More ideas: Unify the Ubuntu Name

First, I want to thank everyone who gave their input regarding my last post about unifying the Ubuntu brand. You can also read more opinions on Freddy's and Og's blog.

Next, I want to share some of the ideas that were expressed in the comments to my post.
  • "Ubuntu Lightweight Desktop edition? Why didn't they make the default edition lightweight enough? How come when I install it, it uses the same amount of memory right after I boot up as the regular edition?

  • XFCE is not lighter than Gnome in reality at all. What you end up with is that people will be forced to install some KDE/Gnome applications because XFCE doesn't provide everything required. That will pull in several environments running simultaneously, and in overall it's far heavier than pure Gnome/KDE. It will lead to some new comers to think "ooh it's LIGHT", and getting really disappointed and moving along to something else. "Light" should NOT be used as a selling point for Xubuntu, ever!

  • You: "You should try Xubuntu"
    Them: "What's Xubuntu"
    You: “You know Ubuntu? Well, this is Ubuntu with Xfce.”
    Why not start with, “You should try 'Ubuntu with Xfce'”

  • People have a hard enough time just trying to remember and pronounce "Ubuntu." Getting rid of all of this Ku-Xu-Go nonsense would be a big step in the right direction. Besides, for all of Microsoft's stupidity, their naming conventions are significantly more memorable and pronounceable than anything Ubuntu or Linux-in-general offers.

  • I personally think there just needs to be one desktop version. Then at the time of installation you have the choice to install either Gnome, KDE ,or Xfce. Much like other distros have been doing for years.

  • Ubuntu is very focused on ease of install, and an old and valid concern is that new users cannot be expected to make an informed choice about their desktop environment.
  • A simple drop down list is NOT too confusing for novices, especially if GNOME is the default and the installer recommends using the default. Most users cruise through using default settings anyway.

  • I don't think the names should be unified until the tools are equivalent. I am not talking about the places where GNOME and KDE do things differently - I am talking about the additional tools and wizards that help make Ubuntu as popular and user friendly as it is today. Where is my Proprietary Driver Manager in Kubuntu? That sort of thing. Until that happens, I think that making the other *buntu derivatives part of the same product is asking for trouble.
After reviewing the comments, I am leaning towards a single Ubuntu Desktop version that allows the user to select Gnome (default), KDE, and XFCE during install. Even more importantly, there should be an option under "System > Preferences" that will allow a user to change between those whenever they want.

For an example of how this could be done, look at how OpenSuse handles this question during install. They provide a small screenshot of each option. The problem with this is that people will assume that Gnome is brown and has the "Start" bar at the top, and KDE is blue with the "Start" bar on the bottom. This is untrue, since both version allow you to change the color scheme and position of the taskbar.


I understand that this will add an extra step to the install. I really appreciate what Ubuntu has done to simplify the install process and the reduction in user input. However, I believe that the benefit of having a unified Ubuntu Desktop is greater than the cost of this extra step during install.

As you can tell, I feel that marketing Ubuntu is an important step to achieving mainstream adoption. Because of this, I have recently joined the Ubuntu Marketing Team. If you have any experience in marketing, or if you just have some good ideas, please join this team. Together, we can make a difference!

Comments

  1. I'm all for unifying the name. All the separate names, websites, and guides (ubuntuguide.org kubuntuguide.org) confuse me anyhow especially when it's all the same core.

    How about naming them by color? Ubuntu Blue (kde), Ubuntu Brown (gnome). This would make it easier for support purposes with noobies who don't know the gnome/kde/xfce differences.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It might be a little late to offer my opinion on this, but feel I should anyways. At first, I thought unification was a bad idea, until I thought about some of the trouble I've had in the past. The first thing I noticed with Ubuntu/Kubuntu is that some documentation is duplicated between the two and worse, some really helpful information listed under (for example) Kubuntu that applies to all versions wouldn't be found by those searching for Ubuntu for Xubuntu. Remember, Google is verb used in very forum. Someone searching for an answer may not think to search using all the *buntu terms.

    Another thing I would like to mention is that if I download the Xubuntu CD, install it, and decide I don't like it as much as Ubuntu, I'd have to redownload an entire ISO just to get GNOME or KDE to be the default environment.

