Comments on: Ubuntu Satanic Edition 10.04 (Lucifer’s Legion)

By: Hecatior

Hecatior — Sat, 02 Apr 2011 20:33:53 +0000

Inside my desktop and it will stay that way for a long time. Why? Its stable. Many other ubuntu had flaws in java chat rooms and also this version is very very stable. It closes in 4 seconds and opens up in under 1 minute.

So yeah I dont care about the name – but this SATANIC edition has something to sink your teeth into. This linux distro is way better than mint or zorin. I have tried so many! Its countless – but I remain with this one. I was very scpetical at first but very soon I adpated to it and It was like the best replacement of my old XP! Now I can safely say, Windows is dead and Linux rules.

By: JD Hendrex

JD Hendrex — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 14:02:07 +0000

@ John:

lol… touche!

By: Randy

Randy — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 00:11:45 +0000

I’m with those comments that say this distro is kind of silly. It’s Ubuntu with a different theme. That’s not enough of a change for someone to justify calling it a separate distribution. Ubuntu isn’t just Debian with a uglier theme, it actually has a lot of things changed (though not usually for the better). I can also understand Linux Mint being a completely new distro even though it is very close to Ubuntu. It at least adds all of the multi-media stuff that aren’t installed by default in Ubuntu. I’m an atheist but I’m not going to make an atheist theme for Ubuntu and call it Atheist Ubuntu.

Still, I’m glad you didn’t avoid posting a review of this distro jsut because it’s evil and such.

By: fyujj

fyujj — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 23:14:35 +0000

@ John: Agree. MS still wins regarding devilish ties. I saw this review wasn't mentioned in Distrowatch, maybe because they use the Uxxxxx word. One could think this copyright© thing is the evil while the fun these guys have is quite on the good side.

By: Ubuntu Muslim Edition 10.04 (Sabily) Review | Desktop Linux Reviews

Ubuntu Muslim Edition 10.04 (Sabily) Review | Desktop Linux Reviews — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 20:24:03 +0000

[...] Ubuntu Satanic Edition 10.04 (Lucifer’s Legion) [...]

By: Jim Lynch

Jim Lynch — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 15:31:36 +0000

Ralph, good point on the official distinction. I added some text to cover that.

By: Ralph

Ralph — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:50:49 +0000

If you want this site to be taken seriously, you should at least get the basic facts in and be correctly informative. You should state in the beginning that this is not a recognized derivative or special edition of Ubuntu. It is simply plain vanilla Ubuntu with an elaborate (if juvenile) “theme” applied. As such, your review should limit itself to the quality of the artwork and how well integrated it is. Personally, I am extremely impressed by the quality of the artwork even though, in the end, it is childish and ugly.

By: Lucifer

Lucifer — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 10:37:39 +0000

In Nomine Dei Nostri Satanas-Luciferi:

Corrections: a really ‘Satanick’ distro would most certainly NOT have an EULA copied from M$W, nor would it contain ‘Mephistophelian’ bug-code, for the simple reasons that [LaVeyan] Satanism emphasises individual excellence rather than the conformist uniformity demanded by M$W, & places great value on quality. The Satanic edition exemplifies the Ubuntu value of customising & therefore having a more individual distro, although the ‘true Satanist’ would make a truly one-off personal version that expressed & satisfied his/her egotism, & so would probably not even bother with this version.

Nevertheless, it is hilariously funny, & proves that not all geeks are nerdy!

I shall give it a try.

SHEM-HA-MEPHORASH!

By: Fragger34

Fragger34 — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 01:46:59 +0000

John wrote:

If it was really a satanic distribution it would have an EULA copied from Windows.

Hahah! Good one, John!

By: michael

michael — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 07:26:31 +0000

@ John: How do you know? or is it winodws will copy from open source?

By: Manuel

Manuel — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 06:34:16 +0000

Nice post Jim. Here is how you could actuallt install Ubuntu Satanic themes and other eyecandy in Ubuntu.

http://www.techdrivein.com/2010/07/ubuntu-satanic-edition-1004-features.html

By: Mike Smith

Mike Smith — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 05:38:06 +0000

@ John: Now thats funny right there. I dont care who you are.

By: John

John — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 22:46:15 +0000

If it was really a satanic distribution it would have an EULA copied from Windows.

By: Christian

Christian — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 21:13:14 +0000

IMHO, it’s so stupid, as same Linux distribution can be…

By: ironick

ironick — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 19:46:44 +0000

> God I hate extremism(s).

Hate is an extreme.

Perhaps you meant “God I dislike extremism(s).”

Love and hate are both extremes. In the middle? Apathy.

On-topic though, I find the satanic edition creative and rather tongue-in-cheek. Which is nice. I still just run regular brown/purple Ubuntu myself though.

Cheers.

By: dragonmouth

dragonmouth — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 13:02:14 +0000

What is so special about the Satanic Edition that you accord it the status of a separate distro? All it is is Ubuntu with some Goth eye candy. There is NO special Satanic software to distinguish it from the run-of-the-mill Ubuntu. At least the Christian Edition has some Bible related software.

BTW – what’s with the Anti-AdBlock popup at the end of your review???

By: .net

.net — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 18:46:02 +0000

Of course you’ll write about it in the future as well. You hope it’s controversial.

But, I have to admit it, this satanic crap – and it’s neither a religion nor spirituality, btw – evens out nicely all that mushy Nelson-Mandela crap from the original Ubuntu.

God I hate extremism(s).

And no, of course I won’t download it and try it. Ubuntu Loudmouth Lemming is bad enough. No more Ubuntu!

By: Brian Masinick

Brian Masinick — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 16:23:24 +0000

Well, I guess that I’ll have to be the “Goody Two Shoes” in the bunch. I’ve already tested multiple variations of the Ubuntu 10.04 series. All along during the development, I closely monitored the Kubuntu developments, mainly because I am interested in the track that KDE has been taking, and the test releases of Kubuntu, Mandriva Cooker, and OpenSUSE, track the KDE progress better than most others (unless you want to track them with Arch, Gentoo, or Linux from Scratch).

Though Jim is not a fan of Kubuntu, I find the Kpackagekit and the mostly generic implementation of KDE to be what I want, because I want to be able to evaluate a mostly unaltered implementation and compare it to the customized versions. Kubuntu, during the relatively rocky recent history of the KDE project, has provided a reasonable, usable platform, though it has certainly faithfully shared the KDE 4 defects, and both the good and the bad.

Based on testing, not only Kubuntu, but also Xubuntu, Ubuntu, Lubuntu, Peppermint, and Mint, all of which use the Ubuntu repositories, I am confident that this release would have functional similarities to the others. The differences would be more in visual appearance and the choice of tools. Given that I have no particular urge to view or hear anything beyond what I’ve already seen or heard, I will pass on downloading this one. I will say, however, that based on what I’ve already tested, those who may be interested in this will, more than likely, find a very easy to install, reliable to use system.