Conflicting Goals Create Tension in OSS Community
An anonymous reader writes "Mark Shuttleworth, of Ubuntu, has a post up meant to clear the air and clarify the project's place in the Debian community. He's specifically referring to comments made by Matthew Garrett earlier this month." From the post: "A little introspection is healthy, and Debian will benefit from the discussion. Matt is to be credited for his open commentary - a lesser person would simply have disengaged, quietly. I hope that Matt will in fact stay involved in Debian, either directly or through Ubuntu, because his talent and humour are both of enormous benefit to the project. I also hope that Debian developers will make better use of the work we do in Ubuntu, integrating relevant bits of it back into Debian so as to help uplift some of those other peaks - Xandros, Linspire, Maemo, Skolelinux and of course Etch."
These divisions simply do not exist. Ubuntu is another sign that free software is advancing, and that non-free junk will just fall by the wayside. M$ obviously doesn't want this, they know their business model is failing, so they're plunging money into astroturfing to make OSS look divided. They've done it before and they'll do it again. Everyone knows Vi$ta will fail.
Friends don't help friends install MS junk.
What I want out of Linux:
1.One GUI.
2. Ability to play DirectX games.
3. Double click driver and application installs. "Fire and forget"
4. No preaching. I don't really give a rat's ass about what is free and what isn't. I care about things that work and have minimum user input to make them work. The days of $500 printer drivers have been replaced with $75/hour Linux distro experts.
5. Uniformity in how things work. This should be #1, but it's late. Currently, Google is the #1 tool that Linux admins use for tracking down errors. Why?
There is a uniformity that exists with windows that linux lacks.
Ubuntu...all the others. Of them all, SUSE has a clue.
I will be *retired* long before Linux gets a grip...if it ever does.