Switching to Ubuntu(support.system76.com)
support.system76.com
Switching to Ubuntu
http://support.system76.com/articles/switch/
113 comments
I left Linux in the days of Mandrake (that was its name then) and KDE, because it was a bad copy of windows XP.
I saw the GUI of that era as something without character, only copying XP and later trying to copy OS X, but in an incomplete way, and mainly, without something that can be perceived as original.
In fact, the Ubuntu I saw before Unity was almost a carbon copy of OSX. Macbuntu 10.04 was a thing. And it was a thing because of the lack of identity the Linux DEs had before Unity.
I read about Ubuntu, and decided to try again, and this time I forced myself to learn the keyboard shortcuts. That's the main difference and what made me swear this is the DE for me.
The HUD is a game changer. The keyboard shortcuts to switch between virtual desktops, and to move windows between them are second nature now. The same to maximize or half-screen maximize them.
I went back to using Linux full time, because of Unity. I have changed some of the default keyboard shortcuts, and enabled virtual desktops but otherwise it is the vanilla experience.
It helps me work faster and better. And it really feels like its own thing. I know it is not Windows and I know it is not OS X. I understand you got used to the previous thing, but Unity is better for me and for many others.
I always miss the Unity keyboard shortcuts whenever I'm using any other DE, including when I use Windows.
I saw the GUI of that era as something without character, only copying XP and later trying to copy OS X, but in an incomplete way, and mainly, without something that can be perceived as original.
In fact, the Ubuntu I saw before Unity was almost a carbon copy of OSX. Macbuntu 10.04 was a thing. And it was a thing because of the lack of identity the Linux DEs had before Unity.
I read about Ubuntu, and decided to try again, and this time I forced myself to learn the keyboard shortcuts. That's the main difference and what made me swear this is the DE for me.
The HUD is a game changer. The keyboard shortcuts to switch between virtual desktops, and to move windows between them are second nature now. The same to maximize or half-screen maximize them.
I went back to using Linux full time, because of Unity. I have changed some of the default keyboard shortcuts, and enabled virtual desktops but otherwise it is the vanilla experience.
It helps me work faster and better. And it really feels like its own thing. I know it is not Windows and I know it is not OS X. I understand you got used to the previous thing, but Unity is better for me and for many others.
I always miss the Unity keyboard shortcuts whenever I'm using any other DE, including when I use Windows.
I too have been put off by Unity when it appeared, and moved to Mac. It's sad that they lost so many people, they were on the path to become the leader OS, and not only among the Linux community. Did they even gain more of the target users (tablets) they hoped to reach with Unity?
But there's always one guy to say "Hey, I like Unity, plus you can always configure Gnome or get Kubuntu if you like" and the mere doubt of a debate dillutes the elephant in the room, which is that Unity wasn't capable of generating massive adoption, as opposed to most other DEs. Yep, some people liked Unity, but it's only some people, that's the problem.
But there's always one guy to say "Hey, I like Unity, plus you can always configure Gnome or get Kubuntu if you like" and the mere doubt of a debate dillutes the elephant in the room, which is that Unity wasn't capable of generating massive adoption, as opposed to most other DEs. Yep, some people liked Unity, but it's only some people, that's the problem.
Sorry to be that guy, but I like Unity. My vie is that Unity is Canonical's way of integrating the good features of MacOS into the Linux desktop and moving away from the Windows-lookalike strategy the GNOME project used to have. So I would argue that if people migrated from Ubuntu to MacOS, it's not because they don't like Unity, but rather because they like MacOS or Apple machines in general, and Unity was Canonical's response precisely to that.
I didn't even know MacOS when I migrated. I just did it because I literally couldn't work anymore in Ubuntu. I just knew some people could get the job done in Mac, which doesn't happen to be the case with Ubuntu.
Not doubting you but has anyone produced metrics to show a drop off in adoption, install, usage of Ubuntu after Unity came around? I was one of those people but I suspect I can't be the majority. Today I use it and honestly dunno why I was so resistant. On a dev box, however, I'll use i3 or something.
