What does /g/ think of Ubuntu?
>>52032011
It's okay as long as Unity isn't included.
Best loonix for beginners and people that want an out of box experience that just works.
>>52032023
But that's objectively not true. Mint is just as newbie-friendly and far more similar to Wangblows out of the box.
>>52032030
it doesnt have to be similar to windows to be good for beginners
Unity is okay, and is honestly one of the best DEs available for people switching for Windows based on personal experience, where I've transitioned my entire family over to Ubuntu Linux after getting sick of cleaning their virus infested Windows installs.
Personally I use Xubuntu, which is fucking great.
>>52032030
I'm speaking anecdotally here again, but in my personal experience, I've seen my family have a much easier time adjusting to Unity than Cinnamon. Though this was also back when Cinnamon was relatively new and unstable, so maybe it's gotten better.
>>52032128
Xubuntu 4 life
>>52032084
Don't be stupid. Almost everybody trying Linux for the first time will have had experience with Windows beforehand. A similar UI to what they're used to is always going to make it easier for somebody to adapt.
>>52032128
With respect, your anecdotal evidence is utterly meaningless. Go into extensive detail about the problems your family members had with Cinnamon, and how those problems were solved by Unity. Explain at length the amount of knowledge and experience you offered on each one, and how that may have tainted your family members' experiences. Provide a timeline of how long they spent using each environment, as well as their personal thoughts on each.
Otherwise fuck off.
>>52032201
Damn man you need to chill out a bit. Not saying you're argument is invalid, but relax.
>>52032030
>>52032128
Linux scrub who put xubuntu on a cheap thinkpad 420 I got for 100 bucks here.
Xubuntu is fucking beautiful
>>52032276
His argument became invalid as soon as he was a cunt in all fairness.
>>52032201
It's been a few years and I haven't bothered going back. Most of the problems revolved around UI inconsistencies and Cinnamon itself crashing regularly. They also weren't fond of the way Cinnamon's application menu was organized. In particular, my thought is that it's an issue of what each UI seeks to accomplish.
Cinnamon seeks to emulate Windows XP. Windows XP is the very operating system I would be fixing for these people on a weekly basis because they would constantly break it. Not only with viruses but by accidentally messing with UI elements that they didn't realize they could change so easily by accident. Unity on the other hand was made with huge, easily visible icons and a design language built around being simplistic enough to easily teach somebody with no experience with computers. The non-customizable nature of Unity made it such that they wouldn't be accidentally changing things around, removing toolbars by mistake and similar minor user errors.
Is that detailed enough? Or do I need to write a 1200 word thesis in triplicate before it's detailed enough?
>>52032303
Old Linux user who likes shit to work.
Xubuntu is fucking quite nice.
>>52032011
It's shit because of the Linux part.
>>52032011
It's what you should use unless you're an edgy kid who hates mainstream stuff.
I am a old Linux user that recently went from Arch to Ubuntu gnome. It's a good distro when you need something to work. Or if you need something stable for your grandmother
>>52032644
GNOME3 is too heavy lad
MATE has the same functions for 1/3 of the CPU/RAM use
It's okay for windows users that don't want to use windows anymore.
I like it, it's stable, has a decent server install, does ppas and is basically the closest thing there is to a standard distro. That last point alone is very valuable.
>>52032011
Xubuntu is the best OS I have ever used.
It's what you use if you're very insecure and afraid of being called a nerd among nerds. Otherwise, you don't touch it because of its chronic NIH syndrome and instability, and use fedora instead.
>>52032023
A lot of people like to parrot ubuntu marketing, and a lot of people install ubuntu and never touch linux again because ubuntu is shit.
Oh yes, unity is well designed (or would be if it supported legacy system tray apps under X11 instead of breaking them due to shuttleworth's autism), but sotware-wise, it's a monkey-coded compiz-based crapshoot and won't reliably work on hardware configurations that KDE and GNOME work fine on.
And then you have the "stable" packages, in-development software pulled out of debian sid, hastily fixed, and then frozen without a word from upstream on the matter
>>52033415
that's an abomination compared to vanilla XFCE
looks like cinnamon, geez
>>52033533
I was going for the Windows 7 look but okay. I am trying to feel at home after switching.
Great upstream, middling distro. It "sucks", just because the derivatives are so great. Still better than Windows.