    To alleviate the problem undeconstructed mentioned, I do think there should be a little "GNOME", "XFE", "KDE" icon somewhere so that people can ask, "Does the icon say GNOME, KDE, or XFE?" and the unknowing user being helped can quickly answer the question.

    So there's my two cents.

    ReplyDelete
  3. First, Xfce is just as heavy as gnome now because they made it a gnome clone and it sucks. The 'real' Xfce doesn't look / act anything like the version in Ubuntu. They've bastardized it and I can't stand it anymore.

    Second, how about a big huge fat resounding NO to a unified install disk. This is one of the best things about Ubuntu is that it is a single CD (700M) and we don't try to push DVDs or multiple CD sets like the other distros. I know I'm *never* going to use KDE or Xfce so I don't want to waste my bandwidth downloading all that crap. A unified CD would take more bandwidth, require more CDs (or DVD) and lose that benefit we have. It would not be possible to fit everything on a single CD and I hope we never go beyond the single CD route.

    I wont really comment on the naming unification. Don't really have an opinion there.. maybe because I use the 'true' Ubuntu ;)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ross and Undeconstructed:

    We can simply ask the user to click on "System > About Ubuntu" to see if it is Gnome, KDE, or Xfce.

    This step is needed anyway to determine what release they are running. It is hard to give support to someone without knowing this. Some things have changed a lot since Warty (Ubuntu 4.10).

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think the unification is good, but I don't think making this choice should be part of the default install. Remember that the idea of "Don't make me think!" goes a long way in gaining traction amongst users. The normal installation path should remain unchanged, and at some appropriate point an "Advanced configuration" button or some such is added that allows an individual to choose to start thinking. This way we keep the no-brainer installation appeal that ubuntu has already, and things only get more complex if people choose to make them more complex.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I like the idea of a simplified naming scheme, but hate the idea of an install media with GNOME/KDE/XFCE, because I prefer the whole system on just one CD, and I don't like to download a big DVD for a lot of software that I won't use.

    I think that the selection should be carried out on the web site before downloading the ISO. In the site you can help the user select the version s/he likes more and the site can be updated whenever needed based on information from users. But at the end almost all users adopt only one version, so downloading one CD is the only thing needed.

    If you want a command to switch from one DE to another, make it as smart as the Language Support. If something is not installed, just download and install it.

    As on the names, I vote for something like:

    * Ubuntu Desktop (based on GNOME) (Default)
    * Ubuntu Desktop (based on KDE)
    * Ubuntu Desktop (based on XFCE)
    * Ubuntu Server

    On the site could be a big [What is this GNOME/KDE/XFCE thing?] Link to explain the differences, and the default mark will help uninterested parties to make the selection simpler.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Rivas, qhartman and Christer:

    Don't you think that bandwidth and DVD burners are a commodity now, and getting cheaper everyday?

    I do like the idea of a "What is this GNOME/KDE/XFCE thing?" website that goes more into detail about the differences between versions. We should have that anyway!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Maybe It is a foolish idea, but why don't let the user to try Gnome/KDE/Xfce direclty from the live DVD?

    During the installation you are asked to choose the DE, but you have also the option to _try out_ all of them.

    I think (maybe I'm wrong) that with all the coolest things we can do today with live distros, this is not impossible.

    During the trial there could be a little guide which shows to the user the main concepts and features of each DE (starting with the explaination about what is a DE, a Windows user doesn't know it at all!).

    It is foolish or not? =)

    ReplyDelete
  9. I'm all for unifying the name, and I think Big Dans idea is wonderful! "Ubuntu Blue" and "Ubuntu Brown", etc is so much easier for Joe User to remember, and understand, than "Ubuntu with KDE" and "Ubuntu with Gnome".

    ReplyDelete
  10. Tristan Brown: I've read both posts and i must say i totally agree with you man!


    børge: the color scheme naming sucks! Like Tristan Brown already said, the UI is customizable (wallpaper, color scheme, arrangements etc).

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think there is one and only one compelling reason to unify names and that is distro stats. We see various internet publishers telling us which distro is most popular 'this week'. Most that I've seen treat the various Ubuntu flavors as if they were totally unrelated. Unified naming would force these prevaricators to treat us proper.

