Ulteo, The New 'World's Easiest Linux'

ggarron writes "Gael Duval, the creator of Mandrake and now fired from Mandriva, has created a new Linux distro, based on Ubuntu, and it claims to be the easiest Linux, and that it will redefine the Desktop philosophy."

no

it claims to be the easiest Linux

No, the easiest Linux is Tivo.

Re:no

No, the easiest Linux is Tivo.

Well, I'd say an even easier linux is one used in a Wireless Access Point, comes preconfigured, plug it in & never touch it again.

But that's not really what the article's talking about is it? It does't mean a single-use box like TIVO or a router, but a general purpose desktop.

Re:no

You can't get irony, isn't it?

Sentence not parse, does not?

Re:no

You can't get irony, isn't it?

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

C:\Documents and Settings\anguyen071904>irony
'irony' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.

The world's easiest Linux distro?

You mean, even easier than Slackware or even Gentoo?!?

Re:The world's easiest Linux distro?

You mean, even easier than Slackware or even Gentoo?!?

Gentoo is pretty easy to install. Hell, I even remember the two of three commands for installation:

Command #1:
cfdisk /dev/hda && mkfs.xfs /dev/hda1 && mount /dev/hda1 /mnt/gentoo/ && chroot /mnt/gentoo/ && env-update && . /etc/profile && emerge sync && cd /usr/portage && scripts/bootsrap.sh && emerge system && emerge vim && vi /etc/fstab && emerge gentoo-dev-sources && cd /usr/src/linux && make menuconfig && make install modules_install && emerge gnome mozilla-firefox openoffice && emerge grub && cp /boot/grub/grub.conf.sample /boot/grub/grub.conf && vi /boot/grub/grub.conf && grub && init 6

Command #2:
either 2a) rm -rf / & sleep 1000 && reboot
or 2b) cat /dev/urandom /dev/hda /dev/sda /dev/pts

Source: Uncyclopedia [uncyclopedia.org]

Re:The world's easiest Linux distro?

Gentoo is all about choice. In this case, you choose to overwrite your partitions with /dev/urandom. While that may be fine for newcommers, power-users appreciate the satisfaction that comes from catting /dev/random and manually moving the mouse to generate entropy until every gigabyte is nuked. You already took the time to compile your system from scratch in step 1; when it's time to give up in step 2, you'll want to make sure you demonstrate that same dedication to slowly acheived perfection.

Re:The world's easiest Linux distro?

Very true.

Installing Gentoo is a serious commitment. After installing comes the countless hours waiting for updates as well as software installs to compile.

God forbid someone should forget that "Gentoo is all about choice" is a mandate to obscenely rice out your GCC flags and make non-trivial changes to make.conf in order to get that whopping 0.00000000000000000001% performance gain as well as the satisfaction that you know what exactly what the "OMGPONIES" and "WTFAMIDOING" GCC flags do in conjunction with the countless other ricer flags out there.

Re:The world's easiest Linux distro?

Hey, you should know that the -OMGPONIES flag makes all apps and libs shine gorgeously with GLITTER!!!! Every seasoned Unix admin knows that. Isn't it the beauty of Free Software?

Re:The world's easiest Linux distro?

I had the thankless task of ridding the boss's wife

So easy to misread. So very easy.

Re:The world's easiest Linux distro?

It get's worse:

over the last two days... I had the thankless task of riding the boss's wife ... her offspring ... my cock ... I decided to wipe everything and ... scratch.

Two days later, after pulling ... them one at a time ... I was swearing in frustration..

Makes me want to take the next moron ... and shove [it] ... down his throat ... stick his toothbrush up his ass...

Easiest or not

It doesn't matter if it lives up to its claim or not, as long as it helps the average user get into Linux. Any 'easy' distro is welcome to join the fray. Welcome aboard.

Redefining through mimicry? I think not.

How can it claim to redefine ANY philosophy if its aim is merely a rehash of the tired Windows 95 interface? Come on, a "start" menu?!

I understand the need to make switchers feel at home, and that's great for an "easy Linux" standpoint, but don't try to shove some "revolution" bullshit down our throats at the same time.

Re:Redefining through mimicry? I think not.

How can it claim to redefine ANY philosophy if its aim is merely a rehash of the tired Windows 95 interface? Come on, a "start" menu?!

I understand the need to make switchers feel at home, and that's great for an "easy Linux" standpoint, but don't try to shove some "revolution" bullshit down our throats at the same time.