Distrowatch #1: Mint
It is a shame. Their hand was kind of forced by GNOME 3 at the time but the damage was done either way.
I've always hated the default Ubuntu since they switched to unity. I used Lubuntu for a while, and now use Xubuntu on everything.
I love it, and wouldn't switch back. But everyone has their preference, I find this very usable and out of your way
I love it, and wouldn't switch back. But everyone has their preference, I find this very usable and out of your way
Am I the only one who uses Flashback Metacity?
It's nice and fast, no bells as whistles.
It's nice and fast, no bells as whistles.
Yes, Unity was a huge step down. The fact that it combines windows of the same binary into one icon drives me insane! Because that means I now need two clicks to navigate to those windows, costing me multiple seconds with every context switch. Someone asked a question on UX stackexchange on how to turn off this behaviour and the answer was along the lines of "it's impossible and you don't need that because you don't know what you want". Frustrating.
EDIT: Oh, and I almost forgot. The fact that the little 'x' close button of maximized windows cannot be clicked if a smaller window is active and in the foreground. That drives me nuts.
EDIT: Oh, and I almost forgot. The fact that the little 'x' close button of maximized windows cannot be clicked if a smaller window is active and in the foreground. That drives me nuts.
> EDIT: Oh, and I almost forgot. The fact that the little 'x' close button of maximized windows cannot be clicked if a smaller window is active and in the foreground. That drives me nuts.
I don't understand: That's default GTK/win behaviour when the smaller window is part of the background window (like LO prompting for closing/saving/cancelling the document you are editing when you click the close button of LO). It's a pop up.
I don't understand: That's default GTK/win behaviour when the smaller window is part of the background window (like LO prompting for closing/saving/cancelling the document you are editing when you click the close button of LO). It's a pop up.
Yes, it makes sense when you close your word processor and you have unsaved work, that the popup asking you to save your work has priority and prevents the close button from being clicked.
However, it does not make sense that if I have a small console window in the foreground and my word processor in the back, that I cannot close my word processor with one click - but I can't. That's default behaviour in Unity.
However, it does not make sense that if I have a small console window in the foreground and my word processor in the back, that I cannot close my word processor with one click - but I can't. That's default behaviour in Unity.
> However, it does not make sense that if I have a small console window in the foreground and my word processor in the back, that I cannot close my word processor with one click - but I can't. That's default behaviour in Unity.
These small but idiosyncratic behaviors in Unity that probably drive so many people away. It is long time sine I used Unity last, but there was enough of these quirks that made it unpleasant to use.
These small but idiosyncratic behaviors in Unity that probably drive so many people away. It is long time sine I used Unity last, but there was enough of these quirks that made it unpleasant to use.
Thanks for your detailed answer. I didn't know things had gotten to that point :/ (I am an awesome-wm user on top of debian with xfce install who kinda like gnome3).
Mouse button clicks are generally for lazy, laid back behavior and not for fast and productive. You are supposed to use keyboard for that. Although there are definitely some cases where their UI fails and multiple windows of the same app is usually among them, like alt+tab is absolutely useless in this scenario on unity, it's way faster to use mouse to switch between them if you have to work with more than two of them on a single workspace.
See, that's precisely the attitude I mean. I want something and I know what I want, but Unity devs and people like you are certain that I am mistaken and do, in fact, not know what I want. That is precisely why I do not like Unity.
Pftt. You can be fast with both. Any Starcraft player knows that.
The fact that you are slow with the mouse is not something that can be generalized to all the population.
Yes, I know I always get down-votes whenever I mention this.
The fact that you are slow with the mouse is not something that can be generalized to all the population.
Yes, I know I always get down-votes whenever I mention this.
