Urban Terror Forums: ubuntu vs. kubuntu - Urban Terror Forums

Jump to content

 Login | Register 
Advertisement
  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • This topic is locked

ubuntu vs. kubuntu Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   F for Fragging (old) Icon

  • Joined: 19-July 04
  • Posts: 290
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 04 April 2005 - 02:31 PM

I've used a lot of Linux distributions. SuSE Linux, Gentoo, Vidalinux, Debian and currently I've been using Fedora Core 3 for 4 months or so.

SuSE Linux, I used the Personal edition, didn't have much packages and didn't give me much freedom.

I didn't like Gentoo and it's user friendlier clone, Vidalinux, because it took me hours to compile a simple package like Firefox, even on my machine with reasonable specs (Athlon XP 2500+, 512 MB RAM).

I use Fedora now. I like it, but there aren't very much packages and there are way too much different APT repositories. Updates are slow because it's release oriented.

Debian was close to what I was looking for, but the problem that updates are slow and used very old versions of most software.

So I'm planning to switch to (K)Ubuntu. But the question for me is, should I get Kubuntu or Ubuntu? I'm using GNOME 2.8 on Fedora now, but I think that KDE is a better choice. For example, KDE software like AmaroK and Kaffeine seems to be a lot better than it's GNOME counterparts Rhytmbox and Totem.

So I was wondering, what are your experiences with Kubuntu and Ubuntu, and KDE 3.4 and GNOME 2.10 in specific?

I already tried out the Live CD's, but I'm not sure yet, that's why I'd like to hear your opinions.

#2 User is offline   SecretSauce (old) Icon

  • Joined: 07-February 04
  • Posts: 4
  • LocationHerndon, VA

Posted 06 April 2005 - 08:49 PM

Dunno about Ubuntu, or what the (K) is all about either.....you can load up whatever desktop / window manager you like on any distro. Well at least I mean it's _possible_ to do this, not saying it's easy for everyone. I don't run Debian (Gentoo guy) but i'm pretty sure they have versions that are as cutting edge as Ubuntu. SID/Sarge comes to mind. (go go gadget google, http://www.debian.org/releases/) Maybe give these a shot before switching to Ubuntu if it was the only thing that made you start looking?

As far as gnome vs kde.......well that's another thing similar to what distro to use and it comes down to this: personal choice. Everyone says there are things that make a distro better or worse than another, but these things usually boil down to their personal taste.

_My_ preference is KDE, due to some features that konqueror has that nautalis doesnt such as the right-click-copy/move-to-dir-tree and the ability to have a console imbedded into the file browser. I can change ownership/permissions faster by typing on that command line, but launch files faster by double-clicking so I get the best of both worlds. I just rebuilt my main workstation and tried running Gnome 2.8 for a few weeks (had been a few years and I wanted to see how much had changed) but after a while these small things I had grown accustomed to made me switch back to KDE. Also from my observation Gnome seems to keep alot more in memory than KDE, IE after running for a few days i'd be using something like ~500mb of ram with just a few apps open vs. the same thing in KDE being closer to ~250.

In the end it's your choice, hope this helps though.

#3 User is offline   F for Fragging (old) Icon

  • Joined: 19-July 04
  • Posts: 290
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 07 April 2005 - 12:50 PM

Kubuntu - http://www.kubuntu.org/ - is a version of Ubuntu - http://www.ubuntulinux.org/ - which uses KDE 3.4 as DE instead of GNOME 2.10 which is used by Ubuntu. Ubuntu is a fork of Debian Unstable BTW. I tried Debian some time ago, but I didn't like it.

Thanks for your response.

#4 User is offline   SecretSauce (old) Icon

  • Joined: 07-February 04
  • Posts: 4
  • LocationHerndon, VA

Posted 08 April 2005 - 04:36 PM

No problem.....guess no one else has any input?


:shock:

#5 User is offline   xfact0r Icon

  • Account: xfact0r
  • Main tag: p4*
  • Country:
  • Joined: 28-February 10
  • Posts: 185

Posted 13 April 2005 - 10:32 PM

Well, what can I say... Ubuntu has changed my life!!!

Previously tried almost every distribution out there: Red Hat, Suse, Gent0o, Mephis, Xandros, Mandrake, to name a few..
I had been using Mandrake for the past 2 years, but inside, I was still looking for the perfect distro, until a friend o mine gave his copy of Ubuntu. :?
I was a bit aprehensive being a single cd based distro, but he told me to go ahead, it was Debian based and had the latest version of Gnome (I believe that in Warty was 2.9). Hum, why not?