I agree with your criticism -- looks pretty much like a standard KDE desktop to me. At the same time, though, I wouldn't call the Windows 95 interface "tired". Basically, it works. It gives you an instant overview over what you're currently doing (taskbar) and gives you quick access to all open windows, even ones that are hidden. It allows you to open your favourite applications in one click (quick launcher). It gives inexperienced users who are looking for a certain functionality a place to look that quickly becomes familiar, is always easy to find and instantly accessible and works (start button). The entire bar gives you your entire essential "system controls" all in one place and does so without wasting much space. As a bonus, it gives you the time (and date, on KDE) at one glance. Also, the vast majority of computer users already know how to use it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

Before anyone tears into me -- I freely admit there is room for improvement. And yes, completely inexperienced users sometimes do take a moment to get the exact purpose of, or difference between quick launcher, taskbar and system tray. But still, all in all, it's a pretty solid interface. Personally, I've never been convinced by attempts to redesign the interface. I don't like the Gnome interface because it spreads things that ought to be in one place all over the screen without serious gains in usability, and keeps me from just flicking my cursor to the upper right and clicking if I want to close a window, which is a small detail, but annoying to me. I don't like the OSX interface too much, either -- again, it spreads out stuff that might just as well be in one place, letting every window keep its menu bar to itself makes more sense to me*, and putting open and closed programmes next to each other as big colourful icons might look nice, but also feels seriously cluttered and a lot less structured to me. I admit I don't use Macs much these days, so maybe I'm overlooking something, but from what I have seen, I'm not terribly impressed.

Most attempts at redesigning the desktop interface that I've seen may have a lower learning curve than the Windows 95 one, but they also seem to limit the user more once he gets beyond the level of an absolute beginner. And a computer just isn't a typewriter. No matter how simplified the interface is, you *are* going to have to put at least a little effort into learning how to use it. That's a basic fact that we might as well accept.

If someone can come up with a better interface without losing functionality, I'm up for it. But why should an interface be "tired" and need to be re-designed completely just because it's been around for a long time?



---
* Yes, I know that Apple's menu bar at the top came before Windows style menu bars. I learned to use computers on an old Macintosh SE with Mac OS 6.0.7.

Real linux users...

Real linux users:

Have beards
Drink (free) beer

And ROLL THEIR OWN DISTROs!!!!!

*cue insane laughter*

It is based on Kubuntu, not on Ubuntu

The article summary is slightly incorrect: Ulteo is based on Kubuntu, not on Ubuntu. This means that it used KDE instead of GNOME as its default desktop environment.

This is not a surprise, considering that Gael Duval is a big fan of KDE and started Mandrake by adding KDE packages to a base Red Hat distribution. But this announcement of a new Linux distribution started as a fork of an existing one sounds a bit like an ego fight. Also, I have serious doubts about using KDE for the "World's Easiest Linux". Either Gael Duval plans to dumb down KDE and hide most of its options, or his definition of "easiest" is rather biased (maybe "easiest for those with a solid experience of Windows"?). Neither seems to be obvious by looking at the Ulteo web site [ulteo.com].

Also, the only screenshot available so far [ulteo.com] does not look like something that would be really easy to use. Compared to a default KDE 3.5 installation, this screenshot looks a bit closer to the default Windows XP interface, so maybe he does really think that "easiest" means "easiest for experienced Windows users". However, Firefox looks rather standard (it is interesting to note that he does not use Konq for browsing) and there does not seem to be anything special about the Konqueror window either.

So after looking at the various articles on the Ulteo web site claiming that it started with a study of "users with limited knowledge in computers", I am still wondering what is so special about this new fork of an existing distribution, and what it really means by "easiest".

Re:It is based on Kubuntu, not on Ubuntu

Also, the only screenshot available so far does not look like something that would be really easy to use.

Personally, I don't think many (if any) of us on /. are good judges of "easy to use" on computers. We're too involved in the technical end and know too much to judge what would be easy for someone without a lot of experience.

easy to use?

Personally, I don't think many (if any) of us on /. are good judges of "easy to use" on computers. We're too involved in the technical end and know too much to judge what would be easy for someone without a lot of experience.

I agree. Also, it is difficult for anybody (including usability experts) to judge anything from a static screenshot, even if you can already have some hints by looking at the crowded menus or at the buttons available in the applications. It would be easier to comment on a movie (screencast). Or just by trying it or watching other users try it.