Per Fitts's law [1], your screen is a lot bigger than the keyboard and your pointer is a lot farther from most targets, than your fingers on the keyboard that you keep on those "asdf" "jkl;" keys. So you can't be faster with mouse on most shortcuts most of the time.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitts's_law
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitts's_law
Using a good mouse and disabling mouse acceleration I can certainly be quite fast, only a fraction of a second slower than using a keyboard shortcut. With mouse acceleration, or with a trackpad, I think I agree with you.
It also depends on the task.
I can select and move a piece of text from one place to another faster with the mouse than with any way of keyboard shortcuts.
For example, using vim shortcuts I have to count the number of lines I need to move the cursor before typing the order and it is always faster for me to just move the mouse cursor than to count the lines.
It also depends on the task.
I can select and move a piece of text from one place to another faster with the mouse than with any way of keyboard shortcuts.
For example, using vim shortcuts I have to count the number of lines I need to move the cursor before typing the order and it is always faster for me to just move the mouse cursor than to count the lines.
The task is a point-and-click interface, for other tasks keyboards are not very useful of course, having only things to click on them and all.
There is a Ubuntu that does GNOME straight from the install. I've been using it since it came out a few years ago:
https://ubuntugnome.org/
https://ubuntugnome.org/
Or Ubuntu-MATE if you prefere the old GNOME2 UI
https://ubuntu-mate.org/
https://ubuntu-mate.org/
Congratulations, you discovered that Ubuntu is a Linux distribution and not a wallpaper of a color you do not prefer. People can also use the normal Ubuntu install media to install something other than Unity, and they can change the wallpaper to a color they like.
I would recommend Debian GNU/Linux over Ubuntu for the following reasons:
* Stability: I consider Debian testing/unstable more stable than Ubuntu stable (Try updating an ubuntu with lots of package installed).
* Privacy: Debian is more concerned about User's privacy then Ubuntu. If your iceweasel (now firefox) automatically connects to internet to load some data against your wish, you can consider this as a bug in Debian (and several other examples).
* Community support: You get community support from both Ubuntu and Debian communities.
* Truely free software 0: No non-free software by default. No binary blobs. But you may choose to have, if you wish to.
* Truely free software 1: In Debian, if you solely install packages from 'main' repo, you can safely use it, even in commercial setup. But in ubuntu, there can be packages that may commercially have several restrictions (and those repos are enabled by default).
Everything is from upstream: GNOME, wayland, flatpak ...
* Stability: I consider Debian testing/unstable more stable than Ubuntu stable (Try updating an ubuntu with lots of package installed).
* Privacy: Debian is more concerned about User's privacy then Ubuntu. If your iceweasel (now firefox) automatically connects to internet to load some data against your wish, you can consider this as a bug in Debian (and several other examples).
* Community support: You get community support from both Ubuntu and Debian communities.
* Truely free software 0: No non-free software by default. No binary blobs. But you may choose to have, if you wish to.
* Truely free software 1: In Debian, if you solely install packages from 'main' repo, you can safely use it, even in commercial setup. But in ubuntu, there can be packages that may commercially have several restrictions (and those repos are enabled by default).
Everything is from upstream: GNOME, wayland, flatpak ...
(Try updating an ubuntu with lots of package installed)
Always do and don't remember any issues.
Mostly, Ubuntu is Debian with some niceties thrown in like AskUbuntu, Unity, PPAs, or a release schedule.
Always do and don't remember any issues.
Mostly, Ubuntu is Debian with some niceties thrown in like AskUbuntu, Unity, PPAs, or a release schedule.
PPAs are really a distinct advantage over Debian. Wish this would get backported.
> Always do and don't remember any issues.
Have you ever tried updating an old Ubuntu (say, 14.04 LTS) with lots of -dev packages installed?
I have had this issue several times, which made me force to switch one of my client's system to Debian.
Have you ever tried updating an old Ubuntu (say, 14.04 LTS) with lots of -dev packages installed?
I have had this issue several times, which made me force to switch one of my client's system to Debian.
