Slashdot Mirror

You could look at http://www.ubuntu.com/testing/jaunty/beta to find out.

Or wait until Saint George's Day.

Note: This is a beta release. Do not install it on production machines. The final stable version will be released on April 23rd, 2009.

K.

Although Linux at least does have 'SE Linux', AppArmor, Exec Shield, support for ASLR, etc, etc so its more a case that its just not on by default yet. (Ironically a complaint usually levelled at Windows).

Please vote to stop this nonsense.

Where's the outrage by end-users for not being able to load Linux as a replacement OS?

http://www.ubuntu.com/

http://www.dell.com/content/topics/segtopic.aspx/linux_3x?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs

My GOD, there's three on one page.

Oh my, Installing Ubuntu on a MacBook Pro. I've been thinking about doing it myself. "This page describes how to install Debian on a MacBook Pro.".

http://system76.com/index.php?cPath=28

Can a photographer who's not a Linux guru use Photoshop on it? And apply that to all the other Linux laptops. So where's the lockin?

Falcon

Looking at the site, I noticed that Ubuntu has a list of projects to work on which are mostly from the Brainstorm site. Most of the other projects have no such plan. I think this is what puts Ubuntu ahead of so many other open source projects.

http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download

Why is linking to Ubuntu, which while a great OS and better alternative to MS - really has nothing to do with the article considered insightful?

Yes, we all know, Ubuntu > windows. I use it too, but really, that is SSDD.

I seem to recall seeing something awhile ago that Ubuntu is being ported to the ARM architecture .

There you go

Obligatory... Here is the link to the cure

http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download

KDE 4.2 is in the current 9.04 alpha releases of Kubuntu. I upgraded my 8.10 installation to the alpha release the other night. A couple of hiccups here and there that I'd guess will be smoothed out over the coming month.

The most annoying thing was that I lost my restricted codecs. I understand full well why Ubuntu can't distribute the codecs in some countries like the US, but I don't understand why the existing codecs vanished. Most of the time it doesn't matter to me because I generally use smplayer/mplayer and build the latter from svn snapshots. I only discovered the codecs were gone when I suddenly couldn't play MP3s in amarok.

He makes a good point about the weird Ubuntu version scheme: a new user is likely to think that you could update from version 8.04 to 8.10 as a ordinary incremental change.

Well, it is. I have been doing these incremental changes since 6.06 (dapper?). However, it is quite invasive and might break stuff. Especially the first release after an LTS release is dangerous, because some large changes will always be delayed until after the LTS release. Ubuntu actually does have a GUI method (update-manager -d) for upgrading (dist-upgrade in APT terms) to a newer release, but like TFA says, Ubuntu will not by itself offer you to dist-upgrade from an LTS release to a minor release.

But an expert would know that 8.04 and 8.10 are actually dates ('08.April and '08.October)

That's hardly "expert knowledge". And as you can see here, the release numbers are the only official designators. The release names (hardy, intrepid, karmic) are only intended for developers, much like you will never find references to Longhorn in official Microsoft documentation.

http://screencasts.ubuntu.com/ is a good start for anyone not into Linux. I use it as a link on the desktop of my family members.

Already a way to do it, https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/FromUSBStick

Maybe I am a little too harsh, thats perfectly possible since I'm a full time *nix admin and as such some topics are simply common knowledge for me. But having said that... When I read the article I'm surprised at how much he raves on about Synaptic and how this is the way to install/remove software. I therefor conclude that this was one of the major drawbacks during his last attempt.

Still... I can't help wonder if its safe to conclude that this basically means that this guy never bothered to even glimpse at the Ubuntu manual (or online help screens)? I mean, how hard can it be? You goto the Ubuntu website (where you most likely went anyway to download it), then you click "Support" (or if you're daring click the Documentation link directly). And then you can take your pick, like 8.10.

The reason I'm pointing out the obvious is because if you followed this road (what other is there?) then you'll end up on this page. And when I see that the 2nd link is none other than Adding and removing software then I maybe an arrogant BOFH but I can't help myself saying: "Next time: RTFM!".

