Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Ulteo, The New 'World's Easiest Linux'

Posted by CowboyNeal on Fri Mar 30, 2007 02:31 AM
from the for-mom-and-dad dept.
Announcements Software 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."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Technology: A Virtualized Linux System For Windows 280 comments
getupstandup1 writes "Ulteo today unveiled their Virtual Desktop (screenshots, download) which is a free, full Linux desktop that runs seamlessly on Windows. It's interesting because it's not running under Xen or VMWare, but instead uses the coLinux patch, which they claim allows the system to achieve 'great performance, close to a native installation on the PC.' No need to reboot the system anymore to switch from Windows to Linux." We discussed Ulteo when the Ubuntu-derived distro was announced a year back.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Ulteo, The New 'World's Easiest Linux' 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • no (Score:4, Insightful)

    by User 956 (568564) on Friday March 30 2007, @02:35AM (#18540409) Homepage
    it claims to be the easiest Linux

    No, the easiest Linux is Tivo.

  • The world's easiest Linux distro? (Score:5, Funny)

    by 4D6963 (933028) on Friday March 30 2007, @02:38AM (#18540423)
    You mean, even easier than Slackware or even Gentoo?!?

    • 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? (Score:5, Funny)

        by Workaphobia (931620) on Friday March 30 2007, @03:06AM (#18540527) Journal
        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.
        • 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.

        • Isn't it the IT equivalent of a mandala? I bet some cyber-mystic could use it as a ritual...

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by BrokenHalo (565198)
        I guess it doesn't really matter too much which distro you choose these days. They're all easy.

        What it not easy, as I've just rediscovered over the last two days, is Windows XP. I had the thankless task of ridding the boss's wife's computer of all the bugware/spyware/malware her offspring had managed to install, and in my cocky wisdom I decided to wipe everything and reinstall from scratch.

        Two days later, after pulling out hard drives to partition and format them one at a time (no sir, XP decided it didn'

        • I guess it doesn't really matter too much which distro you choose these days. They're all easy.

          I agree with you there.

          I've never had much difficulty with my various Gentoo (from stage 3 as well as the new installer), Ubuntu, (old school) Red Hat, Fedora, and FreeBSD desktop installs.

          Windows XP, on the other hand tended to be somewhat of a pain in the ass for me to get installed successfully. For some odd reason, at least 2 .cab files would claim to be corrupted, thus borking up my install. Keep in mind th

        • Re:The world's easiest Linux distro? (Score:5, Funny)

          by thc69 (98798) on Friday March 30 2007, @06:43AM (#18541477) Homepage Journal

          I had the thankless task of ridding the boss's wife
          So easy to misread. So very easy.
          • 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...

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Aladrin (926209)
          "Contrast with a standard Slackware install, which is simply done with and usable in an hour. Makes me want to take the next moron who says Linux isn't ready for the desktop and shove his teeth so far down his throat he'll have to stick his toothbrush up his ass..."

          Do you think maybe this has a bit to do with familiarity?

          As a pc tech, I was used to reinstalling Windows on hosed computers. I was SO used to it that every install took less than an hour and had no issues. The first time I tried to install Sla

  • Easiest or not (Score:4, Insightful)

    by owlman17 (871857) on Friday March 30 2007, @02:38AM (#18540425)
    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.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by gbobeck (926553)

      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.

      Hopefully they will do the right thing and provide good user support. Having a distro which is "easy to use" is nice, but helping (read: 'rtfm' responces to user questions doesn't qualify) users out as well as having good and easy to read tutorials and documentation is a must.
  • I know I haven't. Fragmentation++

      • 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 (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Mr. Hankey (95668) on Friday March 30 2007, @04:31AM (#18540929) Homepage
          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.

  • Redefining through mimicry? I think not. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mr_matticus (928346) on Friday March 30 2007, @02:46AM (#18540461)
    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.

    • 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.
      • Hahaha I don't know if you are serious about this or not but if you are man you are seriously out of touch with non-geek users.

        There's no way people are going to put up with going through "command line exercizes" so that they can learn how to use it. To most folks a computer is a tool to get things done on, not a hobby to work on itself. The command line isn't better for anyone who is NOT a geek. For non-geeks the graphical user interface with its drag and drop abilities rules the roost. But seriously, good

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by ajs318 (655362)
          Having used both the VAX/VMS and Unix command lines, I know that there are better ones than MS-DOS. DOS really did a lot to tarnish the reputation of the command line.

          Still, just try to do the equivalent of

          $ for IMAGE in *.jpg; do THUMBNAIL="`basename $IMAGE .jpg`_mini.jpg"; convert -resize 200x200 $IMAGE $THUMBNAIL && echo "Shrunk $IMAGE giving $THUMBNAIL"; done

          through a GUI and then tell me it's quicker or easier. (Let's say for argument's sake that there are a hundred, 4-megapixel .jpg ima

  • Real linux users... (Score:4, Funny)

    by simm1701 (835424) on Friday March 30 2007, @02:56AM (#18540503)
    Real linux users:

    Have beards
    Drink (free) beer

    And ROLL THEIR OWN DISTROs!!!!!