    ReplyDelete
  12. We can simply ask the user to click on "System > About Ubuntu" to see if it is Gnome, KDE, or Xfce.

    How the fsck is that supposed to work? System > About Ubuntu only exists on Ubuntu, and this can only result in two outcomes:
    1.) Ok, it says "..." (Just the fact that this worked means they're using Ubuntu)
    2.) Where's 'system'? (This means they're using (K|X)ubuntu and you need to do even more to figure it out)

    Basically, I think this is all a bit misguided. I agree that there is a problem regarding duplication of documentation, and some things need to be unified to keep K/U/Xubuntu part of the same community. But assimilating them all into one distribution and pestering the users with a choice they don't want isn't the way to do it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Asking people to choose a DE during install is not really a good idea. It asks people to make a choice they can't make. Like "Hi, do you want this desktop or this one?" "I don't know, I just want Linux!"
    Not everyone is that into desktop enviorments you know...

    Ubuntu is Ubuntu and Kubuntu is Kubuntu. Remember that Coca-cola makes both Coke and Fanta, without calling Fanta "Coca-Cola with Orange"

    - Andreas Nilsson

    ReplyDelete
  14. So, let me get this straight: You're recommending that Ubuntu dump some of the most important ingredients (simplicity, rocking integration and unflinching brand/product focus) that made it different, better and independently attractive compared to other distributions so early on, when no one thought a new distribution would ever succeed?

    That sounds like a recipe for being... ill-conceived, undifferentiated and unsuccessful.

    Sorry. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  15. Jeff,

    Quite the opposite; I want to IMPROVE the "simplicity, rocking integration and unflinching brand/product focus".

    Simplicity: Simply download the "Ubuntu Desktop". No need to decide if I want Xu/Ku/Ubuntu, no more "What do those strange names mean anyway?". The active desktop environment should be a choice the user can make at anytime.

    Integration: I wish Kubuntu and Xubuntu had all the default tools that Ubuntu comes with. We should make the basic administration tools available to all the desktop environments.

    Brand/Product Focus: That is the purpose of following a naming convention that unifies the Ubuntu brand!

    See, we are in agreement after all! :)

    Tristan

    ReplyDelete
  16. That screenshot from suse must be one of the most difficult questions to the user who doesn't know anything about KDE and Gnome. Look for the differences: one has the menu on top and the other at the bottom... apart from that it is hard to see any difference.

    Ubuntu desktop as you say in the last comment, already exists: it is Ubuntu, and it uses the Gnome desktop. The developers made a good choice, just as KDE would have been a good choice, but at least they made a choice and that is what is important!

    ReplyDelete
  17. The cost just isn't worth it.


    Can you honestly explain to a newbie why they should even care if they install GNOME or KDE or XFCE or what the difference between them is? Without going into technical issues like referring to specific technologies (e.g. Gtk+ or Qt), I can't, so all this option will end up doing is confusing and intimidating newbies who are "afraid of making a mistake".


    Truth be known, the key reason most newbies choose Kubuntu/Xubuntu over the default Ubuntu is that a KDE/XFCE user chose it for him/her. It generally doesn't matter anyway since if a KDE/XFCE app is important enough, the newbie will end up installing it through Add/Remove programs. Most GNOME users end up installing at least one KDE app, and most KDE users end up installing at least one GNOME app. It's the way it should be.


    The unified approach would also increase the requirements for the Ubuntu install from a small CD to a large DVD with little benefit since most people will only install one environment and then add any necessary files from "the other environment" after the install.


    Schedule-wise, the unification would mean KDE and XFCE would lose the flexibility of releasing interim releases independent of GNOME. This is especially important since KDE 4.0 might be out after Ubuntu is released, so a Kubuntu update with anything other than KDE 4.0 beta should be possible but less so with a unified Ubuntu since the GNOME and XFCE installs would need to be respun for no good reason.

