this is more so for a comparison of kubuntu with ubuntu. like why did u ultimately choose to use kubuntu rather ubuntu when they seem to have the exact same features. im just unclear to the differences of the two.
-
-
-
Re: why did you choose kubuntu?
With all due respect I typically leave responses to the experts however I sense that in this case it is the neophyte and not the experts that should answer this one so here goes.
First let me say I came to Linux trying to emancipate myself from the clutches of Windows. I started with Ubuntu about 6 weeks ago and quickly fell into a bottom-less pit.
In my case I have 3 machines at home, I wanted to have my favourite programme or their equivalents at my finger tips, I wanted my printer, wireless router and Real player to work flawlessly, etc. Most important;y I needed to get "productive" quickly. Under Ubuntu I was struggling badly and was about to abort the experiment I even considered buying Linspire.
Next I upgraded to Kubuntu and quickly added the KDE environment, for some reason the guides seemed to work better, the interface was more stimulating and I was quickly able to get enough programmes on my desktop that I could work productively while learning to pull all the other pieces together. Kubuntu made me feel like I had all the benefits of windows without having to pay for crappy software.
Some of the imaged and sounds that my old Duron 800 delivered were the best I have seen and heard in over 5 years using this machine and to think I was going to relegate it to a file server.
If someone would add " but you could have done all of that in ubuntu" I would have no argument, I am simply saying Kubuntu worked for me.
Comment
-
Re: why did you choose kubuntu?
I used KDE on one of our boxes here at work and liked it over Gnome.
Too bad I cant get the system network vs proxy issues resolved (apt-get, Adpet dont seem to recognize proxy settings, so I cannot update - and I'm severely disappointed in the lack of apps, like Firefox, that the LiveCD did NOT include).
So much for showing how much easier it was to set up a Linux box than a win box.
Sorry guys, you (and me) killed Linux other than Redhat for a long time.
Comment
-
Re: why did you choose kubuntu?
Linux distros for me are basically a group of folks taking some interesting bits and creating an OS that suits their needs, moods, and even whims and ideals. I found I liked Ubuntu, but I really do not care for Gnome (never have, even though it gets better every release) so I gave Kubuntu a try when it was first announced iirc. Never looked back. I like the overall direction the Kubuntu desktop is going, as well as the basic setup it provides in terms of installed tools and apps. So firefox is not there by default, it *can* be installed afterwards (of course if you are behind a proxy, that is a whole different issue, but there are numerous threads about this in these forums, and more notably, ubuntu's forums)Comment
-
Re: why did you choose kubuntu?
For me and my friends that I have converted, it was we were getting BSD's in m$ all the time due to the fact that we like to tweek, m$ windows does not offer much flexability in this manner. I had played around in linux for a while sporatically with redhat and mandrake which can install both desktops and you choose at startup. I found that Gnome follows the old Mac ideal of simplicity and ease of use yet retains m$ thoughts of hiding system configs for ease of use, meaning to me "newbie that just wants a free system os and want it to work!"(which i am a newbie by all rights too) , to me KDE has been around a longer amount of time and it offers custimizations right from the get go, and its not all hidden or locked out by defualt. Plus Ubuntu really just wanted to set itself apart from the rest of the linux world which most choose KDE by defualt, so they choose gnome.
Love KDE man!!"Time fades even legend"<br />-Blood Omen: Legacy of KainComment
-
Re: why did you choose kubuntu?
I love KDE and I was using Mandrake at the time. Then I felt the need to upgrade KDE and Mandrake simply didn't cut it. So I searched for another linux distribution which offered a more recent release of KDE and offered frequent updates, which Mandrake/Mandriva couldn't offer.
So I searched a bit and finally I found Kubuntu 5.04. It was buggy (well, right now it still has it's fair share of showstoppers) but even then it was much better than Mandrake. So I sticked with it and since then I've been a faithfull Kubuntu user.
So, to sum things up. I never choosed between Kubuntu and Ubuntu. I looked for the best KDE distribution and I found it in Kubuntu. Simple as that.Comment
-
Re: why did you choose kubuntu?
I had ubuntu before. Then I was told that KDE is much better and "free of limitations", as gnome isn't as tweakable. So I decided to give Kubuntu a try.