I have serious doubts about the usability of Ulteo when I look at the navigation on their web site [ulteo.com]. Just try accessing the items in the second-level menu bar and you should see the problem quickly: if you do not move your mouse exactly as the site designer expected, you will have a hard time selecting the item that you want. As an exercise, try selecting UlteOS/Screenshots or Docs/Documentation and see how frustrating it can be if you move your mouse a bit too far up or down. And this site is supposed to promote the "easiest Linux"?

Re:It is based on Kubuntu, not on Ubuntu

I agree with your sentiment on our ability to judge something subjective such as ease of use, however, I still question how easy computer use should be made. By computer, I mean personal, general purpose computers.

Re:It is based on Kubuntu, not on Ubuntu

It's before my coffee and I am feeling crabby. I just hate this subtle fear and doubt BS which is based on lies and false comparisons.

I couldn't just click-and-install a wireless card driver just drew a blank look from me

I don't know why this persists. People appear to be so trained to tolerate Windows' annoyances that I guess the following is "one click":

1. Hunt for a CD and put it in the drive.
2. Try to figure out what to click on the manufacturer's custom welcome screen or trial-and-error figuring out what to click on the CD or oh wait don't actually insert the CD now wait until Windows asks for a driver disk.
3. Agree to a EULA that strips you of all rights.
4. Answer some questions you don't understand the consequences to or meaning of.
5. Boggle at a scary message that these drivers are not approved by Microsoft and take the "not recommended" approach of installing them anyway.
6. Reboot so it can "finish the installation."
7. Reboot again to finally have the device recognized.

why the hell should I need to edit config files and compile stuff?

For the n-billionth time, nobody does this anymore, and hasn't for a long time. The real fact is that 99% of Ubuntu users don't even need to be aware that there is such a thing as a "driver" because the vast majority of hardware works immediately as soon as you attach it to your computer. Your plea for "more drivers" is meant only to scare people into thinking Linux doesn't have them, when in reality a distribution like Ubuntu comes with many, many times more drivers than Windows does.

some very basic things continue to confuse me - eg. setting VLC as the default video player for all video files

So now we take a task that is not basic -- configuring file associations or default applications is something that very few users attempt -- but call it "very basic" to make it seem like fundamental functionality is missing. Good job, there.

Whatever happened...

Whatever happened to linking straight to the source instead of someone's lame blog? http://www.ulteo.com/main/ [ulteo.com]

Re:I bet he hasn't even tried Linspire

A market requires actual money to be changing hands. As such, RedHat, Novell and Linspire are about the only ones in "the market" of selling a distribution. Add Canonical if you want to talk about the support market.

On the other hand, the insane amount of fragmentation we've seen in the "screw you guys, I'm starting my own distro" space has nothing to do with market forces and everything to do with geek egos.

Re:I bet he hasn't even tried Linspire

On the other hand, the insane amount of fragmentation we've seen in the "screw you guys, I'm starting my own distro" space has nothing to do with market forces and everything to do with geek egos.

Or possibly with disenchantment with the direction that the current players are taking. I know I'm in that boat, and there's no OS vendor that currently offers precisely what I'm looking for. Not MS, having used their products for many years and still having to deal with the cruft; not Apple, as a former Mac user; not Sun, although I still work with Solaris; none of the BSDs, nor any one of the myriad operating systems and distributions I've used over the past 20 years.

I started running Mandrake years ago based on the direction that Gael had taken a Redhat fork several years ago, since that seemed to be the only Linux distro at the time that was moving toward what I was looking for right out of the box (simple, scriptable installs, well supported KDE desktop, automated dependency resolution, totally Free-as-in-speech core, user-centric approach, good security tools, decent compatibility with most other systems). Ubuntu is sort of there, but I'm not interested in a Gnome distribution. It just doesn't feel right to me, YMMV of course. Unfortunately, Mandriva hasn't exactly continued along the path of a smooth user experience. Update servers glitch and so do the updates sometimes. Their forums don't seem very customer-centric these days, and getting involved with development is surprisingly chaotic.

I say good luck to Gael and his new team. Hopefully they will take the seemingly half-hearted Kubuntu core and get it right. This might be my next distro, assuming everything pulls together.

Re:Based on Kubuntu

Having installed both Ubuntu and Kubuntu on various PCs, the conclusion I'm coming to is that the best thing to do is install Ubuntu, get everything working and then do an apt-get install Kubuntu-desktop once it's all going. My experience is that most of the config tools are far easier to use in Gnome but that KDE is a better desktop once it's all sorted.

Re:Irony

You can't get from the button you hovered over to the link you want to click without it disappearing or changing.

Actually, you can, you just have to move like a knight instead of like a bishop.