    ReplyDelete
  18. it seems everyone is forgetting that we can always install whatever DE we want later...even a layman can be told how to manage to do this in Synaptic. no one is talking about including all the DEs on the install disk. one CD install is in fact one of the best features of ubuntu. but the kubuntu-desktop, xubuntu-desktop, etc packages are in the repos for a reason. hell, when you install these, they even ask you what DE you want for the default, and so does the login screen if you go looking for the swich session option.

    so in short, i think it should be like Ubuntu: GNOME edition, Ubuntu: KDE Edition, etc

    ReplyDelete
  19. I started writing a response to this here, but it got rather long. The short version: The problem here is that many people, including yourself, still think that "Gnome", "KDE", and "XFCE" are acceptable words to use when communicating with ordinary people.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Maybe the alternate install CD can offer an option to download and install KDE/Xfce, but have GNOME as default. If someone didn't know what all these DEs were, I would say "just go with the distro's default" because it's probably the one they've put the most work into. (This coming from a KDE fan)

    As for Xfce being a GNOME clone:
    xubuntu.png

    ReplyDelete
  21. Let's see...
    First Xubuntu is great for older systems, maybe it uses the same resources on your pc but i have tried it on older pc's and well it just works (it is not the same for kde or gnome).

    Second, the Xubuntu, Kubuntu, Goobuntu, Ubuntu, etc makes it easier not only to identify as underconstructed said, but because it let's you find specific info when troubleshooting said system.

    Third, please excuse me but, you should remember that not EVERYBODY have the same resources at hand, so it might just be me but a proper DVD containing all choices would take a lot of time. I say let people know what they are going to find on each flavor of the distro and get what they want.

    Fourth, this is all about choice. I say let them call their tools as they want. I have not seen one making such a big fuzz about all Knoppix or Morphix variations. (Oh and they all hold the same core)...

    Fifth if people don't know, they will learn.

    Sixth, works with... please let me rephrase that, how else would you let the people know that you require Gnome or KDE to run a program?

    Seventh, if you don't like the name ('cause you are entitled to an opinion) just change it... We both know Ubuntu is Ubuntu.

    And last... Shouldn´t we be speaking about unifying all Distros under the GNU/Linux? [sarcasm] Oh sure this would make things easier dont you think? [/sarcasm]

    ReplyDelete
  22. From a product point of view it's the way to go....

    ReplyDelete
  23. Frankly, I've found this (K)(X)Ubuntu stuff annoying.

    I suppose the initial argument was user-friendliness, but as a longtime Linux user that has used many different distros, I'm just used to flat-out choice.

    The majority of distros I've used (save for Debian and Gentoo Live) do in fact offer you a choice of GNOME, KDE or both at the time of initial installation.

    Every Linux distro I've heard of just goes by one name. This multiple names for what is the same core distribution (Ubuntu) is rather silly and confusing.

    I "get it", but I'm an experienced user. I frankly think that the goal of being more user-friendly in this regard is counter-productive.

    I am all for one single Ubuntu distro with a default GNOME default checked at the time of install (with the option of also selecting KDE or XFCE or switching to just any one or two or all of these (as Fedora does, for example).

    Despite rumors to the contrary, Ubuntu does not corner the market on user-friendliness (at least when it comes to installation).

    I personally find Mandriva to be #1 in that regard (although Ubuntu remains my favorite distribution)

    On the other hand, I'm not sure if making such a change to Ubuntu would make more of a mess (i.e. discontinuing the Kubuntu and Xubuntu names) than just leaving it as it is.

    It would have been easier and more logical if Kubuntu and Xubuntu hadn't existed in the first place.

    I personally like GNOME, KDE and XFCE so I've always installed all three anyway regardless of the distribution I'm using.

    I feel silly saying I'm using Ubuntu with KDE when responses would be "isn't that Kubuntu?...."

    ReplyDelete
  24. Ubuntu also tried to fit on one CD. The 7.10 Beta, last time I installed, is around 730 MB. It will need to be trimmed down to around 700 MB before final release, so there's no room for KDE/Xfce.

    Instead, they should just scrap KDE and Xfce altogether (for simplicity), and have both apt-get and yum under a common GUI. This is if they want non-Linux nerds to use their distro.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Using the Cisco console in Linux

What it takes to make Ubuntu ready for use

Five ways to use Windows apps in Linux