Granted.. Normally none of us do that at first and I'll have to admit that a total novice (c|w)ould expect Linux to be as userfriendly as Windows. iow; you can operate it without reading a manual. But if you have tried over and over and you still didn't succeed, wouldn't it be kinda logical to start poking around the Support section before resorting to help and displayed surprises like these?

I mean... Even Microsoft has an extensive support section amongst which How to use XP. Why would Linux be any different?

Maybe I am a little too harsh, thats perfectly possible since I'm a full time *nix admin and as such some topics are simply common knowledge for me. But having said that... When I read the article I'm surprised at how much he raves on about Synaptic and how this is the way to install/remove software. I therefor conclude that this was one of the major drawbacks during his last attempt.

Still... I can't help wonder if its safe to conclude that this basically means that this guy never bothered to even glimpse at the Ubuntu manual (or online help screens)? I mean, how hard can it be? You goto the Ubuntu website (where you most likely went anyway to download it), then you click "Support" (or if you're daring click the Documentation link directly). And then you can take your pick, like 8.10.

The reason I'm pointing out the obvious is because if you followed this road (what other is there?) then you'll end up on this page. And when I see that the 2nd link is none other than Adding and removing software then I maybe an arrogant BOFH but I can't help myself saying: "Next time: RTFM!".

Granted.. Normally none of us do that at first and I'll have to admit that a total novice (c|w)ould expect Linux to be as userfriendly as Windows. iow; you can operate it without reading a manual. But if you have tried over and over and you still didn't succeed, wouldn't it be kinda logical to start poking around the Support section before resorting to help and displayed surprises like these?

I mean... Even Microsoft has an extensive support section amongst which How to use XP. Why would Linux be any different?

Maybe I am a little too harsh, thats perfectly possible since I'm a full time *nix admin and as such some topics are simply common knowledge for me. But having said that... When I read the article I'm surprised at how much he raves on about Synaptic and how this is the way to install/remove software. I therefor conclude that this was one of the major drawbacks during his last attempt.

Still... I can't help wonder if its safe to conclude that this basically means that this guy never bothered to even glimpse at the Ubuntu manual (or online help screens)? I mean, how hard can it be? You goto the Ubuntu website (where you most likely went anyway to download it), then you click "Support" (or if you're daring click the Documentation link directly). And then you can take your pick, like 8.10.

The reason I'm pointing out the obvious is because if you followed this road (what other is there?) then you'll end up on this page. And when I see that the 2nd link is none other than Adding and removing software then I maybe an arrogant BOFH but I can't help myself saying: "Next time: RTFM!".

Granted.. Normally none of us do that at first and I'll have to admit that a total novice (c|w)ould expect Linux to be as userfriendly as Windows. iow; you can operate it without reading a manual. But if you have tried over and over and you still didn't succeed, wouldn't it be kinda logical to start poking around the Support section before resorting to help and displayed surprises like these?

I mean... Even Microsoft has an extensive support section amongst which How to use XP. Why would Linux be any different?

Squid does a wizard job of that, once you learn to configure it. Nifty Ubuntu instructions too. And you'll need to look up access control limits too. It's not a big deal, just a bit touchy at times...

What do you think should be on Linux.com?

One thing I would like is for it to be a clear and professional page that invites and excites people to learn more about Linux.

What I mean is this: Right now if you google "Linux", the first hit is linux.org. That site has some good info, and even has an explanatory paragraph about what Linux is... but (how to put this nicely?) it doesn't look professional. It doesn't scream "this is a sophisticated and powerful (yet user-friendly) system supported by (and supporting) billion-dollar industries." Instead the impression a first-time visitor will get is that Linux is arcane, old-fashioned, and disorganized.

The fact is that when any of us talk to others about Linux (whether as a home desktop or for business-use), the person will go and search "Linux" and end up being confused. So I would like "linux.com" to have a really carefully designed frontpage, that explains what Linux is, looks very professional (maybe with tie-ins to big-name companies to make the suits feel more comfortable), and helps people get what they need (links to downloads, FAQ, community sites, all that good stuff...).