I just updated Ubuntu last night..and it's no longer working. I would switch to Openbsd but I need VMs. I guess it's time to go back to the good old Debian
If I were able to switch to a new OS now, I'd give a try to NixOS and GuixSD (especially to the latter as it fits my love of lisp and emacs). They bring a new paradigm to the table in package management. Unfortunately a bit busy nowadays...
OpenBSD includes a hypervisor nowadays.
http://man.openbsd.org/OpenBSD-6.0/man4/amd64/vmm.4
http://man.openbsd.org/OpenBSD-6.0/man4/amd64/vmm.4
Thanks for this advice. I'm a bit of an ubuntu fanboi, but I've been getting a bit irritated by some of the stability issues and rough edges. I'll give Debian a try as soon as I have time.
What's the switching to Debian learning curve like, regarding command line tools etc?
Imho the differences are rather subtle. Ubuntu comes more consumer ready and pre-configured whereas Debian is "raw" and needs more initial setup effort.
> Debian is "raw" and needs more initial setup effort.
For some while I have been trying to write some hacky scripts[0] that would help users to configure their Debian systems really easily (consider the script as pre-alpha).
[0] https://gitlab.com/sadiq/systemconf
For some while I have been trying to write some hacky scripts[0] that would help users to configure their Debian systems really easily (consider the script as pre-alpha).
[0] https://gitlab.com/sadiq/systemconf
Well, depends. Debian has so called "tasks". If you install one of the desktop tasks (e.g. task-gnome-desktop), it's as complete as any other pre-configured distribution.
Still the Desktop task is imho by no means comparable to what you get when you install Ubuntu Desktop. Ubuntu is more "turn key" ready what some again would consider as bloated. It's a lot about personal preference...
I'm using mint in my notebook as the main SO just because it have NVIDIA suporte from the box. No neet to edit x11.org. Every time I open x11.org to edit, my life quaklity is decreased.
And well mint works well enouth for my needs.
And well mint works well enouth for my needs.
Ubuntu has several powerful image manipulation programs. Gimp, darktable, and Inkskape will do what Adobe products can. Plus, they are free, which is a huge bonus. Adobe products don’t currently run on Ubuntu but there are plenty of replacement software options.
That's a pretty debatable paragraph, and one with which most serious Photoshop and Illustrator users would really struggle.
That's a pretty debatable paragraph, and one with which most serious Photoshop and Illustrator users would really struggle.
Yeah, I love how sophisticated Gimp and Inkscape are for open source projects, but they don't even touch Adobe when it comes to the finesse and features, sadly. I keep Windows on dual boot just so that I can use Illustrator on the odd times that I need to.
[deleted]
I was configuring a 15 inch Gazelle: i7 6700HQ + 32GB RAM + 250GB SSD comes to around $1300. Good value.
Anyone have experience with System76 laptops recently? How is the build quality, battery life, service? There are not many reviews about the laptops.
Anyone have experience with System76 laptops recently? How is the build quality, battery life, service? There are not many reviews about the laptops.
I have a 4 year old Gazelle that I've been mostly satisfied with. It never did have much battery life, so that hasn't gotten better, but no major problems otherwise.
It does use Nvidia graphics, for which driver support is crap. And unlike previous machines, the issues haven't disappeared with upgrades. A failure to resume is the most common bug.
A special award goes to Chrome, which likes to use the acceleration and will leave the main Chrome window on top of the screen after the application is hidden. (Using a nonstandard manager such as Xmonad or ratpoison.)
It does use Nvidia graphics, for which driver support is crap. And unlike previous machines, the issues haven't disappeared with upgrades. A failure to resume is the most common bug.
A special award goes to Chrome, which likes to use the acceleration and will leave the main Chrome window on top of the screen after the application is hidden. (Using a nonstandard manager such as Xmonad or ratpoison.)
I've been buying them for work and family for about 10 years now. Build quality is good, battery life reasonable, service is very good. These aren't aluminum-bodied macbooks, they are along the lines of Dell or HP business machines.