Really just needs a "windows mode" checkbox at install to give it a classic start menu so normies like my mom can use it. Put Lubuntu on it and she handles it just fine.
>>52033569
For normies there is Xubuntu and Lubuntu. Both are easy.
Nowadays I prefer to get the 40mb minimal CD to first clean install core with updates and then put on a clean DE like Xfce. This avoids the bloat from the manufactured ISO's which I absolutely hate. There is significant difference and improvement in performance when I compared Xubuntu ISO and my method of net install.
>>52033548
that's OK I guess, just make sure not to break it.
>>52033635
Its still vanilla, only Numix theme with Compton.
Shit until it plays all muh gaymes at 100% performance as windows
>>52033415
Xubuntu is literally ubuntu with xfce
>>52033675
>all muh games
elaborate "all". wine and playonlinux have a compatibility list of all the games currently supported. it also shows any glitches to watch out for and how well they run. A gold or platinum rated game is 1:1 with Windows if you have a decent GPU.
>>52033706
Yes. I like Ubuntu core but not Unity. All my games and software work on Ubuntu so I stick with it.
>>52032011
A good containment distro for entry level linux users.
>>52033760
>containment
most people don't give a shit about arch linux and fedora.
>>52033415
Personally, I prefer deskbar mode. Only thing that still needs fixing is the Steam logo. I've already fixed the clock so it looks better than it does in this screenshot.
>>52033732
I'm a Debian master race but I favor this way of thinking.
>>52033327
Yes, sure.. I just like the way Gnome 3 looks and behaves. MATE is great as well with less resources of course. but I can afford to waste resources even on my old laptop.
>>52033842
Gnome 3 rapes battery on laptops. Personal experience even with tlp, 20% brightness and whatnot, it only gives me 2.5hr battery life.
Xfce I get 5-6hrs without tlp or any shenanigans just like Windows.
>>52032011
People say it's the most user friendly of Linux distros, but I disagree. It's certainly aesthetically pleasing. On the other hand, Debian is the most straight forward imo. Debian builds tend to be my favorite
9.04 was boss, i installed it over windows and did the same for my mothers laptop and she loved it. after that it just got worse. current edition of ubuntu is the most garbage i have ever ran on a computer. it runs like shit on my laptop while windows 10 is fast as hell.
>>52033954
Its a disease that plagues free software just like it did with Firefox. They have a nice working system that people like and they decide to fuck it all up by adding bloat and useless features instead of fixing the problems and improving quality.
There is an issue with Realtek Wifi/Bluetooth adapters that is lingering since 11.04 and I even submitted a report about this issue, till today I cannot connect to my wifi normally.
>>52032303
same
xfce is pretty great
>>52033988
realtek wireless has always been a problem since my first time installing ubuntu when 9.04 came out. when i was a noob i would have to spend hours looking for a driver or a command to get it semi functional. even then my wifi would drop out all the time. my moms toshiba had no problems though.
as for firefox, it used to be decent for a immediate default browser but its always sucked.
My experience with GNU/Linux started with Ubuntu. For beginners it is the best distro. But unity sucks. Ubuntu mate or mint would be better.
>>52032201
Holy shit this is probably the most autistic post I've ever read on this board.
Unity is horrible -- menu at the top or integrated with window bar is ridiculous, themes provided are looking quite weary for almost 2016, horrible set of outdated packages based on Debian snapshot in time... Notifications at the top right are positioned too low...
>>52032011
Dropped mainline Ubuntu once Unity hit and never looked back. Upgraded my system, my nice Gnome 2 config was gone, first thing I did was to install XFCE.
when I found out MATE was a thing, switched to that for a bit, and then switched back to XFCE a few versions later and never looked back
>>52032303
This. Xubuntu is great.
>>52032011
It's wild, it's easy, it's free, and VERY American!
My favourite distro for installing Gentoo.
Mint vs Xubuntu?
>>52032011
Its a solid distro for desktop use. It really does everything a typical desktop user could want to do.
>>52034406
Menu at the top is objectively superior. Faster to click/reach and takes up less screen space compared to displaying multiple menus at once.
>>52032128
> xubuntu
This was my first Linux distro. I loved it so much and it just worked. I ran it for a few years and never had a single problem with it. IMO its the best OS for day to day use, even for a normie.
