Here is a biased, frivolous and non-technical overview of the Ubuntu Linux 20.04 operating system and its five official flavors. If you are interested in kernel versions, glibc, snapd, and the presence of an experimental wayland session, this is not the place for you. If this is your first time hearing about Linux and you are interested in understanding how a person who has been sitting under Ubuntu for eight years thinks about it, then you are here. If you just want to watch something not very complicated, slightly ironic and with pictures, then you are here too. If it seems to you that under the cut there are a lot of inaccuracies, omissions and distortions and there is no logic at all - perhaps it is, but this is a non-technical and biased review.
To begin with, a small "entry" into the topic. There are operating systems: , and Linux. Everyone heard about Windows, and everyone used it. Almost everyone heard about Makosi, but not everyone used it. Not everyone heard about Linux, and only the most daring and courageous used it.
Lots of Linux. Windows is one system, MacOS is also one. Of course, they have versions: seven, eight, ten or High Sierra, Mojave, Catalina. But in fact, this is one system that is consistently made by one company. There are hundreds of Linuxes, and they are made by different people and companies.
Why are there so many Linuxes? Linux itself is not an operating system, but a kernel, that is, the most important part. Nothing works without a kernel, but the kernel itself is of little use to the average user. You need to add a bunch of other components to the core, and in order for all this to be with beautiful windows, icons and pictures on the desktop, you also need to pull the so-called graphical shell. The core is made by some people, additional components are made by other people, the graphical shell is made by third people. There are many components and skins, and they can be mixed in different ways. As a result, there are fourth people who collect everything together and prepare the actual operating system in its usual form. In other words - distribution kit Linux. One person can make a distribution, so there are many distributions. By the way, “Russian operating systems” are Linux distributions, and from the Russian one there are only boring desktop wallpapers, separate programs, plus certified tools for working with state secrets and other confidential information.
Since there are many distributions, it is difficult to choose, and this becomes another headache for anyone who decides to take a chance and still try to get away from Windows (or MacOS). In addition, of course, to more banal problems of the form: "oh, Linux is difficult", "it's only for programmers", "it won't work for me", "I'm afraid of the command line". Plus, as usual, developers and users of different distributions are constantly arguing over whose Linux is cooler.
Linux distributions are united against Microsoft's hegemony. The author of the original picture is S. Yolkin, and the missing elements were completed by the author of the article
I decided to update the operating system on the computer and began to choose. Once upon a time, I already had so much fun - downloading Linux distributions and testing them. But that was quite a long time ago. Linux has changed since then, so it doesn't hurt to retest.
I took six out of several hundred. All are varieties . Ubuntu is one of the most popular distributions. On the basis of Ubuntu, they made a bunch more distributions (yes, they also multiply like this: another is assembled from one Linux, a third is built on its basis, then a fourth, and so on until the new desktop wallpapers run out). I used one of these derivative distributions (by the way, Russian - is called), so Ubuntu and its official varieties began to test. seven. Of these seven, two can not be watched, because one of them , and the other for . We look at the remaining five plus the original. Of course, it is very subjective and with a bunch of incidental remarks.
Ubuntu
Ubuntu is original. In slang - "vanilla Ubuntu", from vanilla - standard, not having any features. The remaining five distributions are based on it and differ only in the graphical shell: desktop, windows, panel and buttons. Ubuntu itself looks like MacOS, only that the panel is not from below, but on the left (but you can rearrange it down). That everything is in English - I was just too lazy to switch, in fact, there is Russian there too.
Ubuntu right after download
Cat that shoots eyes - it really is . It looks like a cat, but actually belongs to a different family. Lives in Madagascar. Each version of Ubuntu has its own code name: an animal and some kind of adjective. Version 20.04 is called Focal Fossa. Focal - focus in the sense of "central point", and Fossa is also reminiscent of - Free and Open Source Software, free open source software. Here and in the picture, the fossa focuses on something.
At first glance, the impression is good, but it deteriorates when you start working. If you did not see the usual panel with open windows, as in Windows, then everything is correct: there is no such panel. And there are icons of running applications that are highlighted, and there is such a thing - Activities, which is similar to the list of open programs on Android.