Now... I am here... quite confused... Still thinking that Ubuntu is better, but I haven't checked all features of Kubuntu yet, so we'll see.
Just one comment of KDE. It's too darn windows look-a-like... Which irritates me a bit, but I hope to remake it so it will look much better.Comment
-
Re: why did you choose kubuntu?
I have been dabbling with various free operating systems on dev kit at home and at work for a few years now; BSD and LINUX primarily. I finally settled on LINUX and have been spending the past months getting to grips with various LINUX distros to help me make up my mind on which distro to go for. SuSE, RedHat, Mandrake(Mandriva), Gentoo, Ubuntu, Mepis, Xandros and Debian have all graced my dev kit in my search for the distro that best suits my needs.
On my travels through the world of LINUX I built up a little wish list for my optimum distro:
Nice and Hard - Debian Sarge is rock solid and secure
KDE - I've used Gnome, KDE and XFCE, KDE wins hands down for flexibility and eye-candy
WPA Wireless aware - It must to connect to my WPA1 wireless router at home
Core Apps only - I don't want every app under the sun, just the basics, I can augment later if necessary
A Good Package Manager - If I do want to install something I would prefer it to be relatively simple
Laptop-able - Must be able to recognise my laptop hardware
The only distro which meets all these needs, to my mind, is Kubuntu (+KNetworkManager), so a few weeks ago I took the plunge and moved LINUX from my dev box to my everyday/everything laptop.
My laptop is now totally Kubuntu-ed.
Where I previously had Windows XP I now have Dapper.
Outlook 2003 has been replaced by Thunderbird.
Firefox is Firefox.
Etc. Etc.
I had one or two problems when I first began setting up Kubuntu, primarily getting WPA to work, and at one point I almost threw in the towel and returned to Windows XP. After a little perserverence I overcame my wireless woes and am now quite happily Kubuntu-ing around the house and the garden. While I would not recommend LINUX for all, I do feel it is relatively easy to move from Windows to LINUX. It is not a painless process, but my primary PC is now Kubuntu-ed and I am quite happily working with LINUX as I previously worked with XP.
Kubuntu is great. Easy to use, even for a LINUX dabbler like myself."Computers can figure out all kinds of problems, except the things in the world that just don't add up." James MagaryComment
-
Re: why did you choose kubuntu?
I have a dual boot machine. (Ubuntu / Kubuntu) Both sides are Dapper. I just done this recently after kicking Win ME off of one Harddrive. I had Ubuntu on one drive and after Win ME left Kubuntu filled that drive. I was proficient enough in Ubuntu to want to experiment a little.
You can do the same thing with either OS.
Think of going on vacation. How do you want to get there? Ford or Chevrolet? Boeing or Aerobus? It don't matter how you get there as long as you get there. Your Choice. You decide. This is where Linux excels over Windows.If it's not broken, you're not learning anything!Comment
-
Re: why did you choose kubuntu?
It was Blue.
Seriously!
Okay, well blue is my favourite colour, and I just despised the Gnome orange/caramel theme. I know I could have altered Gnome very easily (I did so once or twice on the LiveCD) but Kubuntu was blue to start with.
Plus...I'd tried a couple of Linux distro's years back and just preferred using KDE to Gnome. It was 'windows' enough for me not to feel totally lost (Hey, I used the excellent Aston Shell on my WinXP machine for years, so I'm not totally dependent on MS' 'desktop chic'...) and from my investigations of the LiveCD it just had that extra sparkle to it, in terms of eye-candy, features and ease-of-use.
I actually ordered 1 of each CD from Ship-it, Ubuntu and Kubuntu, but I guess KDE won me over. I installed it last night and am DELIGHTED with it so far. It's sooooo fantastic to be excited about an OS: A huge change from being perpetually irritated by one!
Comment
-
Re: why did you choose kubuntu?
Some reasons why I picked out Kubuntu and KDE initially (I do not say finally because I'm still looking at my options. Don't you just love that about Linux?)
