“Kubuntu has been my favorite Linux distribution since the very first release. It was made specifically for us KDE fans, branded with beautiful Kubuntu-specific artwork and themes, contained the best Qt-based software, and dared to be different. In a world ruled by Ubuntu, it’s given us KDE fans something to root for. Unfortunately, Kubuntu later became known as Canonical’s third wheel, and each release seems to steadily diminish in quality. What’s responsible for its current status, and what should be done to improve it?”
is good. I run it for month on my netbook and it runs really well.
It is much better than Fedora 11 because it is way smaller. (the EeePC 901 only has 4 GB system SSD)
With the right funding and real dedication there could be KDE distro that blows everything else out of the water, but 9.10 is still very solid. I don’t care for One.
Agreed. The recent beta of Kubuntu 9.10 has been pretty good. The only issue I have had, over trials on several machines, is the Printer Configuration applet in the System Settings. It doesn’t seem to work propoerly if one’s locale setting is not en_US. Not really a problem for me, because hplip-gui works just fine for the same purpose.
I haven’t had any trouble at all with wireless, again on several machines. I’m not sure what this claim was all about.
Nevertheless, if there is a perceived problem with Kubuntu, then give the following close-to-release distributions a trial:
Development Release: Chakra Alpha 3 (Arch Linux):
http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=05692
Development Release: openSUSE 11.2 RC1
http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=05718
Development Release: Mandriva Linux 2010 RC2
http://distrowatch.com/5712
You should be able to find a good KDE release that suits your needs from amongst this choice.
I am running Chakra, Kubuntu 9.10 and plain Arch Linux on my netbook right now. I might take some time also to look at Sabayon 5.0. So far, it is neck and neck. Arch is very nice in that it is a rolling release, and it is very quick, but it is a little bit “mandraulic” for most tastes. Kubuntu is probably going to be the winner because of the number of people running it, and therefore the support it has. It runs pretty well, even on a netbook, and it handily wins the “lowest boot-up time” criteria.
Edited 2009-10-16 04:01 UTC
I’m suprised to read that because I found Arch+KDEmod4 boots atleast 3 times faster than Kubuntu did.
It always amuses me how two people (like us 2) can run the same software but on different hardware and get completely contradicting results. hehe
I’m talking about the latest beta of Kubuntu Karmic. It is a lot faster at booting than Kubuntu 9.04 (which was Jaunty), and it is marginally faster on my hardware that current Arch + KDEmod. Not much in it though, only a second or so.
Arch + KDEmod has nearly 5 thousand packages available in the Arch repositories. Kubuntu has nearly five time as many.
I didn’t really want to get into a distro war.
I was just stating that boot up times can vary on different hardware.
As for packages thought, one of the reasons I ditched Kubuntu was because their repositories were so massively out of date compared to Arch’s.
While this might not be a deal break for some people, it was for me.
And as for software not included in the main repositories, well Arch, being a hands one distro, makes it relatively easy to build your own packages.
At the end of the day though, it’s all down to personal preference.
I run Fedora 11 on my eeePC 900 (also only 4GB) just fine. I have at least 1GB free most of the time (yum upgrades push it close if I delay it too long though), so size shouldn’t be an issue. It does take tweaking to get it that low though. I installed it from a USB key I had that I knew was under 4GB (the install there was about 1.5GB).
Well, I need OpenOffice, KDE (obviously), Amarok and Firefox etc and Kubuntu ics much smaller with all these installed. Fedora depends on so many GTK apps (SEtroubleshoot etc) that is was always a struggle to keep it below 4 GB. Kubuntu still has 900 MB free.
Ah. I stripped out most GTK things (SELinux UI stuff, system-config-*, Firefox, etc) for my install. I think the only thing I have yet is nm-applet if only because the KDE version is still under heavy development (I help maintain it, as well as the rest of KDE, in Fedora). I also replace OpenOffice with SSH into my other machine(s) and running LaTeX there. I’ll probably throw TeXLive onto the thing once 2009 is officially packaged for Fedora. It’s been so long since I’ve used office software for anything other than opening the random .doc, .odp, etc.
No well made KDE distros? I beg to differ. I’m using Mandriva, and I’m loving it. Yes, it has its faults, but it is definitely a good distro.
I’ve tried most of the others and I agree they all suck (mainly because they can’t be bothered to provide anything beyond the KDE default theme), but Mandriva has done a very good job indeed.
The only thing I miss about Kubuntu is .deb package management.
As for Kubuntu? Well, I’ve just about given up. 9.04 was such a big disaster that I doubt I’ll bother with 9.10. I might try 10.04 to see if it’s any good, but they’ve lost a lot of my trust with the last few releases.
I have used Kubuntu for the past three versions and currently running Version 9.10 Beta. I guess it’s all a matter of perception, but I don’t see the “downward spiral.” I am very happy with Version 9.10 and see continual improvements.
I agree, I am using it since 6.06.
