Dell to Offer Ubuntu 7.04

Fantastic news IMO, Ubuntu is a very solid distro, especially their latest release.

Dell to Offer Ubuntu 7.04

In February when Dell launched IdeaStorm as forum for customers to contribute ideas for product offerings, we received overwhelming feedback that customers wanted Linux on desktops and notebooks.

As part of an overall effort to update our Linux program, today we are announcing a partnership with Canonical to offer Ubuntu on select consumer desktop and notebook products.

Full Story

If by solid you mean, the best distro out there hands down. Then yes.

Originally Posted by Faustus

If by solid you mean, the best distro out there hands down. Then yes.

Indeed. I'm running Ubuntu Ultimate, which is a cool flavor of it.

is it ez to install and use like windows ?
I never used anything beside windows

Originally Posted by MJA

is it ez to install and use like windows ?
I never used anything beside windows

Yes it is, perhaps even easier in some areas

Take it out for a test drive

just download , brun , boot from the cd/dvd drive ?any driver issues?

Originally Posted by MJA

just download , brun , boot from the cd/dvd drive ?any driver issues?

Yep, that's it. You can try it as a live-cd without hurting your current install. If you decide to install it, you can use the onboard partition manager (a partition magic clone) to resize your current partition and make another (back up your data first of course).

@Gmaq, Great! I didn't know you could cross-upgrade distros, but I guess since they're all debian bases it would be possible. I've experimented with Mepis though but I really love ubuntu. Are you using KDE or Gnome? The Wifi and drivers support across the board was something they were really pushing for in 7.04, looks like they did it well!

Desktop Edition Ubuntu 7.04 - Supported to 2008 is not the same like Ultimate Edition 1.3 right ?

Originally Posted by MJA

Desktop Edition Ubuntu 7.04 - Supported to 2008 is not the same like Ultimate Edition 1.3 right ?

No they're not. Ubuntu 7.04 is the official release from Canonical. It is the latest version. Ubuntu Ultimate is a user-compiled version that includes many more applications preinstalled but is only current with the Edgy Eft version - 6.14 I believe. If you install it, you'll then have to do an upgrade to 7.04. Either way will work

just got down.woow took 5 min to install .only one error so far" SOUND SERVER FATAL ERROR.CPU OVERLOAD.ABORTING" it keeps showing up every few min,also the screen size issue (dell 20" wide screen).
question.do I need an anti-virus ?

videocard-NV 6600GT

sound card- on board realtek

You don't need an antivirus. If you're looking for the linux versions of windows programs (ie Amarok instead of iTunes), just ask and I'll try to direct you to some ones to try. As for the sound error, that sounds like an alsa problem. Alsa is the program in linux that does sound. Try googling that message error with ubuntu after it and/or your hardware and see what you can find, I found these two links:
http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-22664.html
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/arts/+bug/66982

Also which desktop are you using when you log in? KDE or Gnome?

Originally Posted by MJA

just got down.woow took 5 min to install .only one error so far" SOUND SERVER FATAL ERROR.CPU OVERLOAD.ABORTING" it keeps showing up every few min,also the screen size issue (dell 20" wide screen).
question.do I need an anti-virus ?

videocard-NV 6600GT

sound card- on board realtek

Are you using the official nvidia driver, or the community driver? You can find the driver name in the xorg.conf file.

Would that Realtek audio be the HD audio?

I think I spoke too soon.there is 3 icons on desktop examples,install,kvirc3.I hit install,then when i got to step5 under prepare partitions it said no devices detected.I don't understand how this software works lol. I can use it and surf the net from the cd/dvd drive,but I can't install it on my HD,very interesting

Ah, you're still running the livecd. I wonder why it didn't detect your partition. What size drive are you using, is it NTFS?

@MJA - Since Garibaldi is helping you already, I don't want to jump in with too much information all at once and possibly confuse the issue, but I just took a look at your system specs, and you might want to go a different route to try this out.

You might consider a VM. You should be able to use WMWare, VirtualBox, or even Virtual PC. That will allow you to install Ubuntu, use it, install programs, whatever you want to do. It won't be running natively, and will likely run a little slower, but you won't have to mess with creating partitions, etc.

Later, if you would really like to try to install it natively, we can help you with shrinking your existing NTFS partition to accommodate the install.

When I installed my first full time linux (back in the Fedora Core 2 era), I had the luxury of having a second hard drive available to install a safe dual boot setup. Now when I try out new distros, I either do it via a live cd, or run them in VirtualBox for a while to see if I'll really be interested in it. All my systems are currently dual boot XP/MEPIS, and I need them for business, so I don't experiment with my stock installs much.