The Ubuntu homepage is pretty good in this regard. I'm sure I'm not alone in having switched over the last few years from telling people to "read more about Linux" to telling them to "read up on Ubuntu". It's just easier to pick a distro for them (they can always change when they learn more), and Ubuntu has put a nice "face" on the Linux ecosystem. Their homepage doesn't overload you with info, and provides clear links to downloads, community, etc.

So while I hope linux.com becomes many things to many people (and has all the news and content that we geeks want), I hope they take this opportunity to make the mainpage a useful portal for people who want to learn more about Linux. (Since it will be an obvious place for a newbie to first look.)

Errr... yes?

How can you possibly answer "no" to that question? Do you want your stuff actually being, you know, used by people? There's a reason it's called "usability" and not bumblebee.

Go read up on the arguments against the GoboLinux filesystem structure. (These Ubuntu folks have a bunch). There are some fairly passioned "screw the n00bs" rants out there. Does anybody honestly think that the traditional Unix filesystem heirarchy makes an ounce of sense in 2009?

Both vi and EMACS seem to have taken the "fuck the users" approach to heart. I suppose I might be of the wrong mindset to operate either application, though the developers could have at the very least taken the time to provide a decent set of documentation for their astonishingly-complex applications.

Good call on the NC10. For Ubuntu information, here's the page with installation help you want: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/NC10

My NC10 is running standard Ubuntu, and gets 5 hours battery life on standard usage. (7 to 8 hours when it's idling.)

If he wants Jaunty so much why doesn't he just use it? It's not officially released yet but obviously it exists. There are daily builds available for download.

Its a crippled kernel that only recognizes 1 GB of RAM. They also rebranded Firefox 3 as "Web Browser" and installed a Yahoo! toolbar by default, and had Yahoo! as the default search engine by default. The crapped up Firefox some other way so that the trackpad scrolling worked HORRIBLY. If you have one of these machines, spend $20 on a 2 GB stick of RAM and install the vanilla version of Ubuntu Netbook Remix from:

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UNR

You'll have a MUCH better experience. I have one and now love it, I hate what Dell did to "their" ubuntu though. They added no value and imposed artificial limitations to the hardware. Its really slick on that lowend hardware without Dell's cruft.

I've got Ubuntu running just fine on my Eee 901 using NDISWrapper. Go to http://packages.ubuntu.com/intrepid/ and download the following onto a flash drive (you'll get them with the .deb extension upon clicking the link for your architecture--i386):

From the Misc category: ndiswrapper-common and ndiswrapper-utils-1.9

From the Network category: ndisgtk

Put your flash drive into your Ubuntu Eee. Double click the .deb files in the order that I mentioned them above. Now you'll have a "Windows Wireless Drivers" item in your System/Administration menu. Open it and feed it the .inf and .sys files from your windows wifi drivers.

All the drivers for netbook hardware out of the box, two choices for the interface, and runs pretty darned will in 512 MB of memory.

I have it running on a Dell Mini 9 which is fairly similar to the eee.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UNR

What about the Eee 1000HA had hardware driver support issues?

The Intel Atom restricts the platform enough that there's very little hardware variance between units. WiFi and card readers are about the only thing that varies. I know the Atheros WiFi chipset used in the Aspire One series has some issues with "out of the box" Ubuntu support, but if you connect once via wired Ethernet you can apt-get a package that includes drivers that work. See the ath5k entry in the release notes - http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/releasenotes/810

The only hardware issues I've had with my Acer Aspire One and vanilla Ubuntu were:
1) The above wifi issue
2) Kubuntu's initial Bluetooth issues, this was resolved in the latest round of KDE updates. (This was with a third-party BT dongle, and KDE Bluetooth support was entirely broken on all systems with recent kernels.)
3) Um... I think that's it?

[snip] Is it only windows that has the "Average User?"

no. What's eating the mod (singular)?