Learning to switch between windows in Ubuntu: drag the mouse towards Activities, click, hover over the window, click again. See how simple it is?
It looks spectacular, especially with beautiful smooth animations, but in terms of convenience - not very. Well, I would only do that I listened to music and watched movies without leaving the browser - but I need to constantly switch between programs, and 10 simultaneously open windows are not uncommon. And now imagine: every time you need to drag the mouse somewhere, click something there, drag it somewhere again (and search for the desired window not by the title, but by the small picture), click again ... In general, after an hour you immediately want to throw it away this system and never return to it. You can, of course, switch windows with Alt-Tabami, but this is also another feature.
On Android, by the way, looks like an ulterior motive. In 2011, some smart people who did , saw the iPad and thought, “This is the future. Let's make an interface that looks like Apple's and can be used on a tablet. Then all the tablets will have our graphical shell, we are in chocolate, and ". As a result, on Android tablets with Ai-Axis, and even Microsoft left there. Winda is alive and well, and kapets came to the normal interface of Ubuntu. And, of course, only extreme enthusiasts use Ubuntu on tablets (I’ll say right away that I didn’t even try). Maybe we need to roll everything back, but for ten years so much effort and dough has been invested in this interface that it continues to be developed. Well, what can I say ... At least he is still beautiful. And as for ease of use, it seems that you can put some add-ons that will return the normal panel with windows. But I don't really want to experiment with them.
Plus, I also climbed to see the resource consumption - Ubuntu eats a gigabyte of RAM immediately after loading. It's almost like Windows. No thanks. The rest is something like a normal system.
Kubunta
If Ubuntu looks like MacOS, then - on Windows. See for yourself.
Kubunta right after download. The code name is also Focal Fossa, but the picture is different
Here, fortunately, there is no attempt to make a system for a tablet, but there is an attempt to make a relatively normal working environment for a desktop computer. The working environment is called KDE - don't ask how it stands for. In the common people - "sneakers". Hence the "K" in the name of the operating system. They generally love the letter “K” there: if it works out, they add it to the beginning of the program name, if it doesn’t work out, it doesn’t matter, they add it to the end of the name. On kraynyak draw on the badge.
Does it really look like Windu?
The color scheme is similar to the “top ten”, and even the “ding” when a notification appears is exactly the same ... Honestly, not Kubunta, but some kind of Windubunta. An attempt to “mow” under Windu comes to the point that you can even configure the buttons like in Windows - however, for some reason, like in Windows 95 (look at the screenshot in the settings on the bottom left). Of course, the system can be “dressed up”, because everything in Linux is configured, and then it will no longer look like Windu, but you still need to delve into the settings. Yes, just in case: if you turn on the windows and buttons from the 95th, then the system will still eat resources like in 2020. True, it is rather modest in this regard: some 400 MB of memory after loading is almost nothing. Didn't even expect it. There were persistent rumors that the “sneakers” were slow and voracious. But it seems not. Otherwise, the same Ubuntu, because technically it is the same system. Unless some programs are different, but Firefox and Libra-office are also in place.
Ubuntu-Mate
is an attempt to recreate Ubuntu in the form in which it was before 2011. That is, until the very moment when in the original they decided to make a system for tablets and did what I showed above. Then some other smart people who did not want to give up took the code of the old graphical shell and began to refine and maintain it. I remember well that at that time I looked at their work as attempts to create zombies and thought: “Well, the project is obviously not viable, it will spin around and close for a couple of years.” But here it is - it has been living and well for almost ten years, even got into the number of official varieties of Ubuntu. Happenes. Still, the craving for the classics among people is indestructible.
