Welcome to the Linux Foundation Forum!

KopenSUSE? :/

itbcn8 Posts: 23

I'm not a Linux Guru, let's just make that clear right now :) But I'm trying to learn as much as I can.

So there is KDE and GNOME, the two "major" desktop environments.

Other distros like Fedora and OpenSUSE don't change their names when difirentiating between GNOME Fedora and KDE Fedora (I think at at least, correct me if I'm wrong).

But the Ubuntu guys have Kubuntu!?! Which is Ubuntu but with KDE?? But it's the same distro??

This is so confusing. Maybe someone can explain it to me... Maybe it has to do with the Ubuntu's "theology".

But if they can do it, I want to coin the term Kopen SUSE :P


  • LegacyUser
    LegacyUser Posts: 0
    Kubuntu is just Ubuntu but with KDE as default desktop with custum thems for Kubuntu.
    You can install Ubuntu with Gnome and switch to KDE without any problem. The apt repositories are the same.
  • abrenar
    abrenar Posts: 117
    You are asking why some applications are not changing their names even their are default running in KDE and gnome likewise ubuntu they change their name in the sense that the user can easily identify what is the main features of an Ubuntu Distro.

    Kubuntu = Kde
    Ubuntu = Gnome
    Edubuntu = for Education, for teachers and pre-schoolers
    Xubuntu = Xfce Desktop Environment

    Ubuntu for humanity, For me it means, one shot understandable Linux System
  • itbcn8
    itbcn8 Posts: 23
    I get the Kubuntu, Ubuntu, Edubuntu differences. Cute, i guess.
    I would think, however, Linux having sooooo many different distros and flavors, that the Ubuntu community would want to rally under one "brand".

    By having a seperate logo and name for KDE Ubuntu, they are breaking the brand down again, instead of consolidating it into one "name".

    In my opinion they would do better just calling it all Ubuntu, and then on the LiveCD have the different options, KDE, GNOME, Education version, etc. Oh, then you have Ubuntu "Mint", Ubuntu Studio, etc...

    It's kind of a headache. It's already hard enough for Linux switchers to decide which distro to choose without Ubuntu throwing another 8 variations at you with different websites and names. :S

    Linux users unite! The only barriers holding us back are our own differences! :side:
  • LegacyUser
    LegacyUser Posts: 0
    To my understanding, Kubuntu, et al, are official derivatives of Ubuntu, ie, they are allowed to use the Ubuntu name and branding, but are separate distributions. Although, presumably, many of the same developers work on them as on Ubuntu, though I don't know. Admittedly, it's a bit of a subtle distinction. But, for example, when Shuttleworth at Canonical talks of making Ubuntu matching or exceeding Apple for usability, he is referring pretty much only to Ubuntu, with GNOME. Another example of this process is the potentially upcoming Lubuntu, with the LXDE desktop. The project is currently working to get official collaboration with Canonical. http://blog.lxde.org/?p=208

    Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu, but much further removed than Kubuntu, or Xubuntu. It is not an official derivative, as it were, but a very separate distribution, and would not even be allowed to use the Ubuntu name. They have their own tools, many of their own packages, etc.

    Because of the freedom inherent in linux, there will always be a hundred and one different projects springing up and dying out at any given time, and there will probably never be this united front where someone can say, "Here is the linux operating system." (And I would personally argue there shouldn't be.) Better perhaps to view each distro as an individual linux-based system, and judge them accordingly, rather than this amorphous thing called GNU/Linux. Which seems to be where Ubuntu is going, anyway, where they are building a very strong brand identity, to the point where I have heard it said, "Should I install linux or ubuntu?"
  • itbcn8
    itbcn8 Posts: 23
    Interesting! People really say "should I install linux or ubuntu?"?

    You did a great job puting that in perspective and explaining it to me. I also agree with you in that there shouldn't be one centralized Linux that everyone has to use.

    However, I think that for Linux to really move into the "Consumer Market"... as in stupid high school girls, grandparents, mothers, etc, it needs to be straightforward, simple, and aesthetically pleasing.


    MAC - OSX ... ... ... ... ... uh...


    Packadged, labeled, explained, differentiated, downloadable and comparable from 1 central location. I think when that happens Linux as a brand will really get its wings and people will stop being scared of the complexity of the web of distros, packages, desktop environments, so on and so fourth.

    Imagine walking into a store, Best Buy for example, and having a huge Linux section. On the shelves there they are, the major Linux distributions with guidebooks and stuffed animals and stickers :P Computers under each section loaded and Linux Guru's standing by to answer questions. :D
  • LegacyUser
    LegacyUser Posts: 0
    Honestly, I don't particularly care if linux becomes the desktop of choice among the masses. I only want a large enough user-base that all the major vendors give us as much support as they do Apple, so I can flash my BIOS without using FreeDos, or watch friggin' abc.com.

    But as far as it goes, I don't think GNU/Linux will ever get mass adoption until it becomes common place in schools. The only reason people find linux troublesome is unfamiliarity. If you used linux in grade school, and were able to buy linux preinstalled on computers, there would be no more trouble than with Apple or Microsoft. Probably quite a bit less than with Windows, since you wouldn't spend so much time fighting off malware.

    Also, the more "user-friendliness" is pushed, the more the integral flexibility and power of the system is compromised. Looking at Macs for an example, you have a Unix-based system that is utterly locked down. Yes, you have a nice user interface, but I couldn't stand the rigidity. Also look at some of the dumbed-down netbook distros like Linpus Lite, where access to the command line and package manager are disabled by default. I suppose from the perspective of Acer as a company, it makes sense - if you have those enabled, it becomes very easy for the novice user to break their machine. In the desktop OS sphere, it's a very delicate balance between maintaining the flexibility and power that so many of us love, and having a clear, easy interface with which to interact with the system.

    As far as being able to walk into a store and have a huge linux section...well, distro-wise, that will probably never be the case, since broadband internet is becoming so ubiquitous and it's free to download almost any distro, but walk into any good bookstore, and there is often a pretty significant section dedicated to linux and unix, and the magazine stand usually has at least half a dozen linux mags, with discs included.


Upcoming Training