Help with Ubuntu or maybe try another distribution?

So, I've messed around with Ubuntu 11.04 a bit (through the Wubi Installer). I've seen people talk about GNOME and have no clue what it is, I've seen GNOME titled in a lot of updates, but talk about it for switching from the Unity to GNOME desktop or something. I don't know, I'm just really confused.

Anyway, I just reinstalled my OS (since I'm stupid and messed up some stuff when trying to unistall graphics drivers in order to install new ones). But, since I reformatted my HDD, I also created and unformatted 40GB partition just for other OS's.

How exactly do I customize the desktop in Ubuntu? I've tried to mess around with things but can't seem to get anything right with it. I don't much like the Unity desktop (probably since my history with windows goes back forever). What is GNOME?

Any other distributions recommended (that I may like more)? I downloaded iso's for 64bit Xubuntu and Kubuntu as well. I would have downloaded other distributions, but I didn't download anything larger than 700MB or that were torrent files.

If it helps to know why I want to dual boot, just because I can and to have another OS to mess with.

Thanks!

 

In short, Gnome 2 looks much like Mac OS while Gnome 3 is similar to Unity.
If you like how Win7 looks like, try KDE! Don't expect it to be the same, but it's as close as you can get (so I'm told).
Xfce and LXDE are rather conservative desktops when it comes to design (very distantly resemble Windows classic desktops, at least that's how Ubuntu configures them to look like) that save system resources (although Ubuntu messed that point up for Xfce).

I guess you'll like Mint better than Ubuntu. It comes with Gnome 2 by default but here it looks much like a classic Windows. Frankly I don't see any reason anymore to go for Ubuntu unless you are a fan of Unity. If you like to be lazy Mint will always be easier. And if you intend to tinker there are tons of other distros around that make that more fun than Ubuntu.
If you want a great KDE distro instead try OpenSuse!

 

Read my signature:

 

I think Unity actually looks more like MacOS X Snow Leopard. Gnome 2 really remind me more of Windows.

 

Simply put, Gnome is one many different "desktop environments" for Linux. In linux you can install and run your operating system totally by command line if you wanted. This might be good for servers but the typical user probably wants a graphical interface, ie: desktop environment, so you can use a mouse to drag and click on stuff, and have desktop widgets, etc.

Some of the desktop environments are fancier and look great but use more resources like Gnome and KDE. This really isn't an issue if you have newer computer with modern hardware.
Some environments are considered "lightweight" and use less resources which works better on older computers. IE: openbox, fluxbox, ICEwm, blackbox, lxde, xfce (just to name a few). The lightweight environments and window managers typically look a little plainer but are fully functional.

Recently ubuntu changed its default environment to Unity, which previously was only part of the ubuntu netbook distribution. Before unity, ubuntu used Gnome 2.x as its standard desktop.

It's safe to say you could probably install *any* desktop environment to use with your current ubuntu install. Some versions of ubuntu already come with different default desktops: Kubuntu = KDE, Xubuntu = xfce, Lubuntu = lxde, yet they are all still *ubuntu based.

Do what linuxwanabe said to enable the Gnome 2.x desktop. You'll probably like it.

Here are some links with pics showing a few different environments:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_environment

also look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_X_Window_System_desktop_environments

I hope this helps

 

Well, I had some older Mac OS version in mind. Which version was state of the art 5 yers ago?

Just for clarification:
There is a difference between Desktop environments (KDE, Gnome, Xfce, LXDE) and window managers (openbox, fluxbox, icewm...). Desktop environments are collections of different desktop elements like window managers panels and some other programs. Window managers are only responsible for window decorations and effects although some of them like icewm or fluxbox come with some sort of an own panel.
One must not confuse that. In fact openbox is the default window manager of LXDE.

 

Ok, thanks everyone! I'm going to go pick up some CD-R's tomorrow and burn the iso's. I'll try out a bunch of live CD's. It's weird to me. I never realised that Linux distros were less about the overall OS, but instead the underlying parts (under the GUI). When I first read about GNOME, KDE, etc. I just thought they were other distros, not GUI's for a desktop environment. I guess I'll have to try out Kubuntu and setup GNOME in Ubuntu. At this point I am more familiar with Ubuntu but like I said, don't care for Unity that much. I've seen some really cool looking Ubuntu desktops, and only got confused because I couldn't even do anything like that on my own (such as changing the location of the taskbar from the top for example). I saw some other post about someone looking for "Pro" distros, the last thing I care to do at all, is really learn the interface behind the GUI (or any distro that is difficult to use) but that is kind of the purpose of a GUI. I'm still learning more and more about Windows underneath everyday but my skills with the Command Line = 0 on any OS. I still have to find out about Windows PowerShell (otherwise I'm going to disable it in the "turn of feature of Windows" section).

Anyway, thanks for all the help everyone!

 

Instead of burning a bunch of CDs I'd recommend to try out some distros in virtual machines. This way you can see how an installed system looks and feels like and tinker a bit with the GUI without losing the changes after each reboot.
The only thing a VM can't tell you is the performance of a distro on your real hardware, but neither does a Live CD.