In no particular order:
1. Why Kubuntu: Actually, I didn't pick out Kubuntu immediately, but rather picked Ubuntu and Kubuntu at the same time. I wanted a distro that
a. came in one CD
b. had Live CDs available for download (one of the wonders of Linux)
c. offered both GNOME and KDE (unlike KNOPPIX)
d. easy to use. Judging from the comments from various sites/blogs/reviews, Ubuntu was growing to be a very popular and easy distro. My personal opinion about this "claim": the (my) jury is still out.
e. a great community. I've always been a believer in communities. I believe that a big open source project, such as a big Linux distro, will not survive for long without a strong and active community.
So basically, I chose the distro first before I tested the desktop environment. With Live CD's and Install CD's at hand, I was prepared to test the waters of GNOME and KDE. I ended up choosing KDE initially.
2.Why KDE: It was blue (like Grant). I've always liked Blue over any other color, if I had the choice. This color scheme is actually one of the few things that I actually liked about Windows XP (over the Win95 scheme). Of course, I can easily customize GNOME to be blue, but as they say, first impressions last. (This is, btw, not the most important factor in my decision)
3. Why KDE: Customizability and Themability (is there such a word?). One of the biggest reasons I chose to try out Linux and leave Windows was not spyware/viruses, or the questionable business practices of Microsoft. Rather, it was the power to do what I want with the system, and the promise/probability of being able to change it again and again in the future, with very little constraints. By no means am I a total computer newbie. I've had experiences with installing, configuring, and sometimes even fixing WIndows (regedit anyone?). But I'm (was) a total newb in Linux. But I didn't want to choose an environment that would be simple and easy for beginners, and stops there. I had enough of that in Windows. And I found GNOME to be like that. Of course, there's gconf-editor, but that requires a sys-admin to understand and use (sorry, venting out a bit of frustration). I found KDE to be perfect for my needs. I'm just one of those who see KDE's myriad of options as a sea full of fish to be harvested. And the experience of fishing is a rewarding one. Of course, one can go to the other extreme and just put in whatever is there. KNOPPIX, IMHO, is a fine example of that "clutter" for which KDE is so (unfairly) accused of. Sometimes, I think people who say that KDE is so cluttered have only seen KDE through KNOPPIX. I'd say they better try out Kubuntu. What clutter is there with having only one main menu (versus 3) and one panel (versus 2)? Sorry GNOME.
4. I'm a bit of a sucker for the underdog. Based on many things that I've read, KDE seems to have that position (until very recently). For one, it has been (almost) condemned by the venerable RMS during it's infancy. And even after the dust of legal issues settled down, some people seemed not to be satisfied without an "apology" from KDE. Another thing is that it is not a pet project of the FSF, which makes it less than substandard for those who adhere faithfully to the absolute spirit of the FSF. As such, KDE was forced to cruise the sea of open source-dom on its own, relying on companies such as Trolltech and Novell for its sustainance, which only reinforces it's image as not a very "pure" FOSS project. Of course, GNOME has been maligned as well (by no less than Linus Torvalds), but compared to KDE, it just suffered scratches. In a Linux world where many (not all, not even majority) people are Windows-haters, a DE that "looks like" Windows would really be a bit out of place. (MAJOR NOTE: this is a purely subjective rant).
So there you have it. The reasons I chose Kubuntu and KDE. Sorry for the long post/rant. At least I won't have to repeat myself when some posts a similar thread. I'll just link to this one.
Comment
-
Re: why did you choose kubuntu?
I have Kubuntu and Mepis using the same /home. Mepis after installation works out of the box (all necessary proprietary software installed, the best choice of programs and everything is pre-configured) It is the perfect distro for a newbie and for everyone who wants to work immediately.
The problem is that the future of Mepis is uncertain. Three developers and a small community...they work hardly but they cannot face all the problems that are presented to them everyday.
Kubuntu seems promissing. It is not the large core team and community, but Shuttleworth's money which makes things go faster. Woodford has a clearer and more realistic overview of the things but no money to pay developers and publicity.
So I am using two distros hoping to find a good solution to my linux problems. Maybe Mepis distro with support from the kubuntu community...
Comment
-
Re: why did you choose kubuntu?
KDE is just better than Gnome. It gives you more control over your desktop, and the apps are usually better than the Gnome alternatives. In fact with the exception of Kopete I always prefer KDE Apps. {I use gaim for IMs}.Comment
Comment