I think that this will appeal to users in other countries who haven't used computers much before (and have a limited operating budget). In addition, many people who don't know computers well nowadays seem to be very concerned about spyware and viruses and protecting themselves. If Dell offers computers that are even cheaper than the windows alternatives but free of spyware and viruses, I think people will jump on that. Mac OS X is also pretty virus-free of course, but those computers cost 2-3 times as much

Originally Posted by Krispy Kritter

I don't see the big deal. Typically, the only people interested in an OS like this are computer geeks (no offense...I'm one). And most computer geeks don't buy prebuilt pc's anyway.

The casual user, and I suspect Dell's majority customer base, want windows machines.

I've made this same observation, but only time will tell. I think one positive aspect of this is that it might start to nudge hardware manufacturers into providing better linux drivers. If the numbers from Dell don't impress the hardware makers, then probably not, but it needs to start somewhere.

With the launch of Vista, there are people looking for an alternative. Many say that linux installs are too hard, and that hardware compatibility sucks. While I find both statements false, here is an opportunity to change some of that.

Most linux installs are easier, or on the same level as installing Windows. But, most average home users don't do installs. They get what was put on the machine for them. Now, it will be pre-installed. These Dells are going to be configured so the hardware is fully compatible with Ubuntu. That should solve both those issues.

We'll see where it goes.

The problem with any linux install is most programs require Windows, and many programs and some web sites even require Internet Explorer. Linux may work satisfactorily for those just browsing the web, word processing and a few games, but for most linux will remain an impractical alternative.

Originally Posted by bevills1

The problem with any linux install is most programs require Windows,

Not quite. Most programs require the OS they were written for. Big difference. It might be more accurate to say that most commercial programs require Windows, again, not all. Also, since linux is capable of running many Windows based programs (and not through emulation), even many Windows programs do not require Windows.

Originally Posted by bevills1

and many programs and some web sites even require Internet Explorer.

Somewhat true before Firefox started eating large chunks of IE's territory, and when most web developers were using MS tools and MS active content to create their sites. The backlash from Firefox, Opera, and Safari users is fixing that problem rapidly.

Originally Posted by bevills1

Linux may work satisfactorily for those just browsing the web, word processing and a few games, but for most linux will remain an impractical alternative.

That is a very bold generalized statement. However, there is still a bit of merit in it. Since the cheap OEM "one-size-fits-all" flood of PCs into the market, "most" people now fall into that category. This in itself makes it a practical alternative.

But again, arguments start to fall apart when the argument is made that general. An impractical alternative is not an alternative if it is truly impractical. An alternative is an alternative if it allows you to do what you want to do, albeit in a different way. So, unless we look at what specific things are being done, it is not possible to say whether an alternative would do it in a satisfactory manner or not.

I'm fair game to debate what linux will specifically do or not do, but the general statement made holds little merit.

Typical quotes from the past:

"Who needs Windows? Most programs are DOS-based."
"Who needs Windows 95? Most Windows programs are 16-bit."
"Who needs a Pentium with MMX? No software supports it."
"Who needs Windows XP? Most programs run on Win9x."

Moving forward to today, how many current Windows programs could run on DOS, Win 3.x, etc?

For Dell to offer a GNU/Linux OS shows that there is a definite groundswell in the demand and interest for a non-MS alternative OS that is not tied to proprietary hardware.

Good luck with trying to get a wireless adapter to work.

Originally Posted by A_T

Good luck with trying to get a wireless adapter to work.

Ubuntu 7.04 has much more support for wireless, that was one of the main changes

The problem with any linux install is most programs require Windows

There are many linux alternatives, some of them like Amarok are even better than the windows versions.

many programs and some web sites even require Internet Explorer

The only sites I have ever noticed this is the Microsoft windows update site. Other sites load better in Firefox. In fact, IE does not support many AJAX and Web 2.0 librarys (ie mootools, jquery, etc). If you really want IE, you can even run it natively (at the same speed as in windows) through WINE

Originally Posted by A_T

Good luck with trying to get a wireless adapter to work.

My wireless adapters work just fine thank you.

I'm sure it was due to your wishing me luck, and not the hard work of the linux developers reverse engineering Windows drivers. Oh, by the way, I can also make my wireless work in linux using Windows drivers. Care to try to make your wireless work in Windows using linux drivers?