You're very welcome. I actually made an Ubuntu Brainstorm Idea for this in Bash here. It looks to me that it would be necessary to modify GNU readline, however. I think that it should be possible to put it in ZSH as a part of a configuration but I don't know enough about ZSH to do it and don't (right now) have the time to learn...

I'm most looking forward to N. Naughty Nymph all the way! With a name like that, 2011 will surely be the Year of the Linux Desktop.

I found an antivirus that prevents this problem from recurring. It's here. Works 100%.

For OS X and Windows the components are only there if you are ignoring other software installation methods and locations, such as installation from a Web page, arguably the most common use case.

And that is a flaw in the Windows software ecosystem.

It's worth mentioning that the same works elsewhere -- I can download an installer binary from a website and run it. The problem is, on Windows and OS X, there really isn't a good alternative.

They easily allow third party repositories that are appropriate for free software, but not so much for commercial payware.

Canonical does this.

It can't be that hard to allow the files to come from an arbitrary URL, can it?
That depends upon if you care about security I suppose. OS X and Vista have signing frameworks

So do open source repositories. They generally use PGP, as it's easier to manage without having to pay absurd signing keys.

Which means that you set up the repository once, and you obtain a key for it. After that, assuming the key was correct, the software itself can come from any arbitrary URL, as long as the repository maintainer has signed it.

The frustrating thing is, decent package managers already exist. Why not just write a frontend for them?

I's argue that most package managers these days don't have very good usability for the average user.

Perhaps, but they are the best we've got.

And that is why I suggested writing a frontend. I see no reason something like dpkg/apt can't be used, given a sufficiently usable (and pretty) frontend.

Apple has some distinct advantages with their "software is a folder" model, but it also means a lot more work to adapt package managers to work well with that style of software.

That makes sense... Wait, what?

Traditional package managers tend to distribute packages as single files, containing both package metadata and an archive. That archive contains many files, in many directories -- also known as folders -- and Apple has certainly shown that it can embed metadata in formats like Zip. In fact, I know I've seen OS X .app files distributed as zipfiles.

So, in what way would a package manager make that difficult?

Of course, the better approach might be to put package metadata inside the .app folder, and simply distribute them as zips or dmgs, with a central listing. But then you lose the functionality you get with a good package manager (or even an ok one, like mpkg), which is why I suspect the best approach would be for Apple to simply enhance the Finder view of the Applications folder -- drag an app to the trash, and it runs an uninstall script, if present.

It's just not quite as straightforward as you seem to imply

It's very straightforward.

The only part that's not straightforward is making it usable, making it more convenient than downloading a dmg/zip, and getting people interested, even excited. But Apple is very good at that -- they even made backup sexy, so I see no reason they couldn't do the same to package management.

Microsoft has published a KB article covering various ways to prevent it.

Of course they skipped the obvious one: Get a Mac. Or at least use some other OS software.

Of course, if you don't have anyone working in your offices over the weekend, nobody's likely to come in and plug in infected USB devices.

If you're counting on this, you're not working IT in the Enterprise. Enterprise ops are a 24/7 operation.

It appears I was wrong though. If activation day was last Friday, we'd have heard by now.

If you read the domains it's likely you can find activation day by checking already registered domains. Of course, fast flux DNS can defeat the preregistered domains, as can various DNS hijacking techniques. This threat isn't done yet. A botnet might not even be the intended purpose of this threat. It's possible the random domain generator was engineered to put a perfectly legitimate domain offline, and the prevention techniques in place are the expected execution mechanism.

Why?

If you want to ask this question I have to ask if you were not better off asking yourself "Why not?". If you spent as much time and effort examining how and why these things happen, how the bad guys operate and where they might go next, than defending this malpractice on /. you might not have this problem.

Here are some free tips:

Allow neither open ports nor listening services on end-user desktops - ever. Not ever. Not for any reason. It's deliberate neglect of best practice going back 20 years at least. If I didn't have practical experience as well as theoretical I wouldn't believe this wasn't a mandatory pass interview question for enterprise IT. There is no justification for this practice and there never has been. Anybody who suggests such a thing should be summarily terminated for being an idiot, assuming the idea occured to him after he got past the interview in the first place.

