Is Ubuntu a Serious Desktop Contender?

Exter-C asks: "2006 was the year that a large amount of people started to talk Ubuntu as a possible contender for the Enterprise Linux desktop. There are several key issues that have to be raised: Is Ubuntu/Canonical really capable of maintaining Dapper Drake (6.06 LTS) for 5 years? I know this is not a new question but the evidence after 6 months seems to be negative. A case in point is the 4-5+ day delay for critical updates to packages like Firefox. Given that such a large percentage of people use their desktop systems on the web critical, browser vulnerabilities seem to be one of the core pieces of a secure desktop environment (user stupidity excluded). Can Ubuntu/Canonical really compete with the likes of Red Hat, who had patches available (RHSA-2006:0758) the day that the updates came out?"

Comments

Re:Well

[DivineOmega]

I must try this 'Linuz' OS sometime. :P

Re:Ubuntu is my desktop

[Blakey Rat]

The Registry isn't any more crypt than Linux configuration text files or OS X plist files. In fact, at least the Registry and plist files have a common defined file format, so I'd say they were LESS cryptic.

Re:These aren't the big issues at all

[Anonymous Coward]

Now there we go again with the "friendly" Windows community. Whenever someone lodges a complaint, they're automatically yelled down as "stupid" and "morons" and "losers". I totally understand why Windows can never get any marketshare, with the self-righteous attitude the Windows community has.