Now I am still using 9.04 and waiting for RC to install 9.10. I must say that 9.04 is perfect, I didn’t have any problems with it and I have upgraded to KDE 4.3 since KDE 4.3 was still in beta.
Kubuntu was only in problem during the transition from KDE 3.5 to KDE 4. Now it’s only getting better so it’s in upward spiral if you ask me.
Would not call it a downwards spiral, it was never particulary good to begin with.
The one I have had to suffer the most, 7.10 was quite frankly quite horrible(From the little I have seen on other 6, 7 and 8 version, they where not much better). I did the whole beta series for KDE3.5 from source/SVN on my home machine, and never saw so many crashes as with 7.10.
Edited 2009-10-16 10:47 UTC
I used 7.04, 7.10, and 8.04 before switching to Ubuntu. Part of it is that KDE4 has been a disaster, and is just now getting to the functionality of KDE3 after two years. So I’m rooting for Kubuntu to come back (though I think KDE4 is so heavy that I’ll need to purchase new hardware).
I have plenty of apps open and the only things that run away are Kontact after many hours and X which is DE-independent. I can usually run comfortably with under 1GB of RAM used and my other systems which have far less open run well under 700MB used. What new hardware is needed here?
Define “functionality” – because I found even KDE4.1 still had more customability and inbuilt tools than GNOME.
So I’m not really sure how switching to Ubuntu was a step up in functionality terms (particularly when you can still run GTK apps in KDE4)
Incorrect. KDE has been usable since 4.1, and decent since 4.2. Ubuntu’s KDE has always been second class, and bug-ridden, although they used to have some good ideas as well.
KDE4 is perhaps the winner of all Linux desktops when it comes to performance::functionality ratio.
I’m running it right now on an AMD Athlon64x2 (Manchester core) 2.0 GHz machine with just 1GB RAM and a humble ATI HD2400 low-end graphics card. This is three-year-old hardware that was only basic entry-level specifications even then. It can’t run Vista, but it runs KDE4 beautifully … KDE4 is snappier than XP once was on this machine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athlon_x2#Manchester_.2890_nm_SOI.29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_R600#Radeon_HD_2400
I think the trick is to use the open source ATI graphics drivers, rather than closed source drivers.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_r600_r700_2d…
Much better 2D graphics performance using the open source drivers. KDE4 depends heavily on this performance.
Edited 2009-10-18 10:04 UTC
I am not saying people who are developing now don’t love KDE. I stress that.
I mean those who care should get involved.
I know I’m going to get moderated as a troll for saying this, but here it is: The problem is with KDE not the various distros. For all the talk about how Gnome developers dumb down the interface and are constantly removing customization options, KDE is a mess of options with no consistent way of tweaking everything together. The KDE developers have been told time and time again that their users don’t want the desktop toolbox and Aaron Seigo simply refuses to allow it to be removed.
Here’s the elephant in the room–maybe the reason there have been so few good KDE distros in the last few years is because the distro managers are tired of having to deal with the arrogance of KDE developers?
Yeah I know OpenSUSE just voted to default on KDE, but they’re one amongst a sea of Gnome distros…maybe that should tell us something?
–bornagainpenguin
I thought one of the hallmarks of KDE was that it DID present a consistent interface? Last time I tried a distro, with KDE4 (early version) I seem to remember all the UI components have similar configuration options?
I don’t use it enough to know it, I’ve actually always preferred the look of gnome over kde (even the older versions of both), but I never thought KDE was badly put together… just did not appeal to me.
Or perhaps developers have learnt not to care about what a very vocal and whiny group of clueless know-nothings say? The desktop toolbox isn’t going to hurt you. Your fear of it is totally irrational. So why should anyone take it seriously again?
Oh, because you’re whining on the internet? There are millions others just like you, whining about everything. Perhaps no one will listen simply because you have nothing interesting to say.
All the distros went with Gnome way back when KDE was based on a non-free Qt. No-brainer decision at the time. KDE has been swimming against the current ever since, and their main enemy is inertia, now that all those distros are used to, and standardized on, Gnome.
So all it tells us is that distros don’t want to have to support 2 different DEs at the same time.
Perhaps the most interesting thing is that despite all these disadvantages, and despite not having a corporate parent/sponsor of their own (GNOME is Novell’s baby), KDE is still as popular as it is (to the point that Opensuse’s *users* managed to pull off a coup of sorts).
I would love to see the commercial distros have the guts to put the issue before their own users for a vote, as Opensuse did (assuming it were possible to do so fairly). I’m pretty sure the results would quickly shut up the ‘KDE is dead; long live GNOME’ trolls…
One could make the argument that Gnome is doing the same thing Seigo did by introducing GnomeShell.
Yet, almost every distro gives you the option to use a containment without the toolbox. And that’s the point of plasma, if you don’t like the default containment, then instead clicking hundreds of checkbox to get the look that you want, you just choose a different containment and that’s it