Autorun. There hasn't been a less secure idea since Outlook executed attachments in the preview pane. People who don't know why this is a bad idea should be prohibited from practice as IT professionals. If you don't know the methods by which the prevention of autorun by group policy is prevented by accident or by purpose you shouldn't be allowed to edit GPO's, nor to give guidance to people who manage IT at the executive level in the enterprise.

USB. Its broad utility is its trap. Imagine you have a USB keyboard. If you can configure a PC to boot to USB you can insert a device in the keyboard includes a USB hub that includes both a keyboard attachment and an SSD that's bootable that chain boots to the HDD. That gives you a workable computer in a VM that looks like it's doing what you tell it to, but that is completely and totally owned by an intruder. Likewise a mouse. There's plenty of room in both a keyboard and a mouse. And then there's all those spare USB ports just waiting to be exploited. It's sad how easy this is. Here... let me send you a sample of our latest Ergonomic Human Interface Device. No, let me just share this Zune app with you. Hey, this iPod Touch video requires a codec. You download it from this website...

Oh, God. You're hosed.

I wonder if there's some other system we could use... some system that doesn't have the malware ecosystem that Windows has... Some system which might or might not theoretically be less secure depending on who you ask, but which is known to be less exploited in practice...

"will there ever be a way to watch blue-ray movies legally on a Linux computer?"

Isn't that the fault of the manufacturers and according to this blue-ray movies do play under Linux. See also a demo of the Linux MCE media player. What major effort would the average user encounter in using this?

The big company isn't small enough to realize a significant return. The small company isn't big enough to invest. In the end, his ideas are discarded and the customer misses out on yet another feature.

You remind me of an idea I had a while back. I called it the Hair Brained Ideas Department. Basically, if someone in the company has an idea, they email their idea to the Hair Brained Ideas Department where they follow up on it.

Such a concept is only viable to a large company, as a small company would not have enough resources to follow up on these ideas.

Now that I think about it, the closest thing to a working example of this is Ubuntu Brainstorm.

This is music:
http://theslip.nin.com/

This is a movie:
http://www.elephantsdream.org/

This is a game:
http://www.alientrap.org/nexuiz/

This is software:
http://www.ubuntu.com/

Their service can be used both for good and bad. If the majority of people choose to use it for illegal sharing, that why don't they pursue those people? And, I'll tell you why - because everyFUCKINGbody does it! It's a signal to the fact the the companies producing the content have no idea how to distribute it and price it correctly and instead start this frivolous witch hunts.

It's already out! You can download it here!

To all you Windows users, we feel your pain. Seriously, you don't even know how bad you have it. What's worse, you have been sucked into a mind set that, on one hand, you hate your computer because of all the problems you have with it, but think you *need* windows because of all the programs you feel you can't live without.

You don't need Microsoft Office, you can go to http://www.openoffice.org/ and download a fully functional office suite that, in many ways, is better than Microsoft Office. What's even better, is that it runs on system other than Windows!

Linux is a system, more similar to the macintosh than it is to Windows, and it will run on your PC. It replaces Windows completely. Not only that, out of the box, it is slick, beautiful, and easy to use, and if you like to tinker, there is absolutely no limit to what you can change.

Best of all its free! That's right, free!

Go to http://www.ubuntu.com/ and look around. (There are other vendors for Linux too, so you are not stuck with only one.)

I know, you ask "How can it be free?" Well, you know how your friends who know about cars will sometimes fix your car as a favor? That's because they enjoy working on cars. Well, with the internet, millions of guys who know about computers started working on a system in the '80s that was eventually called Linux. The software comes from places like IBM, Sun, U.C. Berkeley, MIT, HP, and a whole list of other companies and organizations. It is a collaborative system that is put together, not to make money for Microsoft, but to make computers more usable for everyone. In fact, a lot of the web sites you visit every day run Linux.

