Recently i was testing Ubuntu 9.10 Beta and then i tested 11.2’s GNOME. And i must say that Ubuntu’s GNOME implementation is a lot more polished than SUSE’s. And while i do not intend to move to gnome or Ubuntu then i must say it looks really nice and can understand Ubuntu’s gnome users saying that Ubuntu is so nice. Fortunatelly i am hooked up to KDE 4.3.1 and am never going back to gnome
State your experiences with Ubuntu’s gnome implementation.
P.S. It is funny that despite linux division in Novell gaining more money every year they still have so few people to work on it… We can see what a good team can do to the distro if they concentrate on something (Ubuntu and gnome). I really consider running Ubuntu 9.10 in a virtual machine to check it.
You’re right, i missed the k in the question. I am not intending to try kubuntu as their implementation of KDE was always lousy as hell. For me SUSE got great KDE, YaST that kicks ass and lots of repositories i could use
I tried last time kubuntu in 9.04 but it feels underloved lol!
While KDE in ubuntu sucks then i must say Gnome shines. And i must admit they are going in the right direction with that distro.
P.S. Oh, one thing, i would really like to see openSUSE become a deb distro
So you really want a package format which had no real improvements for years (maybe there were some changes in the last few months/one year)and gives a lot of problems with consistency if one of the scripts is failing?
Search Debian/*Buntu forum of your choice for that, you will find a lot of funny threads which could be resolved in rpm with one command.
It’s simple. If you like GNOME and hate KDE, by all means use Ubuntu. If you are a KDE fan and hate GNOME, then use openSUSE, or Kubuntu.
By the way, the implementation of KDE 4.3 in Kubuntu 9.10 (the upcoming version) seems nice.
Judging from your nickname you are using Ubuntu ;)??
I know that starting a “flamewar” like deb vs. rpm is useless so i am sorry for that, it may be my ignorance and lack of knowledge about both formats, their advantages and disadvantages.
I will have to learn a bit about differences of both formats then i can talk about it. I know that having any format of packages is better than having none
Anyway, gnome in Ubuntu is a lot nicer than in SUSE, i must admit it. And their new software center is also quite nice. Searching for applications in SUSE may create a headache if someone has lots of applications lol!
About 2 months ago I uninstalled Suse/KDE and reinstalled it with Gnome. Added a few old faves from KDE but just a very few. I was sick of the delays and frustrations of the developing KDE4. I’m not bad-mouthing KDE4, just frustrated it’s taking so long to mature. There’s so much I want to do and KDE slows me down. So three cheers for all the guys with time to test and report and help integrate KDE4 into Suse.
The point of my post is that I really don’t envy the KDE users who just want to get on with their day to day I.T. tasks; and I really like Gnome because it “just works”.
Yes, i must agree that when i had gnome everything worked, it is because their way of slowly implementing stuff (in fact, with every release they didn’t implement much (in my honest opinion), not everyone has to agree with me ). While KDE devs gave us a revolution that had to evolve to meet our expectations I guess they have achieved their goal at last.
In one way gnome is great for businesses which need stability, gnome can deliver this. One bad thing about gnome is it’s heavy use of Mono (i know, it is good etc. BUT for example Banshee uses parts of Mono that are not covered by Microsofts Community Promise, nevermind that i’m just looking for something to complain about;))
Now KDE, till 4.2 it was pure crapiola, till KDE 4.2 i was using gnome (and testing KDE from time to time to check how it is doing). It is good for KDE that they can look at something they created and try to match it or be even better (KDE 3.x), it is like a base to start. I think they achieved their goal and are moving forward in an astonishing pace. I guess KDE 4.4 won’t be such a great leap forward as earlier but it will surely bring us the stability we always needed
This is complete nonsense. First you need to understand what they are comparing. What they are doing is comparing apt to rpm. That is comparing apples to oranges. OK? To do this right you need to compare dpkg and dselect to rpm. From a users point of view, you can still end up in dependency hell whether it’s deb or rpm. The main reason in rpm distros is because of the different rpm distros, mandriva, fedora, openSUSE, and so on, each make their own rpms, and own scripys and file names and places. This is just enough to throw it off. With deb distros, they are all based on deb, so no differences. At least not enough to cause dependency hell on the debian side.
So if we’re going to compare package managers…like apt to something else, try apt to zypper. apt can’t stand up to zypper. Feel free to compare apt to other package managers.