Ubuntu: What's so marvelous about it?

[jæd]

Not trying to say you're wrong or anything, but IMHO there's little to differentiate between alot of distributions these days, and I find it a little odd that these guys seem to enjoy bashing ubuntu when I can't really see any important differences...

Some people find it easier to "bash" something then do something creative... If something is successful then its more of a target...

 

[jæd]

Distro evangelism is fucking mega-boring.

Yep... But then a lot of people use Windows. And I think the idea of downloading an distro that is tailored to your particular needs, yet is compatible with other distros, is a bit strange to some...

Heck... In the past I've worked at places that had their own distro...

 

[stdPikachu]

Heh, as long as a distro has apt/dpkg I'm usually happy

I do find Ubuntu has better out-of-the-box support for ACPI/laptops and stuff than Debian though, which is why I use it as such. Debian still rules the roost for servers, although I preferto stick to the stable distribution.

The main reason I went down the gentoo route is that, at the time, certain apps were much easier to install, particularly the "restricted" stuff like Java and multimedia codecs. There was also a certain amount of attraction in that it does very little hand-holding (although the broken-by-default packages are damned annoying) in that it kinda forced you to go in there and learn the nuts and bolts of things.

I usually find rolling your own distro is a bit overkill, it's usually easier to just have your own apt repository that'll pull down customised versions of things (although this can play havoc with dependencies, dpeending on your needs).

 

[Junglist]

Maybe your right, I'm a noob so I dunno.


What I do know is that the Linux community have GOT to come up with better font rendering because at the moment it is just horrible, this is the main thing that stops me from using it full time, 10 minutes of browsing using Linux gives me really bad headaches because the fonts are so bold and blurry, I've tried using the MS fonts but they really don't make that much difference.

I would of thought that the amount of money some of these major distro people are worth (Mark Shuttleworth - £400 Million), surly he and others could club together and make font rendering as good as Windows since Linux is getting more sophisticated and starting to rival MS/Apple.

 

[jæd]

What I do know is that the Linux community have GOT to come up with better font rendering because at the moment it is just horrible, this is the main thing that stops me from using it full time, 10 minutes of browsing using Linux gives me really bad headaches because the fonts are so bold and blurry, I've tried using the MS fonts but they really don't make that much difference.

I'd be checking your Font settings, as well as Display settings... Here at work we have people (myself included) who use Ubuntu eight hours a day...

 

[jæd]

Maybe your right, I'm a noob so I dunno.

Perhaps post up on stuff you do know about...? Just a thought...

 

[Iam]

Heh, as long as a distro has apt/dpkg I'm usually happy

Yep, I'm with that. It doesn't get any better, imo.

I've been using Yum this week (VMWare ESX servers built on FC3) and it's nasty.

 

[stdPikachu]

What I do know is that the Linux community have GOT to come up with better font rendering because at the moment it is just horrible, this is the main thing that stops me from using it full time, 10 minutes of browsing using Linux gives me really bad headaches because the fonts are so bold and blurry, I've tried using the MS fonts but they really don't make that much difference.

How do you mean bold and blurry? I've always found Linux font support to be streets ahead of windows (in fact, font rendering was incredibly broken in windows up until Vista came out - try running XP with your fonts at a "non-standard" DPI setting), although it's not quite up to OSX standards yet. But Linux fonts have been pretty solid since the big X > Xorg migration of yesteryear IMHO - distributions picking daft/ugly default fonts is another matter of course.

Are you using an LCD screen? Have you tried enabling or disabling sub-pixel rendering (aka ClearType) as per your preferences? Dive into your font configuration thingy and see what settings you have available.

Yep, I'm with that. It doesn't get any better, imo.

I've been using Yum this week (VMWare ESX servers built on FC3) and it's nasty.

Tell me about it, dealing with RHEL/ESX here is a bit of an arse, blech.

Cool Thing About Apt pt. 94: if you compile a custom package from source in compliance with Debian's policy, apt is clever enough to figure out when an official version of the same package is added to the repositories and will offer to upgrade it for you

 

[Stig]

You installed Linux on your girlfriends Laptop! Let me get this straight: you want to keep your girlfriend and your methodology for this is going to be to make your good self the only person who can possibly support her computer - is this right?

Just seen this.


*waves fist at rich!*



(I can't actually complain, I have been provided with a dual-boot. I could fire up the windows side, but I much prefer to fiddle and whinge. )

 

[Junglist]

Perhaps post up on stuff you do know about...? Just a thought...

I know what I like so ner.

stdPikachu; I ahev just found this pic after Googling "disabling sub-pixel rendering", this is how I want my fonts, these are really good, in fact they look better than Windows fonts! - http://jaganath.files.wordpress.com/2006/11/after-cleartype.png

Yes I am using an LCD screen, could it be a graphics problem do you think? Maybe my card cannot handle fonts like in the above pic? (Intel GMA 950).

I have tried playing with sub-pixel rendering but it just makes it look either more blurry or less blurry.

EDIT: I can get actually get them close to this, but it's still not as good as the posted example - http://www.fishpool.org/public/Illustrations/font_rendering.png

 

[spudulike]

Yes I am using an LCD screen, could it be a graphics problem do you think? Maybe my card cannot handle fonts like in the above pic? (Intel GMA 950).