Yes, yes, there are two panels! If anything, the panels are these two gray stripes above and below
Mate is MATE, the name of this green graphical shell. Mate is , such a South American plant, and therefore green. And mate is also a friend, so “friendliness” is hinted at. Mate does not look like anything at all - neither Windu, nor MacOS. It looks like itself, or rather, the original idea from Linux of the 90s and zero: to make not one panel with windows and icons, but two: one with windows, the other with icons. Well, nothing happened. By the way, you can see four more rectangles in the lower right corner - this is the desktop switcher. In Windows, such a thing has recently appeared, in Linux it has existed since time immemorial. Like, you can open something on business on one desktop, then switch to the next desktop and sit on VKontakte there. True, I almost never used more than one desktop.
If you open a lot of windows, it will look like this
Otherwise, the same Ubuntu, and in terms of resource consumption and speed of work - like the original. It also quietly eats up a gigabyte of memory after loading. I don't feel sorry for it, but it still hurts somehow.
ubunta-baji
did the impossible: to become even more like MacOS than Ubuntu. Badge is the name , just in case. Although you probably guessed it yourself.
Free MacOS Ubuntu-Baji immediately after download
Let me explain how this miracle came about. When in 2011 some smart people decided to make Ubuntu for a tablet... yes, yes, it all started then too New Man a new graphical shell, which in terms of ease of use will be approximately like the old one and without sharpening for tablets, but it will be all so cool, fashionable, technological. They did and did and got something similar to Makos. At the same time, the creators of the original Ubuntu also did and did and got something similar to MacOS. But Budzhi, in my opinion, looks like a little more: after all, the panel with icons is immediately below, and not on the side. From this, however, it is not at all more convenient: just do not understand how you have to switch between windows, I did not even immediately understand where to click.
Maybe you see such a small, small spark under the right icon? This means the program is running.
In general, in terms of convenience and resource consumption, it differs little from the original - the same gigabyte, as you can see, and the same problems with “sacrifice convenience for the sake of beauty”. Plus, this system must have one more problem: Budzhi is still a less popular thing than Ubuntu, so the chances that it can just as easily be customized to your tastes and corrected if something goes wrong are significantly less .
Lubunta
- this is Ubuntu for poor computers with little power. "L" means lightweight, which is lightweight. Well, I wouldn’t call 400 MB of RAM after loading quite “lightweight”, but okay, we take our word for it.
Booted up, took a selfie...
It also looks like Windu and sneakers, respectively. On sneakers, I must say, it’s no coincidence - the same technology is based there (I won’t go into details, but you can google “Qt”). True, in order to create something somewhat faster and less voracious on the same technology (although it didn’t work out with “less voracious”, judging by the memory waste), I had to replace a bunch of programs and components with their analogues, which seem to be simpler and therefore faster work. It turned out, on the one hand, normal, but in terms of visual impression - not very good.
Old-school windows in the form of Windows-95. Actually you can make more beautiful, but it needs a little tinkering
Zubunta
- This is another relatively "lightweight" version of Ubuntu, but with another graphical shell. The graphical shell is called Xfce (ex-fc-e!), and sometimes it is written that this is one of the ugliest names in Linux. In jargon - "rat", because her logo is like that.
In the upper left corner you can see an icon with a rat's face - this is the logo of the graphical shell. Yes, and the stars on the right, it seems, also drew a muzzle
In terms of appearance - a cross between Windows, Makosyu and original version. In fact, the socket can be easily sent down, and then it will be like Windows. In terms of economy to resources - like Lubunta. In general, such a really good system, designed in a classic style - not super-fashionable, but quite suitable for work.
Conclusions
There are no conclusions. Pure taste. Plus, there are many more nuances that are more technical and depend on who will use what programs and how much it itches to dig under the hood of the system, that is, in the settings. My personal rating, perhaps, is as follows.
- Kubunta
- Zubunta
- Ubuntu
- Ubuntu-Mate
- ubunta-baji
- Lubunta
If you are painfully trying to connect such a rating with the content of the article and understand why this is so - do not try. If you do not see the logic - yes, everything is correct, it probably does not exist here. I'm talking about taste. Remember the picture about vendekapets from the beginning of the article.
And so we do not forget that there are hundreds of Linux distributions. So, perhaps, the conclusion is “not Ubuntu at all, only ».
Source: habr.com