Here is a map of the GNU-Linux operating system and FOSS that shows you how
their relationships and various layers:
http://www.makelinux.net/system/
It gives you an idea of the role of the kernel in the whole process.

What you have to realize is that you can take out the Linux kernel out of the
GNU operating system and use another kernel ( Ive used the FreeBSD kernel which is
ironic since in contrast with GNU/Linux, where all the pieces are developed separately and brought together in distributions, FreeBSD has been developed as a complete operating system but I digress) because the kernel is a small (but very important part) of the kernel.

So no, the operating system of Ubuntu is NOT the Linux kernel.

As for being friendly….

How user friendly is it when you install Kubuntu as a dual boot and the first thing you are
then greeted by that black and white DOS looking option box (even better when the
kernel upgrades kick in and then they are given even more text choice?)

The reason I started installing PCLinuxOS/Mandriva instead of Kubuntu 3 years ago
was that (and a few others).
As of 9.04, you are still dual booting into something which is unsettling for newbies.
So total fail there.

My friend installed Kubuntu 9.04 on his mom’s netbook (she thought the Ubuntu it came
with was depressing and ugly) and when she open the lid and the netbook wakes up, she is
greeted with a ‘killing requests for dead queue’ message every time.

Its not the end of the world but reputation are often overblown and honestly….
‘user friendly’ is a question of personal choice but deep down most top distros that use
the same desktop look the same and are user friendly (SUSE and Mandriva were user
friendly before their time I guess).
Im running KDE4.2 with Mandriva, Kubuntu and two more I regularly change and the difference is minimal. My kids think theyre the same thing and think Im nuts.

I think the desktop is more important a choice than the distro and those choices affect
more the usability than a new wallpaper,icons or notifier.

I’ve done a couple of dozens installs over the past 3 years at install fests and friends and family
and desktop does make a huge difference.

i work and play on 2 Win, 1 Mac and 4 Gnu-Linux desktops every day and I believe that any power user should be able to adapt and be productive less than a week after first
trying a new environment… it is NOT rocket science.

But people are creatures of habit and they like what they know and casual users even more so if they only care that something just works.
That’s why Ive foudn that when given a choice between desktops (I only offer XCFE on old hardware) Windows users will go over 2/3 of the time with KDE. The bottom taskbar
and the look and feel (I found out they mean the fonts in KDE look more like Windows than
the Gnome ones).
My job when I want to switch someone over is to make them feel confortable, distro fanboism
doesnt figure into it. I recommend Kubuntu to power user friends who can search for answers and copy past the sudo commands, the ‘community’ is great for them and useless for the ones
who arent computer savvy.

I want to be able to customize as much as possible and with the least problems as possible.
For 3 years, PCLinuxOS was my friends.family distro but there were many others that were just as good and user friendly. To claim that it was the ‘best’ would have been childish.
Now, Mandriva seems to be doing the best KDE4.3 version (but again, the difference is
splitting whiskers).. Im sure that next year or the year after, it will be another.
This attachment to a distro through thick and thin is a very Mac fanboiesque thing.
The success of their OS/distro directly affect how they perceive themselves and their own self worth.

“My distro offers this and it does this and that.” sounds more impressive than saying that most top distros all do it but its like saying that flavour #25 at Baskin Robbins is the best one.

1+2+3 = 6. But also a very user-friendly, adaptable environment.

It’s not a lifestyle, idiots. It’s a PC.

Windows. It WORKS!

[Software Management] If you use debian, you either choose stable with outdated packages or you run unstable, with ahem.. stability issues. Ubuntu provides a balance new packages tested for stability in a six month release cycle. If you stick to the main repositories you are unlikely to be out of date by more than 6 months. If you want newer versions, many packages are now available through the Ubuntu PPAs. Debian has no such equivalent. This is a tangible benefit of marketing, not just hype.

[Choice] Ubuntu does simplify choice. You would ask a new user to try 3 different DEs, 8 different editors, 12 different video playes, 24 different music players before they make a choice. Good luck with that approach. Ubuntu presents one default DE, with one default application (typically considered best of the breed) for each function. Excellent choice for new comers. Even experienced users don’t change every setting of every program. For those that you care about, choose another setting/package, for those that you don’t the sane default settings are always there.

[Installation]Ubuntu installation is easy. 8 steps, 7 questions, with arguably the most difficult being disk partitioning. Installation is also fast compared to some other distros. Compare this with Fedora, OpenSuse and Mandriva. OpenSuse defaults to KDE because most OpenSuse users prefer KDE. Most Ubuntu users prefer gnome. Also OpenSuse is a DVD, Ubuntu is a CD, literally a big difference. To install kde in ubuntu do apt-get kubuntu-desktop. No need for ISOs or a reinstall. Your claims are disingenuous. What changes to be made to an installed system? Examples?

[Boot Time] Ubuntu does boot faster, google for bootcharts and boot times. Compare it with OpenSuse. By your own admission distributions with faster boots do not have adequate features. Again good luck pushing it to a newbie.

So many claims. So many vague allegations.

Ubuntu is hyped? perhaps, but no one is forcing anyone to use ubuntu. Still Ubuntu grows; may be you should consider why.