I tried Linux Mandrake 10, and I had no problems with wireless connection, web browsing, or programs that came with it, but I have at least 2 programs that were written for Windows and a half dozen web sites I use that require Internet Explorer. No doubt linux will work fine for those who don't have Windows specific programs or web sites requiring Internet Explorer, but linux remains impractical for me and many others who have such requirements. I'm no gamer, but I doubt those who are big into gaming will find linux a practical alternative either.

Originally Posted by bevills1

I have at least 2 programs that were written for Windows and a half dozen web sites I use that require Internet Explorer. No doubt linux will work fine for those who don't have Windows specific programs or web sites requiring Internet Explorer,

Well, as several of us keep saying, some people do have a need for some Windows applications, as well as IE specific sites. Many linux users have gotten around those limitations. In many cases, WINE will run Windows only programs. If you only have a small handful of those keeping you tied to Windows if you don't want to be, this is one alternative. WINE is not an emulator (that's what WINE stands for). It is a functional set of reverse engineered Windows libraries. For IE, we can usually run it in WINE if needed.

Originally Posted by bevills1

but linux remains impractical for me and many others who have such requirements.

As we say, if it's impractical for you, you probably shouldn't use it. While some users are anti-MS or anti-Windows, most linux users are pro-choice We like having choices. If Windows is your choice, we're happy you have that option. If Windows is not your choice, we like giving you another option.

Originally Posted by bevills1

I'm no gamer, but I doubt those who are big into gaming will find linux a practical alternative either.

To this day, still a somewhat universal truth of linux. But then, if I want a game, I'll use a gaming console. Appropriate tool for the job and all that. Although, it is not that linux doesn't have games. It does. Some are outdated (quake, doom), some are native to linux. Many Windows games can be run under WINE or Cedega. Cedega is basically like WINE, although its specific function is on running Windows based games. It is a subscription based service (although the brave can download and compile the source for free), but it often lacks the absolute most current or hottest games. Again, not a perfect solution, but if you are talking some subset of games, linux can do that. If you'r e hardcore, stay with Windows or buy a console.

Originally Posted by tekkieman

Originally Posted by A_T

Good luck with trying to get a wireless adapter to work.

My wireless adapters work just fine thank you.

I'm sure it was due to your wishing me luck, and not the hard work of the linux developers reverse engineering Windows drivers. Oh, by the way, I can also make my wireless work in linux using Windows drivers. Care to try to make your wireless work in Windows using linux drivers?

Not necessary - the Windows drivers work fine. Plug in device and off you go - none of this hours of typing and configuring that Linux demands.

Originally Posted by A_T

Not necessary - the Windows drivers work fine. Plug in device and off you go - none of this hours of typing and configuring that Linux demands.

I think the number of times I had to hit a command line in the new Ubuntu is like 2 and in both cases someone gave me the exact command I needed to type.

Generally speaking the Ubuntu community gives really good support whenever I have had a question.

But the truth is Wirelessly speaking I've not had a card that didn't work out of the box for at least one version back. Heck my friends wireless worked perfectly booted to the Live CD without even installing the OS.

I used to be actually kind of ANTI Linux, I saw its limitations as too vast and needing FAR too much work to be ready for an end users desktop for many years to come. The Ubuntu guys have turned me around on all that. Each new release it inches closer and closer. Obviously if Dell is going to preload it on some systems they agree also.

In reality I only play one game and if I REALLY wanted I could get World of Warcraft to work under Linux just fine, I've just not sit down to try yet. The only thing that keeps me primarily in Windows is DVD Tools, specifically DVD Rebuilder and one tool thats handy to have for my job that I run on my personal PC. Otherwise MS would be kicked out the door. As is they are NOT getting any Vista upgrade money from me. (other then what I already stupidly ordered right before release to test on one of my boxes)

Originally Posted by A_T

Originally Posted by tekkieman

Originally Posted by A_T

Good luck with trying to get a wireless adapter to work.

My wireless adapters work just fine thank you.

I'm sure it was due to your wishing me luck, and not the hard work of the linux developers reverse engineering Windows drivers. Oh, by the way, I can also make my wireless work in linux using Windows drivers. Care to try to make your wireless work in Windows using linux drivers?

Not necessary - the Windows drivers work fine. Plug in device and off you go - none of this hours of typing and configuring that Linux demands.

As do my linux drivers. None of this hours of typing and configuring that...I guess nobody needs to do. Imagine that! I guess about the only differences is that I have two choices for drivers, and you have one. That's ok, that's why I'm a linux user. I like choice.