The latest Lemur is supposed to be really great. I have an old-gen (4 years old), and it still works pretty well.
Having a work computer that had Ubuntu pre-loaded I must say that Ubuntu almost hits the mark on being a competitor in user friendliness. There are only a few things that I think needs improvement. For me it's configurability of the mouse (in particular cursor acceleration) and dual screen high-dpi support (which is partly on app developers). Most other things seems to be there when using a laptop with supported hardware. But supporting the hardware has been the main hurdle for a long time so having more alternatives that ships with it would probably solve that one.
> For me it's configurability of the mouse (in particular cursor acceleration) and dual screen high-dpi support (which is partly on app developers).
Yes, disabling cursor acceleration requires some CLI fiddling and adding that to the autorun login scripts.
Also rotating the screen is not automatic in tablet mode.
Yes, disabling cursor acceleration requires some CLI fiddling and adding that to the autorun login scripts.
Also rotating the screen is not automatic in tablet mode.
I agree that the out of the box mouse settings are too limited. But if it really bothers you there's still the option to find the right driver and dive into xorg.conf any time. I spent an hour or two to tweek my macbook touchpad but it was totally worth the effort.
Yeah, I have that for getting two finger scroll and right click and disabling touch areas. But after the first time I tried to set it up I got a lot of weird behaviour after suspension and such.
It took quite a bit of effort and the details were hard to understand. There are a lot of conflicting info in stack overflow threads and such. Like I found out after the first try that there are multiple configuration paths that are merged. Don't remember the details now. It was confusing anyhow.
It took quite a bit of effort and the details were hard to understand. There are a lot of conflicting info in stack overflow threads and such. Like I found out after the first try that there are multiple configuration paths that are merged. Don't remember the details now. It was confusing anyhow.
Ubuntu ruined it when they included their advertising and marketing engine straight up in the unity interface. Debian is at least not trying to sell all your info.
The Amazon thing was disabled by default in 16.04.
The Amazon "thing" is most definitely enabled on the sidebar by default in 16.04.
The Unity Amazon search integration was disabled. The Amazon button is just a shortcut that opens the Amazon web page.
Eh, close enough.
I appreciate that Canonical spends a lot of cash developing and hosting Ubuntu but if this is the only way that they can do it then thanks but no thanks.
I appreciate that Canonical spends a lot of cash developing and hosting Ubuntu but if this is the only way that they can do it then thanks but no thanks.
Could be wrong, but thought when I tried it out it was still installed and would show up in the menu even if "disabled," and was a PITA to actually remove completely.
I thought it was completely optional and you can turn it off if you scrub the settings for less than 1 minute.
Sounds like a Microsoft response, please stay away from my GNU/Linux thx.
(but yes using Ubuntu MATE is a perfectly viable option)
(but yes using Ubuntu MATE is a perfectly viable option)
Considering Windows 10's privacy scandal, the Microsoft response would rather have been "You can limit it by scrubbing the settings or disable it completely by buying the Enterprise version".
"You can limit it by scrubbing the settings, until the next update when we will accidentally enable it again, and also it was really never limited much anyway, or disable it completely by buying the Enterprise version. Also all of your outbound connection are monitored anyway by various parties too so the whole thing is more or less futile, here try this cloud."
ftfy
ftfy
Linux Mint is good but definitely not great, it's biggest flaw that isn't true Ubuntu so you can't rely on base fixes that would work on all Ubuntu flavors.
Ubuntu Mate is such an underrated distro, it's faster than GNOME2 base ever was, it's customizable, the only thing what's missing is more advanced menu. GNOME menu should never been included in the first place (too unstable). Wimpy and others on UM forums talked about finding new more modern menu for a long time, I hope we will see some progress there. Synapse launcher on Ubuntu MATE can be unstable sometimes, but at least there are so many alternatives.
Has Unity stopped from being a slow and unresponsive mess?