I'm glad that I tried it... the install took around 10 mins. after which it tested my net connection and downloaded around 300Mb of packages...
after that moment my life has changed forever!!... :lol:
In the meanwhile I already upgraded to Hoary (released last Friday) and what can I say more...
[list][*] Gnome 2.10.1
[*] installed later XFCE 4.2.1-1
[*] kernel 2.6.10.7
[*] xorg 6.8.2-10
[*] openoffice 1.1.3
[*] all the latest apps (XQF, tvtime, Gnomebaker, etc.)
[*] a great package manager (synaptic for the n00bs or apt-get for the 1337)
[*] automatic updates warnings
[*] rock solid performance and stability
[*] my best UrT companion :wink:
[*] I could keep up all night on this :oops:[/list:u]

:arrow: I will definately recommend you or anyone to give a go at Ubuntu!

bullet_loaderAdvertisement

#6 User is offline   illogical Icon

  •   verified user   
    Retired Master Server Administrator
  • Account: illogical
  • Main tag: 6th|
  • Country:
  • Joined: 08-March 10
  • Posts: 2,349

Posted 14 April 2005 - 09:21 AM

"kernel 2.6.10.7" ... That's not even close to current. But I guess for some people, keeping a current system is not a priority if it's a desktop and rebooted often. That or the Ubuntu team is slow ;-)

#7 User is offline   Woekele Icon

  •   former FS member   
    Public Relations
  • Account: woekele
  • Country:
  • Joined: 26-January 10
  • Posts: 11,575

Posted 14 April 2005 - 01:57 PM

Ye, I tried Suse, and thought: damn, Linux is too hard for me. Now I tried ubuntu and it was a lot easier imo.

#8 User is offline   F for Fragging (old) Icon

  • Joined: 19-July 04
  • Posts: 290
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 14 April 2005 - 06:17 PM

Well I've tried Kubuntu for a few days now. It is quite unstable (Konqueror crashes quite a lot, sometimes OpenOffice doesn't finish starting up, Kaffeine crashes) and it took a while before I figured out how I had to install java, flash, and other things (the method for KDE is different than what is wriitten in the unbuntuguide.org howto).

Also, there still is a problem which I encountered first when I was still using KDE - the problem wasn't there when I used GNOME - on SuSE 9.1. My desktop resolution is 1280 x 960, I play ET and Q3 in 1024 x 786. If I start ET/Q3 and then quit, my desktop is completely messed up (desktop doesn't "fit" on my monitor anymore, I can play ET and Q# fine though) if the desktop resolution is different from the resolution in ET and Q3. In ET and Q3 I can't choose 1280 x 960 reso, only 1280 x 1024, so I had to put a custom reso of 1280 x 960 in an autoexec.cfg, which fixed the problem of the desktop getting messed up after exiting.

Besides all the problems, I like KDE more than GNOME. Konqueror can do so much, it can be used as a file manager, web browser and ftp client. And amaroK and Kaffeine own their GNOME counterparts Rhytmbox and Totem. And KDE looks so good with the baghira theme (http://baghira.sourceforge.net/).

[quote name='"woekele"]Ye' date=' I tried Suse, and thought: damn, Linux is too hard for me. Now I tried ubuntu and it was a lot easier imo.[/quote']

That's good to hear. I can remember that you posted here some time ago, writing that Linux was to difficult for you. Have you decided to keep using it permanently now? BTW which SuSE version did you use? I used SuSE 9.1, and the installation process of SuSe 9.1 was a lot easier than (K)Ubuntu's installation IMO, even though it's a year older than (K)Ubuntu.

#9 User is offline   Woekele Icon

  •   former FS member   
    Public Relations
  • Account: woekele
  • Country:
  • Joined: 26-January 10
  • Posts: 11,575

Posted 14 April 2005 - 09:51 PM

The installation was easy for both, I think I used suse 9.1. In Suse I just couldnt get a firewall running decently (wich was very easy in Ubuntu), and some other stuff. Im still not using Linux on my main-PC. Still 'practicing' with it on my side-box.

The things I have the most problems with are prolly the simple things. Adjusting refresh-rate/making a menu in a panel, wich shows all the items on the desktop (like possible in WinXP).

#10 User is offline   FragginNewby (old) Icon

  • Joined: 07-February 04
  • Posts: 2,026
  • LocationKilladelphia, PA

Posted 15 April 2005 - 05:02 PM

I just installed Ubuntu last night in about an hour (yeah, less time that Windows normally takes). At 5:20 this morning, I got up and installed quake3... in 10 minutes, I installed Urban Terror during my current lunch break.

Ubuntu is friggin easy... easy enough for me to figure out!!

One question, I need some help with my file settings... I can write to my configs, so nothing is saved. Please help this Linux'Newby and tell me how to fix this? I'd appreciate it! I plan to install Teamspeak when I get home from work and hopefully will be gaming this evening on the "linux side" of my rig.

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • This topic is locked

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users

Advertisement


Copyright © 1999-2024 Frozensand Games Limited  |  All rights reserved  |  Urban Terror™ and FrozenSand™ are trademarks of Frozensand Games Limited

Frozensand Games is a Limited company registered in England and Wales. Company Reg No: 10343942