mrBen has long been a fan of Ubuntu. He introduced me to it in early 2005, with a very basic looking version of the software, which was, at that point 4.10. It wasn’t particularly jazzy and not everything worked (I remember onboard sound being an issue), but it wasn’t awful, so I kept it on and upgraded it every six months when the new version came out. I used it on and off for a few years, but gradually got tired of fixing problems that came up after upgrades, and so sometime about 18 months ago, I stopped using it, at about the time I started using Windows 7.
Still, I saw this week that Ubuntu 10.10 was officially launched, so I thought I’d take a little look, so here are my thoughts…
Installation / Upgrade
Now, for me, this was more an upgrade than an installation. I did have Ubuntu 9.10 installed, so I had to first upgrade to Ubuntu 10.04 LTS, then on to Ubuntu 10.10 from that. So, in effect, I had to upgrade twice. I did this over two nights, given the time it takes, as I couldn’t use my PC in the meantime. Given previous experiences, I expected to have to fix a few things, but was hoping that at the very least my GRUB bootloader would still work. It did. Phew!
I have to say, the upgrade process was very good. It didn’t ask too many questions, gave a good indication of how long it would take, and above all, it worked. I was very pleased. That I could upgrade twice without any problems was brilliant. Post upgrade, nothing complained that it didn’t work, and my wireless card (which I will come back to) was recognised, when it wasn’t before.
If I do have one criticism, however, it is that when users have choices to make, the choice needs to be explained in simple, understandable terms, like, “if you are unsure, choose x”. By all means let people choose, but give them a default option, as many won’t know which one to choose.
Software
Software is always an important factor. Obviously, there is no Microsoft Office for Ubuntu (I am completely ignoring any software like WINE that may or may not run programs non-natively). There is OpenOffice, which has got much better over the years, and up until the release of Office 2007, had started to look like a decent program. It’s still not a bad program, and it does support Microsoft Office file formats, as well as PDF conversion, but next to Office 2007 and beyond, there is no comparison. Functionality-wise, 95% of users would be fine with OpenOffice, but it doesn’t look nearly as polished, and that is a mark against it. OpenOffice needs some work put in on the front-end and how it is displayed to users.
Browser-wise, Ubuntu does well. Firefox is the most obvious choice, but there is also Chromium, which is the Linux version of the Chrome browser from Google. When the browser comes across codecs that aren’t installed, it looks for them. This is a good thing. Adobe Air also seems to work better now, so applications like Tweetdeck now work much better than before. However, integration into the wider OS doesn’t really work with Tweetdeck, and the default Twitter offering, Gwibber, isn’t a particularly polished application. It is slow to respond and doesn’t have the best menu interface. However, once you can get it set up, it displays nicely, but the slow response time is an issue.
The Ubuntu Software Centre has been around for a while now, and is a very good idea. It looks clean, is organised nicely into sections and is certainly more friendly than Synaptic Package Manager, which is a highway to hell for any new user to Linux. I would say that it is one of the best features to be added over the years as it solves one of the biggest problems to new Linux users – how to install new software. Furthermore, people are more used to these centralised systems now since the creation of Apple’s, RIM’s and Android’s app stores. However – yes, there’s always one – it is slightly hampered by the sheer wealth of applications available to install. This is not a unique problem – it’s a problem in all the mobile app stores too; just how does someone decide which application is best? I think there really needs to be a “best picks” section, possibly supported by partners. Not everyone would agree with this, obviously, but it would make it that little bit easier. New users don’t want to choose between ten different pdf viewers, they just want to read the pdf. So, why not recommend a pdf viewer? Yes, some won’t like the choice, but you know what, some people don’t like GNOME…but it’s not the most important thing.
You then get into your more technical programs. For image editing, there is GIMP, which is a fantastic piece of software. It may not, on a default install, be as good as Adobe’s Photoshop, but it’s still a superb program, and if you hunt around for extra brushes, gradients and the like, it can produce some excellent results. Finding plug-ins is more of a pain, and it is a distant second to Photoshop when it comes to image effects, but it’s good enough that I use it at work over a fully licensed version of Corel PhotoPaint. Which I hate. CorelDraw is pretty good, but CorelPaint is awful.
Talking of CorelDraw, if you’re looking for a vector-based drawing program, you’re looking at Inkscape. To be honest, it’s pretty basic, and not nearly as friendly to use as Windows-based programs. I should also say that my experience of the development team behind Inkscape was…disappointing. I found them to be quite rude and quite uninterested in fixing bugs. But maybe that was just me. Or maybe they just had a bad day, although my experience tells me it was less “bad day” and more “too bad”.
When it comes to managing photos, the classic Linux program – f-spot – has now been replaced by Shotwell. I gather this has been controversial, partly because Shotwell has less features than f-spot. And it does. But you know what? Shotwell is better. Let me explain. Most people don’t want to edit all their photos, They take them, they want to look at them. Not many people go anywhere near editing them. And those who do are unlikely to use f-spot, or Shotwell. They’ll much more likely use GIMP, Picasa or a pay-for application. Thus, features aren’t the issue. The issue is much more to do with organising and displaying photos, and Shotwell does this with a cleaner, more aesthetically-pleasing interface. It’s a very good move.