My last experience with Unity was that it just lagged lagged on a machine that could handle windows seven with no hiccups.
Most people with whom I talked about this seemed to have had similar experiences. In truth I've never heard anyone defend Unity.
My last experience with Unity was that it just lagged lagged on a machine that could handle windows seven with no hiccups.
Most people with whom I talked about this seemed to have had similar experiences. In truth I've never heard anyone defend Unity.
Do you talk to people in real life about unity?
I have never met a person who called unity slow and unresponsive, but I always read that complaint online.
My dad uses it full time at home and consider it just as user friendly as the windows he uses at work.
I used it on my laptop 7 years ago, and every other update had hardware compatibility quirks. But unless I used the XP that came with that laptop, Windows also didn't have full compatibility.
I have never met a person who called unity slow and unresponsive, but I always read that complaint online.
My dad uses it full time at home and consider it just as user friendly as the windows he uses at work.
I used it on my laptop 7 years ago, and every other update had hardware compatibility quirks. But unless I used the XP that came with that laptop, Windows also didn't have full compatibility.
> I have never met a person who called unity slow and unresponsive, but I always read that complaint online.
Well everything is relative I guess. Compared to Windows Vista, Unity is rocket fast. On older machines MATE is much more responsive then Unity without suffering the tweak-ability issues of Lubuntu.
Well everything is relative I guess. Compared to Windows Vista, Unity is rocket fast. On older machines MATE is much more responsive then Unity without suffering the tweak-ability issues of Lubuntu.
Wow? I use Ubuntu for years because I had the exactly opposite situation, it runs smooth on the Linux OS, but Windows would get weird lags and with time the startup time got longer than 3 minutes.
One of the problems with 'The year of the Linux Desktop' is that last years' problems are still Googleable...and the year before lasts' and the year before that, etc.
Unity has been responsive for me on a variety of hardware over the past three years. I'd say anything with Intel Graphics or better would be fine. As a generic user experience I think it's better than Windows 7, worse than Windows 10 [for people who like Windows 10]. On Linux, I prefer Unity to Gnome and Xmonad to everything.
Unity has been responsive for me on a variety of hardware over the past three years. I'd say anything with Intel Graphics or better would be fine. As a generic user experience I think it's better than Windows 7, worse than Windows 10 [for people who like Windows 10]. On Linux, I prefer Unity to Gnome and Xmonad to everything.
I always was more of a xfce guy. So I used xubuntu most of the time, but I have the feeling it's performance isn't was it used to be:/
I have been an Ubuntu user for over 5 years and used unity. Now after a fresh install I tried gnome 3 and was blown away by the usability and looks. Also the application search does not hang like unity. I think gnome 3 deserves some more love.
Unity worked well for me on older machines (Thinkpad X220 is the only thing I use for everything), however, to get the 15+ hours of battery from it and a superior experience (for me), I use i3wm instead now.
I think it was significantly improved around 14.04 and remember a definite before vs after difference. Further tweaks in 16.04 but you would hardly notice anymore.
> Has Unity stopped from being a slow and unresponsive mess?
No. Still slow and unresponsive, more or less works responsively after reboot and if you kill the hud-service and disable some other stuff, but starts to get to barely working after a bit.
Lubuntu is the most responsive one from the Ubuntu family I think.
No. Still slow and unresponsive, more or less works responsively after reboot and if you kill the hud-service and disable some other stuff, but starts to get to barely working after a bit.
Lubuntu is the most responsive one from the Ubuntu family I think.
It used to be pretty bad indeed a few release ago. It's now very fast and smooth! You just need to learn and use a few shortcuts to make Unity very efficient.
[deleted]
It is much better now than it was in 12.04.
Great, just what I was looking for. Let's see if I can finally rid myself of the Apple Co. for good!
Although, no Google Drive... no Evernote...
Although, no Google Drive... no Evernote...
Try dropbox paper instead of evernote. Personally I find it awesome and migrated to it from evernote. One reason for it was the (since years) missing Linux client and the unusable web client.