So, if you are fed up with your computer and Windows, now is a great time to start a new adventure. Try something new, learn something new! It won't be hard, but not too easy either, as a lot of things are different than what you are used to, but once you get the hang of it, you'll realize that sometimes "different" is the only to get "better."

Wow, I've been saying it wrong for two years...

"oo-BOON-too" http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/faq

I pronounce it "Niggerbuntu." I'm really looking forward to the next release, Jackin' Jiggaboo (9.04). It's a great OS.

http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/faq?action=show&redirect=FAQ

Third one down

Wow, I've been saying it wrong for two years...

"oo-BOON-too" http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/faq

No idea what you want to say, but if you want to install Ubuntu Linux, check out their website. You can get rid of any other Linux or Windows on your box, if you really want to. To remove an operating system, you don't need an installation disk. You simply wipe the disk, and install a different OS. The OS installer normally provides an option to format your installation medium. Of course, you need to save all your data before you do that, otherwise, it's gone.

I recommend decentralization of Ubuntu free CDs distribution to every nation in the world.

I glad I can help you be a more informed person:

http://www.ubuntu.com/

Easy to install, no technical knowledge needed. You can actually browse the web and use the OS while its installing.

You do realize that Mark Shuttleworth (Ubuntu founder) is from South Africa, where there are a lot of black people, and the name Ubuntu is an African word?

Just because the demographics of the users you know are mostly white males doesn't mean they all are, you self-centered twit.

Windows: Download driver, copy it over, point windows to the location when it's installing the driver.

Ubuntu: Follow this guide.

This really isn't an argument you want to have.

> Microsoft can't offer Windows for free until it loses it's monopoly.

Why? They happen to be the absolute LAST vendor trying to sell a PC operating system. So who would they be accused of competing unfairly against? Sun/Solaris? Red Hat? Ubuntu? Apple doesn't really count since they only sell hardware/software bundles. OS/2 is long since in the grave and NOBODY gives a crap about SCO/UNIXWare.

If they strongarm OEMs to preload Windows instead of competing systems it would be an anti-trust problem whether they sell it or give it away.

No, Canotical doesn't make all of those. They make two.

visit www.ubuntu.com and look at the "products" menu:

Ubuntu
Ubuntu MID
Ubuntu Server
Ubuntu Netbook Remix

are all listed as "products" on the Ubuntu site.

next visit:
http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu

Where you can, and I quote: "Request a free Ubuntu, Edubuntu or Kubuntu CD from Canonical."

Now as an average consumer, tell me that you wouldn't be confused by that.

http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/derivatives

Yeah Ubuntu only has 8 versions based around the same kernel!

There's a meta fix for any broken Fit It tools available here.

All we have to do is learn to set aside our infighting because we want things to be scientifically "perfect) and market some form of Linux, anything, and unify behind it for the user base at large.

I think we are already doing exactly that.

Yes there should be lots of distros for niche markets.

And that too.

But that's the beauty of Linux. Linus may be "a geek, a developer" and may indeed be out of touch with what companies need, but that's okay because RedHat and Novell stepped up to fill that need. Meanwhile Daniel Robbins created a distro for those who either like to tweak and build bleeding edge systems or who need systems that don't have to be rebuilt every couple of years when the packages are all out of date. Mark Shuttleworth built a distro for people who want a version of Linux that just works right out of the box. Klaus Knopper had the great idea to create a distro you can run from a CD instead of installing on a hard drive.

This is cool because you can use the right distro for the job at hand. We use Gentoo where I work because we can keep our servers up to date with minimal downtime -- we don't have to rebuild our servers every time we want to upgrade. I run Slack at home because, well, it's what I learned first. I've got a hard drive install of Knoppix on a laptop because I couldn't boot from CD on that particular machine, so I pulled the hard drive, mounted it in an external enclosure, booted Knoppix on another machine and followed the instructions for a hard drive install using the USB drive, then reinstalled the hard drive in the laptop. I knew Knoppix was very good at automatically detecting hardware, so I felt Knoppix would have a good chance of working on the first install (it did).