Talking of change, GAIM – before it was renamed Pidgin – used to be the defautl chat client. This was, quite a while ago now, changed for Empathy. This too was a divisive move. But it was also correct. It has a much cleaner look, is better integrated into the OS, and has less technical options. Which is what most people want. There is one problem, however. It doesn’t have an option to log you in. It expects you to realise you need to open each individual client. Most people won’t realise this – I didn’t. It took me more than a day to work out why I wasn’t logged in. The program needs the ability to automatically log you in and call the external program it uses for each client. Otherwise, it looks like broken software when it isn’t.
Web development – the Filezilla FTP client is available. This is brilliant software. There’s little better out there. For coding, gedit – the standard text editor – does the job. You can add awesome features like syntax highlighting, code validation tag insertion and functions if you know where to find it. But you shouldn’t have to look for it! Someone really should make a package that you can select to add this as a plug-in for edit. It is a very powerful text editor, but few people realise because this feature is so hidden, yet when installed, it is a text editor far better for web development than anything I have installed on Windows. Annoying.
Finally, there is music and sound. The default music player is Rhythmbox. It connects to an online music store, Ubuntu One, as well as Jamendo and Magnatude. It’s not iTunes, but it’s not bad. It connects to my iTunes music on my Windows installation, which is very good, and integrates very nicely into the sound menu in the notification bar when minimised. Can’t argue with that. Saves space too, s a thumbs up on that. I can’t say I held much hope for the movie editing though…it’s never been good in Linux. In fact, it’s always been dreadful. However, I was pleasantly surprised to see that I could throw in some video files and it could play them perfectly, video and audio, and I could add multiple tracks. Excellent. It doesn’t appear to do credits and titles, but the rest of it is on a par with Windows Movie Maker, and in a couple of areas, nudges ahead.
Two more comments on software: 1) DVD playback. It works! This used to be a pain; 2) Fonts. You don’t get many, and this is a problem if you’re into designing, but can I just say, the new Ubuntu font is fantastic! It’s very easy to read, is clean, aesthetically pleasing. Everyone should have it, it looks fab.
Other Practical Thoughts
That’s the main of the review done to be honest – it’s the software that’s the most important thing. There are a couple more thoughts before closing, however. Firstly, boot-up. It takes about the same amount of time to book as Windows 7, maybe marginally slower, but Windows 7 is quick, so it’s not a bad thing. Secondly, the brown is gone. This is good, but the new scheme will need to be a grower. However, I must also say that the wallpapers that come with Ubuntu are much better than the stock Windows wallpapers. They are more diverse, a bit more creative. You feel like you have more choice. Finally, there is the rather good looking computer janitor, that looks for old, redundant files and software packages that are no longer needed – and removes them. With your permission, of course. This is good.
Closing Thoughts
Ubuntu 10.10 is a lot better than I expected, much more polished than it used to be. I still prefer Windows 7, but Ubuntu is showing much more promise than before. It still needs to work the balance of keeping powerful features, but hiding them, in some way, from users who just want to, err…”use” Ubuntu, rather than spend all day tweaking. It’s not an easy balance, but I think it’s getting there. The other thing it needs is more polished software. PiTiVi is showing promise, but needs development. Jokosher (audio editing) looks much better these days; if PiTiVi can follow a route like that (by that, I mean “keep it clean, keep it simple, keep it looking nice, no nasty crashes, but yet still make it powerful”), it’ll be doing well. OpenOffice, whilst being quite good, needs a makeover. And, above all, hardware support…it’s getting there, but it’s still not good enough. Remember the USB wifi stick I mentioned earlier? It works for 10 minutes, then stops working. This is no use. I use wifi, ethernet is no use to me. Problems like this are the biggest barrier to adoption, and they really are the most important issues to sort out. But it’s getting there…
I’ve not yet played with 10.10 on my netbook, but a few notes all the same ;)
1. The new colour scheme came in with 10.04 – get with the program ;)
2. For video I suggest you take a look at OpenShot (http://www.openshot.org and available in the repos I believe), which has a lot of functionality and gets rave reviews. For audio Audacity and Ardour are still top of the pile, depending on your requirements.
3. OpenOffice.org development could well change massively after the falling out with Oracle. Hopefully it will mean some work on the interface, although I’m not a fan of the new MS Office interface at all, so personally I’d rather they didn’t just mimic MS.
Well, like I pointed out, I hadn’t actually used 10.04 as I upgraded straight past it, so it’s new to me if nothing else!
I will take a look at OpenShot – looks promising, also good that they’re looking to port it to Windows too – there’s a definite gap in video edting that Movie Maker doesn’t really fill. I’ve used Audacity before, and it is good, but it’s not the friendliest programme, which is the biggest mark against it, but yes, it is good – but I do think the way a program presents itself can be as big a factor as the features sometimes.
As for OpenOffice, I don’t think it needs to copy Microsoft Office, but I do like the ribbon approach. Initially I hated it, but it’s grown on me a lot. Replication doesn’t have to be the answer though, but OpenOffice doesn’t have a professional look at the moment – it still looks a bit haphazard.