The laptop in your signature should easily handle two VMs simultaneously if you want to make direct comparisons.

Last but not least:
Have fun at DistroWatch.com: Put the fun back into computing. Use Linux, BSD.

 

State of the art 5 years ago would be OS X Tiger (10.5).

Never seen that version... I used a Mac for a bit sometime in late 80's or very early 90's (belonged to a very rich friend). At home, I was running DOS.

...and than it was Snow Leopard (which I expect to be keeping for at least two more years, I have decided against a Lion upgrade).

Windows like or Mac like, I think both Gnome 2.x and Unity are both intuitive enough that someone who can use Windows can feel comfortable after a few hours.

 

You can't customize Unity too much at this point and, frankly, I think unity is crappy.

You can customize Gnome 2 (Gnome desktop or whatever Ubuntu is calling it these days) to your liking. As others have said, you may prefer linux mint's implemenation of gnome 2.

LXDE (the lubuntu desktop) is lightweight and works well on netbooks and older hardware. It's very simple and easy to lay out. Replace pcman with thunar, learn to use synaptic and you're good to go.

 

Why not use Unetbootin and run a distro from a thumb drive?

 

If you think Unity is crappy, you should see Gnome 3. Overall, I think Unity might be ready to go mainstream once GDM has been replaced with Light DM.

You can change that with a single line at the command prompt or even through the GUI. A lot of people download Linux Mint because they want Gnome 2.32 and a right hand orientation. Guess what? It's easy enough to have that interface on Ubuntu.

The real downside of Mint is that your Google searches are redirect to a Mint page for the sake of advertising.

LXDE isn't all that lightweight but isn't read for the mainstream either. It's functional, but if I wanted to go in that direction, I might just go with IceWM and leave it at that.

 

Because this way you need to create those thumb drives and reboot every time you want to try another distro.

 

For now.

The "fallback" or "classic" mode that you are advocating will be going away in the next release.

IMO, that's not really a solution -- just postponing the inevitable.

 

Yup,

Third Ubuntu 11.10 alpha arrives - The H Open Source: News and Features

Well for me this is good news, I get to choose between an improved Unity and Gnome 3 in 11.10. But if Unity or Gnome 3 is not to your liking, maybe some other distro is the way to go.

 

not if you use YUMI multiboot thumb drive software ( YUMI - Multiboot USB Creator (Windows) | USB Pen Drive Linux ), works like a charm i have all my system recover tools, etc on one 4gb thumb drive plus a few distros. you still need to reboot but you dont have to create new ones.

 

The problem with that statement is that the Gnome 3 disaster was never inevitiable? The warning signs were there when Canonical broke negotiations with the Gnome community and went for Unity and Light DM. Now we have Linus Torvalds weighing in against Gnome 3.

The Gnome community broke down and ignored the needs of both developers and end users. Gnome 3 represents an irretrievable, irredeemable failure. And there was nothing inevitable about this failure.

 

I didn't mean that the failure of GNOME 3 was inevitable. I meant that Unity being forced on users is inevitable: Ubuntu's "fallback" is only a short-term reprieve.

 

True enough. God, I cannot stand that!

 

LOL! XFCE 4.8, here I come!

ICE and Flux are too minimalistic for me. Maybe if I was back on my PIII? I'd opt for straight openbox myself but not on any machine that I'd potentially share with anyone else. My gf loves mint but nearly faints in front of crunchbang.

LXDE needs some filling out but it does a nice job of providing a lightweight desktop that's amenable to regular folks. Lubuntu is pretty spartan still (how many blue buntus do we need anyway?) but Peppermint and mintlxde provide better examples of how LXDE can be used.

 

Please name a more lightweight desktop environment! And please don't compare apples to oranges by mixing desktop environments and window managers.

 

The problem with LXDE is that it doesn't appear to use all that much less RAM than classic Gnome or XFCE.

And it is fair to mix apples and oranges, when a Window Manager offers the same approximate level of functionality as a low end Desktop Environment.

LXDE is not a mainstream desktop environment and isn't really all that lightweight either.

 

But the meltdown in the Gnome community was the triggering even for the adoption of Unity. Gnome 2.x wasn't killed off by Unity, but by the Gnome community.

 

LXDE is lightweight compared to gnome, KDE and Xfce at least - which makes a lot of difference in being at least feature-rich to a pretty good extent and light weight at the same time.... I bet you cannot name another DE which is at least as feature-rich as LXDE and lighter at the same time...

The one good thing about LXDE is the components of LXDE are not tightly couple and can run independently unlike the other bigger DEs - which makes a lot of sense for devs/enthusiasts who wanna build on top of LXDE....

On what basis are you defining mainstream here ? from the distros' point of view - many distros have started providing LXDE options and few even use it as the primary choice... From the userbase - it might not be that high as gnome or kde, but at least on par with XFCE or even better.

 

I've found lxde to be signficantly lighter on ram and snappier than xfce. That said, xubuntu's implementation of xfce has become more efficient and I usually end up installing Thunar anyway.

 

welcome to the club.

oh and if your tired of xubuntu auto mounting all hdd partitions on the desktop, the fix is here.