>>52032307
Not invalid necessarily, but just far less persuasive.
>>52034800
Xubuntu will always have a special place in my heart because I used it for about 2 years in uni, and it worked perfectly. That being said, I'm using Debian with gnome now and it also works great.
>>52034762
If your mouse pointer is already in the application it's faster to access an in-window menubar
But menus are terrible anyways. That's why everyone uses toolbars and a search feature to access menu items. OS X did it first, unity did it second, and it's pretty useful. Like an emacs M-x.
>>52032011
debian with bloatware preinstalled
if you want something that "just werks", fedora.
It's an os
>>52034753
Xubuntu, always Xubuntu.
Xfce by itself is great but you need a nice core as well that is up-to-date with packages and easy to install, hence Xubuntu.
Mint > Ubuntu
>>52034800
Xubuntu is so nice that it still has me under the line of thought that even if I tried Windows on this laptop, it'd probably run worse and drain more battery.
>ITT: all this Xubuntu shills
>>52033812
That is a really nice wallpaper, care to share m8?
>>52032011
Ubuntu is shit
Xubuntu is great for beginners though
>>52034902
>fedora
>just werks
do they include non-free drivers nowadays?
>>52034958
The lack of feature like auto detection and auto configuration of connected monitor prevents me using xfce
>>52032011
It's pretty good equally for beginners and
>>52035975
maybe because it's a good os?
>>52037081
Xubuntu is shit because of ancient and nonflexible window manager
>>52039212
Which one are you talking about? IceWM?
>>52035975 -> >>52039197
BTFO
Getting Xubuntu 15.10 as we type. Should I go for it or get the LTS?
the hate Unity gets here is unreal. Sure it's bloated as fuck but the user experience out of the box is the best. Cinnamon is alright, but the other DE are either pants on heads retarded or good but feel like I'm using something from the 2000s
>>52039291
Thunar, an ancient demon of fuckups
>>52039332
>the user experience out of the box is the best
I don't think so
XFCE is better even out of the box
>>52039332
It's really not the best. Kubuntu offers a better experience by far. The problem is both DE's need 5 billion petabytes of RAM to work well. In the "Reasonable RAM usage" department, XFCE and MATE are kings.
>>52039374
thunar is a file manager. also why would anyone hate on thunar?
>>52039310
Go for 15.10... LTS is only useful for people who run servers and can't handle a bug or two. But you end up with old software.
I run Ubuntu Mate on my x220 and it's awesome
>>52039426
Thunar is not very stable/easy to use, compared to Caja for instance. But that's really all I have against it. It just werks 90% of the time.
>>52039453
I find Ubuntu MATE very ugly OOTB. Also, no "Store" pre-installed? Only complaints against it tho.
>>52039477
why would a nautilus fork be better than thunar? do you have any examples for "not very stable/easy to use"?
>>52039426
1. Thunar is crude
2. Thunar cannot remember last window position
3. Thunar cannot open folder in new window with doubleclick
4. If you ripp off Thunar from Xubuntu, the whole point of Xubuntu is lost.
Best option for beginners. Just unity blows. Ubuntu was my first distro.
>>52039444
thanks m8
>>52039477
>It just werks 90% of the time
Enjoy le smart placement of windows
>>52039509
Nothing I can actually show you, but I've broken Thunar several times (on purpose or not). Caja: never.
>>52039515
>1. Thunar is crude
subjective
>2. Thunar cannot remember last window position
why would it need to? don't you snap it to borders anyway?
>3. Thunar cannot open folder in new window with doubleclick
true, one middleclick is default (it's also more logical)
>>52039585
>why would it need to?
to me it is essential. i don't want to chase windows all around desktop.
>>52039585
>true, one middleclick is default (it's also more logical)
that is subjective anon. if linux is flexible, remember? I WANT DOUBLECLICK! I WANT CHOICE!
>>52032011
It's Debian + botnet, so why you wouldn't use Debian?
>>52039612
then thunar is not the right filemanager for you, doesn't make thunar bad though.
>>52039651
pretty sure you can change it in some config or something. and i think it's more logical because all major web browsers use middleclick for opening stuff in new tab.
>>52039694
i personally use debian but i don't think debian is suitable for completely new users and tech-illiterates. you need to be able to read if you want to use debian.