Does it have the equivalent of the web clipper? I use Evernote mostly to save bookmarks
Have you considered Pinboard? I got big into Evernote for a while but the poor app quality and losing a couple of notes' contents was enough for me just to move to KISS pinboard.
Does it actually let you save the page content, or is it just the bookmarks like del.ici.ous?
The site-provided bookmarklet will save the text you have highlighted on the page, and you can pay a little extra for the "Archiving" option that will wget the entire page for you to access forevermore.
[deleted]
Not that I'd know. More a note taker here...
You can use https://www.insynchq.com/ for Google Drive client (and there are others).
Both are accessible via the Browser...and it looks like there's a FUSE client for Drive. Of course the fact that it's a FUSE client speaks to the Linux experience...no matter how much anyone wants to pretend, there's still command line and configuration involved when dealing with many interesting problems.
I use hubiC instead of GDrive or Dropbox. Totally worth it for me.
Too bad they don't have any good looking laptops. It could really be an alternative to apple.
I wish they had a 13'' model. The Lemur is not bad, but still bigger and heavier than a MBP 13.
The Dell XPS 13 looks not too bad http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/xps-13-9360-laptop/pd
The only Linux Laptop I know that could be sort of compared to a macbook pro. But still from my point of view not even close to the asethetics of a mbpro.
The only Linux Laptop I know that could be sort of compared to a macbook pro. But still from my point of view not even close to the asethetics of a mbpro.
I tried out in the shop XPS 13 and new MBP. Even though XPS is a really nice laptop MBP is nicer looking. I changed in 2006 from Windows to Mac but now I am really struggling to decide if I should go back to Windows with XPS or buy that overpriced MBP.
I switched to the XPS 13 in 2015 after ten years of Apple. In my opinion, the Macs look much much nicer overall. But after getting used to the super thin bezel on the xps 13 screen, sitting in front of an MB feels like working on an archaic machine to me.
Make sure you try out Windows 10 for long enough before you really consider such a move. Imho macos is still way smoother... (I have a Mbpro and W10 Desktop and VM)
It is more than good enough for me.
Its also a good side by side graphic comparison of both OSes.
With a bit of effort, Unity could look much better.
With a bit of effort, Unity could look much better.
It really could, and it really needs to. The default looks is a pretty sure way of ensuring that people who are browsing for an alternative to the Mac aren't going to pick Ubuntu.
It's a matter of personal taste, but does anyone honestly look at the default Ubuntu desktop and think "Well, that's just the pretties desktop I've ever seen".
Logically it shouldn't matter, the look has little influence on the functionality, but I really think the orange, black, and purple look has turned people away from, if not Linux, then certainly from Ubuntu.
It's a matter of personal taste, but does anyone honestly look at the default Ubuntu desktop and think "Well, that's just the pretties desktop I've ever seen".
Logically it shouldn't matter, the look has little influence on the functionality, but I really think the orange, black, and purple look has turned people away from, if not Linux, then certainly from Ubuntu.
> but does anyone honestly look at the default Ubuntu desktop and think "Well, that's just the pretties desktop I've ever seen".
Data point of one, but yes, I have — I genuinely think that Unity (>=12.04) looks better than any of Windows 7, Windows XP, and KDE4 (all of which I had used extensively), MacOS and Gnome-3 (which I had used sporadically) and Windows 8 and 10, (which I've only seen but not used). IMO it's also at least as functional as any of the above.
I particularly liked the fact that they "got" the fact that one can have limited vertical screen space and for example the menus of a maximized window merge with the top status bar.
Tastes obviously differ widely.
Data point of one, but yes, I have — I genuinely think that Unity (>=12.04) looks better than any of Windows 7, Windows XP, and KDE4 (all of which I had used extensively), MacOS and Gnome-3 (which I had used sporadically) and Windows 8 and 10, (which I've only seen but not used). IMO it's also at least as functional as any of the above.