I would like to see software installation/upgrade/downgrade etc made much more easier and fully intergrated in the Software Centre so your average person can install anything with confidence. And this will make it easier for developers to get their software out.

eg I have installed Chromium this way, and if weren’t for PPA’s I would not have installed it. It is so easy. This may be lazy, but I want Linux for the masses and it has to be easy. Those who want a dogs breakfast are free to look elsewhere.

0. Ethics – Ubuntu and Canonical have them.

1. I needed the same level of troubleshooting support via Google as I have in XP.
Ubuntu provides this via http://ubuntuforums.org/ all the answers are there, you just need Google to find them :)

2. Vast software repositories (and codecs).
Ubuntu is the clear winner here with 20k+ packages.
Most of the software you need are just a few clicks away and they are pgp signed.
If its not in the repository the site usually has a .deb e.g. the Open University uses FirstClass so go to the site and yes! there is the .deb :)
As for the codecs installing “ubuntu-restricted-extras” does the job.

3. No one man bands – I need to know my investment in time and effort will not be wasted.
Ubuntu has a huge user-base and Community.

4. Constantly updated software
Canonical updates the whole distro every 6 months – Lovely!

5. Only best of breed software installed by default
I don’t need 25 text editors and I especially don’t need 50 bad/unfinished text editors.

6. LiveCD.

I found that moving over to Firefox\Thunderbird\Openoffice in windows then making the jump to Linux was the way to go. Then a VM of XP for any apps that you still need to use until you find an alternative.

Ubuntu made my move possible.

If you’ve paid for the full Photoshop and Quarkexpress, then I assume that you are a professional, and almost assume that you can afford a Mac. ;-)

If you really want this software available for Linux, go ask Adobe, or go ask Ubuntu to partner with Adobe and have them ask it.

Try installing ubuntu-restricted-extras package using synaptic.

Don’t agree that your list illustrates ease of use for Ubuntu.
It’s fairly baffling when first confronted, MORE SO than
PCLinuxOS or others: you’re MERELY familiar with it.

Sudo: I can’t handle that form of nagging. I suspect that most
n0000bs will forget or lose their password as I did. Think that
was the time I used a live CD to change it, but may have been
another distro. Anyway, it won’t bother most users to “be” root
ALL the time, or to NOT type in ANY password; it’s what they’re
used to with Windows. The user/admin distinction (which I fully
grasp, thank you) is useful only if you do not install software;
it’s a geeky anachronism. I have a PERSONAL computer, I’m not
time sharing on some remote mainframe, darn it.

That leaves security WIDE OPEN if you install unknown software,
yes. However, even XP is safe enough to use anywhere on the web
under these conditions: use only Firefox, disallow “install on
demand”, not even updates; use “noscript” to selectively allow
Javascript; disallow Flash and everything from Adobe; disable all
search engine integration. The default Firefox installs on the
dozen or so Linux distros that I’ve tried violate all of those
rules. You cannot enable “web features” and be anywhere near
SAFE, besides not annoyed by an endless barrage of ads and
flashing images. (That reminds me: in Firefox about:config, set
browser.animation.mode to “once”. And use a “hosts” file.)

Choice made simple: current GUIs are a serious plague that you
regard as positive only because of familiarity. But they’re NOT
simple, have exotic possibilities yet often make common actions
difficult, besides are always sheerly manual labor of clicking.
Examples: In PCLinuxOS (KDE, and Windows) ctrl-selection works by
rectangles, NOT as a series list. This makes for an incredible
amount of clicking unless your choices happen to be lined up
right. — In Puppy (and others, probably all), the GUI not only
allowed but caused opening multiple video players, resulting in
essentially DEAD machine. Sometimes I wonder whether programmers
ever do more than toy with a new “cool” while ignoring normal use
and oblivious to possible drawbacks.

I couldn’t agree more:

“Don’t get me wrong, I’m not grousing here. I’m simply pointing out that things *will* go wrong, even after you have everything working. “User friendly” is a relative term.”

“Windows is for people who want to use their computers just like another Television set, without thought or bother, while Linux (any distro) is for people who aren’t afraid to roll up their sleeves and get their hands dirty fixing it. As long as you understand that difference, then yes, Ubuntu is the friendliest.”.

Your last point (above) is the best, making the difference clear for Windows crossovers.
My own background with computers gos as far back as PDP11, now about ~33 years.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not grousing here. I’m simply pointing out that things *will* go wrong, even after you have everything working. “User friendly” is a relative term. Just because a Live CD works with all your hardware (and there’s no guarantee of that), doesn’t mean it will continue to do so down the road after you’ve been working with the OS for six months. Windows is for people who want to use their computers just like another Television set, without thought or bother, while Linux (any distro) is for people who aren’t afraid to roll up their sleeves and get their hands dirty fixing it. As long as you understand that difference, then yes, Ubuntu is the friendliest.

I’ve been using Linux full-time for several years now, and wouldn’t go back to Windows now if you paid me. To me, Linux is simple, flexible, secure, and powerful. But that’s me, with nearly 30 years of computers under my belt. YMMV.