I have tried playing with sub-pixel rendering but it just makes it look either more blurry or less blurry.

Have you pressed "auto adjustment" on your LCD? X probably uses a different refresh rate to Windows, though you can change it if you want.

 

[Junglist]

No I don't have any of those buttons on my screen, I have a laptop and from what I hear the refresh rate is always 60hz for TFT monitors.

 

[rich!]

No I don't have any of those buttons on my screen, I have a laptop and from what I hear the refresh rate is always 60hz for TFT monitors.

the people you are hearing from are illinformed, I suspect. It's not one of those computing mags they sell in newsagents, is it?

 

[stdPikachu]

OK, after zooming into that image it looks like sub-pixel rendering is enabled.

How you enable it or check it on your machine will depend on the distro and desktop environment you're using - if you're using KDE, you'll find the options under KDE control centre > appearance and themes > fonts > anti-aliasing > use sub-pixel hinting - ten to one your screen is using the standard RGB layout.

Bear in mind that fronts won't appear completely smooth on an LCD that's low resolution (typically below 1280x800). Also bear in mind that some fonts work better with anti-aliasing and sub-pixel hinting than others.

I'm also using an Intel GMA 950, so that shouldn't be any problem for you.

 

[Junglist]

Thanks mate will try that in a bit. What if your refresh rate? Is it 60hz and does your graphics display has a Intel 945 instead of 950?

 

[stdPikachu]

Refresh rate is 60Hz yeah, it's pretty standard for LCD's but not universal (expect a big song'n'dance over how you all have to get new 100Hz LCD TV's to occur over the next few months).

Dunno where you mean is "displays" as an i945, it uses the i810/intel driver and is detected as follows:

00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Mobile 945GM/GMS/940GML Express Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)
00:02.1 Display controller: Intel Corporation Mobile 945GM/GMS/940GML Express Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)

The i945 is simply their mobile version of a chipset that contains the GMA 950 graphics adapter.

 

[Iam]

if you're using KDE

You're a wrongun'.

 

[stdPikachu]

You're a wrongun'.

Anyone happy with Gnome is obviously in need of psychiatric help

 

[Signal 11]

^ You're both right.

</xfce fanboy>

 

[Junglist]

Ok forget what I said about PCLOS being easier than Ubuntu, I;ve avtually got it installed now and it's loads better, well Gnome is better, I think I prefer Ubuntu actually. Fonts are alright as well, need a tad tweaking though.

Excuse my idiotic contradicting weirdness.

 

[cybershot]

Get PCLinuxOS, it's tons better:

It's much easier to use than Ubuntu, it supports loads of hardware, has a whole load of software (I really mean a load as well) you can install using it's Synaptic package manager (automatic download and installation of software without using the command line), Kernel upgrades and be done just by clicking a couple buttons (installs via Synaptic again) it's really good, I love it! It's so clean and detailed looking, fast loading and perfect for someone looking to come from Windows (or Unbuntu ) and is very stable. Has a good community of people that will help you out but I think their IRC channel is way better, always got PCLinuxOS pros on there willing to lend a hand.

Take a look at this http://www.lockergnome.com/nexus/it/2007/04/26/pclinuxos-and-ubuntu-examined/

http://www.pclinuxos.com/

p.s. You might as well download it and give it a try because it is actually a live CD and you have the choice of installing when you get in to the Desktop.

EDIT: And as said in the Locker Gnome article, Ubuntu is more for an Intermediate-beginner (I'm a total n00b). I think PCLinuxOS is the perfect stepping stone in to the world of Linux, I think the next step after that is Ubuntu, but that's my opinions.

Must admit, I like the magazine thing they have going on there. For Linux noobs that's pretty ideal.

 

[stdPikachu]

Ok forget what I said about PCLOS being easier than Ubuntu, I;ve avtually got it installed now and it's loads better, well Gnome is better, I think I prefer Ubuntu actually. Fonts are alright as well, need a tad tweaking though.

Glad you got it sorted! The great thing about all this stuff being free is that there's usually very few barriers in between switching distributions. If my gf's laptop was anything to go by, sub-pixel hinting wasn't enabeld by default in ubuntu (some people like it, some don't - it can make text appear too fuzzy, depending on your LCD).

 

[jæd]

Ok forget what I said about PCLOS being easier than Ubuntu, I;ve avtually got it installed now and it's loads better, well Gnome is better, I think I prefer Ubuntu actually. Fonts are alright as well, need a tad tweaking though.

Excuse my idiotic contradicting weirdness.

Wait until you see Beryl (the 3d fx thing) lots of tweaking to be done there. With most Linux Distros, once you've got the thing installed you can spend all morning tweaking the Window Manager settings...

(And the handy thing is its actually quite easy to copy them across to a new machine)

 

[jæd]

the people you are hearing from are illinformed, I suspect. It's not one of those computing mags they sell in newsagents, is it?

People still buy computer mags from newsagents...?

 

[stdPikachu]

Wait until you see Beryl (the 3d fx thing) lots of tweaking to be done there.

If he can hold fire on Beryl, Compiz Fusion is meant to be a standard part of Ubuntu from 7.10/Gutsy onwards, (hopefully) doing away with having to futz around with enabling it.

People still buy computer mags from newsagents...?

People on dial-up might...? But yeah, the information and software (particularly where Linux is concerned) is typically very out of date by the time the mag is published...