Slashdot Mirror


New Ubuntu Foundation Announced

AccUser writes "Mark Shuttleworth and Canonical Ltd, founders of the popular Ubuntu Linux-based operating system, have today announced the creation of The Ubuntu Foundation with an initial funding commitment of US$10m. From the article: 'The Ubuntu Foundation will employ core Ubuntu community members to ensure that Ubuntu will remain fully supported for an extended period of time, and continue to produce new releases of the distribution. As a first step, the Foundation announces that Ubuntu version 6.04, due for release in April 2006, will be supported for three years on the desktop and five years on the server.'"

11 of 315 comments (clear)

  1. Great News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    IMO Ubuntu is the distro most likely to break out into the main stream. I recently switched from Gentoo and can personally attest to the simplicity and ease of use of Ubuntu. The typical non-nerd doesn't want a command line; doesn't want to compile a custom kernel; doesn't know what "compiling" means. Ubuntu is perfect for the mainstream, and a guarantee that the project will continue is great news.

    Long live Ubuntu! (And Kubuntu too)

  2. Happy to hear it by bad_outlook · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm very happy that Ubuntu has come out of the gate, and done everything right. Since I've been using linux (1998) I've never seen any company so behind Linux as Cannonical have been, and I have a good feeling about this. Funny thing is, yesterday I just recieved my free Ubuntu cds; I 'ordered' 15 x86 versions, and 6 powerpc versions. I'm giving them to friends to try the 'live' option, and dropping them off at coffee cafe's, music stores and colleges. It's a good time to be using free software, and I think it can only HELP the world in coming together.

  3. How does Debian fit in? by hubie · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I am ignorant on this topic, and a quick look at the Ubuntu FAQ didn't help, but what exactly is the relationship between Debian and Ubuntu? Is Ubuntu a complete fork, or is it dependent on Debian for core functionality?

    I am a bit confused because I see some people here give high praise for Ubuntu over Debian, things like how Debian is way too slow to release while Ubuntu is up to date, while others have pointed out that Ubuntu has the advantage where they can cherry pick the best things out of the x86 code that have gone through the rigorous testing in Debian.

    From a support standpoint, when a security flaw is found, does Ubuntu fix it themselves (and thus make it available for Debian), or do they have to wait for the Debian packages to be fixed?

    1. Re:How does Debian fit in? by rpsoucy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They started out friendly, but now Ubuntu is distancing itself more and more from Debian, they're making no effort to even stay compatible for package installation, which I think is hurting Debian in the long run. I really wish people would just try and help Debian if they have a problem with it instead of starting up yet another dist to make GNU/Linux "OS of a thousand distributions."

    2. Re:How does Debian fit in? by SassyDave · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I was going to mod you up so we could see a healthy discussion on this topic, but I'll reply instead.
      They started out friendly, but now Ubuntu is distancing itself more and more from Debian
      I have to respectfully disagree. I run Ubuntu on my laptop, and I have switched the /etc/apt/sources.list to use the Debian unstable sources. The two distros are binary compatible (meaning I can use Debian .deb files on Ubuntu), and it works great. I get the eye-candy of Ubuntu (a pretty good default setup) with the new packages of Debian unstable. I for one like the setup.
  4. Start of Something Special by Amadaeus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    3 Years of desktop support and 5 years of server? The fact that Ubuntu is looking at long-term development for their OS instead of the usual 6-month fire-and-forget releases of many other Linux Distros subscribe to is an encouraging sign that Linux is coming of age.

    Longer lifespans for Linux provides a level of security that will allow many users wary of switching over from Windows to start looking at a Linux distro as a serious replacement for their current OS. Just think: there IS an alternative to warning users that they have to buy a new OS for new features and security updates.

    I'm only worried that theyll spend all $10m on pretzels and beer.

    --
    ------
    Amadaeus
    The last bastion of Mathie-ism
  5. Re:Oh crikey, not another one! by AccUser · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But isn't this a symptom of open source software, in that everybody is able to do it their way? With M$ and Apple, we get an operating system that works the way they want it to. With GNU/Linux, you get to choose a distribution which works the way you want it to. And if you can't find one that does that exactly, you have the opportunity to do it yourself.

    Obviously in the real-world (!) we all just want something that works the way we want it to, without having to scratch around every distribution. Personally, I think that Ubuntu does it for me.

    --

    Any fool can talk, but it takes a wise man to listen.

  6. Ubuntu review by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've been playing with Ubuntu lately, and I like it. There are some problems though:

    Sound. I have to kill -9 the ESD process to get some applications to work. A lot of applications had to be tweaked individually after install.

    Synaptic. Synaptic does its job, I can say that. But the user interface leaves a lot to be desired. I upgraded to Hoary yesterday. Why did that have to involve editing sources.list by hand?

    Applications. Why the hell do newly installed applications need to be added to the menus manually? This is Ubuntu's biggest flaw. When you install a new program, you'd better know how to invoke it from the command line -- and good luck finding that out from Synaptic's description, which disappears after install anyway.

    Firefox. Ubuntu's web browser of choice, Firefox, is unresponsive after opening new tabs. Firefox is much nicer in Windows. And IE for Windows is far more responsive than either.