    *cue insane laughter*

  • Based on Kubuntu (Score:3, Informative)

    by aitikin (909209) on Friday March 30 2007, @02:58AM (#18540511)
    Having it based on Kubuntu actually worries me quite a bit. I have installed Ubuntu, Kubuntu, and Xubuntu, and the only one I have ever seen have any serious problems was Kubuntu. Ubuntu has been running for months on a completely non-tech savvy individual's computer, Xubuntu for about the same on a semi-savvy individual, and Kubuntu...Well Kubuntu crapped out on a semi-savvy individual after 2 months. I don't know if this is just my experiences coming through, but I've noticed a few others mentioning this difference as well. So I'd be glad to have something that's KDE based that I can recommend to anyone, but if it's Kubuntu based, I'm very weary.
    • I concur, when trying to migrate my laptop OS to Linux I tried Kubuntu first as it was supposed to be the most complete (good CD/DVD burner, good music player, overall good software). But it was very buggy, the artsd always crashed lots of Knotify processes where making the machine slow, the cd burner (k3d) worked half of the time and overall it just fell very clanky.

      I installed Ubuntu and since then it has became my alternative OS (using XP as main) and I am very happy with it (although I cant use it as m
    • I've been using Kubuntu on my workstation for over a year, including upgrading from Dapper to Edgy. I'm more than semi-savvy (my business is based 100% on custom software I have written) and I've had no problems with Kubuntu. That you've had three computers and the one that failed was Kubuntu means nothing statistically. You're not working with enough computers to be statistically significant. Sure, "a few others" makes it interesting, but considering that Kubuntu is basically Ubuntu with a different pa

    • Re:Based on Kubuntu (Score:4, Informative)

      by naich (781425) on Friday March 30 2007, @04:56AM (#18541043) Homepage
      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.
      • That's kinda the impression I got using it. I love KDE, but Kubuntu just felt wrong.

        It's always good to have a grammar freak around. Thanks for the correction.

      • Could I please be pointed to the reasons of these comments? I've used a lot of Linux distros in the past, and Kubuntu -that I use at work since 6.04- always seemed to me the best in terms of both usability, simplicity and functionality. It also seems to me it has the best thought KDE desktop I've always seen. It's both simple and fully powerful. What is wrong in the Kubuntu interface?

  • And not the article itself. Too bad, would have been nice to hear whether this was a real contender or not.
  • MyLinux the easiest Linux ever... because I SAY SO! ;)

  • It is based on Kubuntu, not on Ubuntu (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 30 2007, @03:28AM (#18540617)

    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 (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TheWanderingHermit (513872) on Friday March 30 2007, @03:36AM (#18540659)
      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? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Raphael (18701) <quinet&gamers,org> on Friday March 30 2007, @04:04AM (#18540801) Homepage Journal

        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 (Score:4, Insightful)

        by pembo13 (770295) on Friday March 30 2007, @04:11AM (#18540829) Homepage
        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: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Peregr1n (904456)
        I might be a reasonably good test bed. I recently installed Ubuntu on my home PC as my first taste of Linux. I find it easy enough to use once everything is set up, but the fact that I couldn't just click-and-install a wireless card driver just drew a blank look from me (why the hell should I need to edit config files and compile stuff for something so simple?) From my point of view, Ubuntu is pretty much there in terms of basic user friendliness and ease of use, it just needs more drivers and less applica

        • 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.

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

      There are more screenshots available on Go2Linux [go2linux.org], describing the installation steps. It is not a surprise that it is almost identical to the current GTK+ Ubuntu installer, except for the Ulteo logo. Also, the initial boot screen has been changed to look a bit more similar to the SUSE boot splash (with the blue curves) but otherwise this is very similar to the current Ubuntu installation steps.

      this s

  • Easiest Linux with Hardest Site (Score:3, Insightful)

    by suv4x4 (956391) on Friday March 30 2007, @06:13AM (#18541341)
    Go on, try to quickly navigate the submenus of their site here [ulteo.com].

    Make me feel bitter about their "easiest linux ever" statement, especially the part about "easiest".

  • Whatever happened... (Score:4, Informative)

    by nschubach (922175) on Friday March 30 2007, @07:18AM (#18541671) Journal
    Whatever happened to linking straight to the source instead of someone's lame blog? http://www.ulteo.com/main/ [ulteo.com]

  • YALD (Score:4, Insightful)

    by graybeardtechie (1081875) on Friday March 30 2007, @08:32AM (#18542327)
    Just what the world needs - another Linux distro. Maybe if a few good folks could set their egos aside, and rather than create Yet Another Linux Distro, actually contribute to an existing community, we might converge on a manageable set of improved distros. This fragmentation is destroying, rather improving, the outlook for Linux. We are rapidly building a Tower of Linux Babel.

    • Re:Irony (Score:4, Funny)

      by unitron (5733) on Friday March 30 2007, @06:08AM (#18541323) Homepage Journal

      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.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by ajs318 (655362)
          I feel your pain.

          The thing is this: ignorance is transient. You start out not knowing things, and you need showing how to do them. Everything is hard, if you have never done it before. Once you have done something a few times, though, you start to understand what's happening and it gets easier. There are a lot of things which you will only ever have to do so rarely that they never really become "easy".

          The idea of treating the state of ignorance as a desirable one which should be preserved (the Win

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.