktops, but takes a lot more space and can leave you with some clutter and multiple applications for the same tasks)

[clickwir]

Re: Kubuntu versus Ubuntu+KDE claim spotted on Slashdot

I would have to disagree with them. 1) they don't site any specifics. So it's just fud for all I care. 2) I've been using Kubuntu just fine since Dapper (testing Feisty now) and have used advise from the Ubuntu and Kubuntu forums.

Anytime I've ever looked for help and it said it was for Ubuntu, I had no problem applying the exact same fix to Kubuntu.

I believe their fud is misdirected.

I've installed Ubuntu and then added kdesktop to it, and installed just straight kubuntu. By the time I get to installing the common apps I use and all their dependencies, it's almost exactly the same anyway.

Everything has bugs, just because some no name posted on a website that something is "buggy" doesn't mean jack ****. Unless they can list their specific gripes and have an intelligent discussion about them and honestly try to fix their issues, they are full of ****.

[claydoh]

Re: Kubuntu versus Ubuntu+KDE claim spotted on Slashdot

yeah, its rubbish it is slashdot after all .
Installing Ubuntu then kubuntu-desktop (or Kubuntu then installing Ubuntu-desktop) does not fix any bugs that may exist for the most part.

if KDE has a bug in a program, nothing in Gnome is going to alleviate that, and vice versa. BUT one desktop's tool might be better/easier at configuring a device or something, thats about it really

[slackrat]

Re: Kubuntu versus Ubuntu+KDE claim spotted on Slashdot

I'd have to say as far back as warty , that i tend to have less trouble running kde on ubuntu......tho there have been ubuntu releases that paled in comparison to kubuntu releases since then tho, as well....

lets face it, ubuntu' s focus and user base had a major head start......whats more, in my opinion, theres no real need to call k/x/ubuntu three distros when they dont bother having three redhat versions based on DE, or three or four suse releases.....like xuse, guse and kuse??

for me , kubuntu means kde on an ubuntu engine, with gnome apps not included till you install them, tweaked to make a pleasant and efficient kde based experience. I also think that having three or more ubuntus on places like distrowatch is confusing........as if ubuntu were forking from itself instead of simply offereing choices of desktops. Even the slax based mutagenix, with two dev teams for gnome and kde respectively dont change their name to kutagenix and gutagenix. Its probably better PR to say when promoting kubuntu that its number two on the distro hit list, rather than count forum hits etc and prove that 'ubuntu' is miles ahead of ubuntu tailored for kde users. Six of one, half dozen of the other.

As a kde fan, i frequent the place (here) where my kde oncerns are dealt with, but i was never under the impression (nor do most canonical reps on any of the distro versions imply) that they are different or separate distros when xfce, gnome , flux and more are all apt-able.......and dont forget, most distros based on kde in the past year or so were a bit buggy thanks to kde changes etc......

Tho I rarely boot into gnome or xfce , i install them if i have room for the variety and options they provide, and prefer loading my kubuntu off dvd versions containing all three desk tops....

<end of mini rant> :-P

cheers