    Menus. I like the start menu organization. The "Places" menu is great. I was beginning to think that Linux was congenitally incapable of setting up the most important bit of UI on the system. The menu is even better in Hoary.

    Folder Navigation. I don't like the fact that there is no back or up arrow when exploring file folders. This is massively stupid UI design.

    All in all, it's a nice system. It's a million years behind Windows in usability; there is clunkiness present everywhere. But there are lots of free applications. As usual with Linux, it is so impossible to install or change anything without expert knowledge that you can safely recommend the system to your grandmother without the slightest fear that she will be able to mess anything up.

    1. Re:Ubuntu review by greenguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Synaptic. Synaptic does its job, I can say that. But the user interface leaves a lot to be desired. I upgraded to Hoary yesterday. Why did that have to involve editing sources.list by hand?

      Granted, this can be a little intimidating for newbies. But after the first time, it's not that hard. The only tricky part is remembering to sudo.

      Applications. Why the hell do newly installed applications need to be added to the menus manually?

      Er, they don't. Give it an hour or two, and they will magically appear on their own. I know this from repeated experience (I'm on Ubuntu right now).

      This is Ubuntu's biggest flaw. When you install a new program, you'd better know how to invoke it from the command line -- and good luck finding that out from Synaptic's description, which disappears after install anyway.

      You can uncheck that option.

      Firefox. Ubuntu's web browser of choice, Firefox, is unresponsive after opening new tabs. Firefox is much nicer in Windows. And IE for Windows is far more responsive than either.

      This is true. On the advice of another Ubuntu user, I installed Galeon, and I've been much happier since. I'm perplexed as to why Firefox chews up so much processor time.

      Folder Navigation. I don't like the fact that there is no back or up arrow when exploring file folders. This is massively stupid UI design.

      In the preferences, on the Behavior tab, click "Always open in browser windows."

      All in all, it's a nice system. It's a million years behind Windows in usability; there is clunkiness present everywhere.

      Gotta disagree with you there. Windows seems far clunkier to me. I work for a non-profit, so I don't have much experience with XP, but the versions I see look like they're held together with baling wire. Ubuntu is the picture of elegance in comparison.

      But there are lots of free applications. As usual with Linux, it is so impossible to install or change anything without expert knowledge that you can safely recommend the system to your grandmother without the slightest fear that she will be able to mess anything up.

      Er, I think this is the first time I've heard dificulty of use discussed as an advantage. I'd phrase it as "You don't need to learn all that much to make changes, and if you don't want to learn anything, it will still work fine as is."

      --
      What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
  7. Re:Time for a name change? by Siener · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've heard nothing but good things about 'Ubuntu'... But for some reason I can't bring myself to try it out because of the funny name.

    I realise you're saying this tongue in cheek, but Ubuntu is an extremely fitting name. The concept of Ubuntu embodies exactly what the FOSS movement is/should be about.

    Being South African myself I'm also very proud that someone like Mark Shuttleworth is putting us on the FOSS map.

    Thanks Mark!

  8. Jesus wept...and puked... by Hosiah · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I just went ten rounds with the Missionaries of the church of Debian's Witnesses two days ago, and here we all go again!

    I'll just lay some points down once and for all, and I don't care what anybody says, these are the facts as I observe them with my own eyes and the common-sense that logically concludes from those observations:

    (a) More Linux = Big Win for everybody! I don't care what it is, how it works, how narrow it's market is, who funds it, who writes it, what they believe, or whether they make money. More Free/Open software enriches us all.

    (b) Bill Gates must surely be laughing his fat moneycat ass off watching all the Linux tribes bicker and flame each other. Just try to keep this in mind, when Linux fights Linux, Bill Gates wins.

    (c) Every distribution I've tried that was derived from/based on Debian worked for me. I've never heard the complaints about Debian-based distros that I've heard (and experienced) with Debian itself. It is indeed in Debian's best interest to take a backseat and continue maintaining the base packages, but leave assembling them into released operating systems up to other distros.

    (d) If the above statement makes your blood pressure pop your eyeballs out of your head and steam shoot out your ears, the person you are mad at is the Debian founder as I read in his own personal blog. And you have no right to be mad about that, it's his distro and he speaks much good sense about it and I am agreeing with him and emphasizing his point. If Debian is that precious to you, then just download it's packages and make your own system, because that's all anybody else has ever done, anyway! Isn't that the selling point, you can customize it?

    (e) Linux wouldn't be Linux if everybody doing something with Linux didn't have the right to do it. If you're mad at all the distros, there's nothing to stop you from downloading the tarballs and building it yourself. You can even call your arrangement the One True Linux, and say everybody else is a hypocrite and a poser and a lamer. I can download the exact same tarballs and say the same thing about my arrangement and about everybody else. The point being: The source and kernel are GNU/Linux. United! Completely! Steady as a rock! Everything else is what we make out of it, because Linux is and will always be a ball of clay. You can use that clay to build an idol to worship, or a toilet bowl, but you also can't stop anybody else from doing the same. Don't be surprised if somebody pisses on your idol or worships your toilet bowl.

    (f) This has been a Public Service Announcement. Flames will be printed out and shredded into hamster litter, because /dev/null is mailing me bounce messages.