I particularly liked the fact that they "got" the fact that one can have limited vertical screen space and for example the menus of a maximized window merge with the top status bar.
Tastes obviously differ widely.
I personally feel that 80% of the people complain about Unity because of the default color scheme. Switch it with some shade of nice blue and everybody likes it.
The only thing I would change (and in fact I have done it a couple of times) is make the top bar transparent to have a full background view when there are no windows.
Yes, in fact that dull gray is the only ugly thing. The launcher bar on the left is very good looking by itself.
Yes, in fact that dull gray is the only ugly thing. The launcher bar on the left is very good looking by itself.
Good article on getting started. I think the initial switch is the most daunting part but once you do it, you won't look back. If you currently use a mac and work primarily in a *nix environment then making the switch from OSX -> Ubuntu should feel incredibly natural.
I've bought twice from system76. Replaced Ubuntu with Arch on the first, & Windows on the 2nd (would've preferred Arch on the 2nd, but alas, I'm a Windows dev by shameful trade)
This is a really good document. I wish someone would do this for KDE Neon, which is Ubuntu LTS paired with nightly KDE (much better experience than Kubuntu).
I think the article misses a big part of the experience of switching platforms that goes beyond what GUI applications are there by default.
Brilliant write up
Why in the world would anyone switch from Apple to anything?
You drop the cash, pick up the vertically integrated product, turn it on, and get done whatever you need to do without hardware or software getting in the way.
Time saved: priceless.
Time saved: priceless.
> without hardware or software getting in the way.
I see you and I have had different experiences with Apple laptops.
I see you and I have had different experiences with Apple laptops.
I wouldn't recommend Ubuntu to anyone after the Unity debacle. The way that they insisted on ramming certain "design decisions" down people's throats demonstrated quite clearly that certain elements of the project decided that user feedback meant squat. I remember talking to someone involved with Unity and asking him why I couldn't move the launcher to the bottom of the screen. The answer I got was that it was a design decision that people would just have to accept. He followed up by saying I would get used to it - despite having already put up with it for 2+ years. Attitudes like this are why I and many others will never trust Ubuntu again.
Unless you are using vertical monitors, it makes sense to preserve the more premium vertical screen space by not placing the launcher there. Anyway you can move it to the bottom now since 16.04.
Ubuntu offers a lot of niceties, and the DE is definitely not a deal breaker since you can install GNOME/MATE/KDE with a couple of terminal commands anyway.
Ubuntu offers a lot of niceties, and the DE is definitely not a deal breaker since you can install GNOME/MATE/KDE with a couple of terminal commands anyway.
You can move it to bottom now BTW.
You absolutely can but for the longest time you couldn't - not at least in a way that wouldn't break between versions. The wider issue here though is the attitude. If someone from the Unity team had explained why it couldn't be done for a technical reason I think many people would understand that. But to be told it was by design and that I should learn to live with it is exactly the kind of arrogance we could all live without in the Linux/FOSS community.
But then, out of chance installing on a laptop that wasn't sure it was UEFI or BIOS (yes, BIOS in UEFI mode), lacking much in terms of storage media, plus a weak internet connection, knew Ubuntu had a mini install, not server install, but mini install, but had never used before. Not so well linked to on the website but for benefit of all here's the link: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/MinimalCD about 40MB.
Fantastic. Complete Ubuntu ecosystem underpinned by Debian solidness. And straight-up GNOME environment (or GUI of choosing, or lack of, selectable on install). No cruft, but as full featured as any Ubuntu can be. And lets GNOME actually be enjoyed with customisation, but also allows the focus and productivity that GNOME esp. GNOME3 offer.
The OP is about OSX to Mac. Completely support Ubuntu/GNOME. Absolutely suggest straight OSX > GNOME and it/general Ubuntu ecosystem. Avoids messing with Unity or any 'Ubuntu minus Unity' system reinvention, and lets one enjoy using a computer, not being frustrated by it.