Slashdot Mirror
Will Dell Be Bad For Ubuntu?
vcore writes "Many people are excited for Ubuntu's upcoming release on Dell computers, and while it is certainly good news there are a few causes for concern. Very few details have emerged so far so it is not completely clear what impact Dell with have on the thriving Ubuntu community. But there are questions concerning support, logistics, pricing, and a number of other areas that are affected. From the article: 'Dell is in the practice of filling their computers with large amounts of "bloatware" and also all sorts of co-branding, but it remains to be seen what they will do with Ubuntu. It has been reported that Dell will be shipping a standard version of Ubuntu 7.04...'"
Dell will be as bad for Ubuntu and GNU/Linux as mankind's discovery of the wheel was bad for the wheel, or stone axes for that matter
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Rot in hell you smug son of a bitch.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
I have tried Linux recently. Ubuntu seems to be the only distro anyone is using these days. You do know that they had to implement those app downloaders simply because programs were a bitch to install?
See, what you may not understand is that the very concept of a command line SCARES the normal win user. Dell won't ship many systems with Ubuntu on it. Dell won't be bad for Ubuntu - Ubuntu will be bad for Dell. They know this though. They are just paying lip service to Linux fans everywhere. Truth be told, Dells are not going to be purchased by Linux users. And even at that, they are smart enough that they won't want Dell installing Ubuntu for them even if they do buy a Dell (god help them if they do).
Perhaps my views of Linux do deserve an updating, but honestly the whole apt-get thing is just a band-aid. There is still command line work required, something that isn't normally required in Windows unless things seriously go sideways.
The only operating system that has ever worked for me is MacOS X. I've never had to reformat due to OS corruption. It's secure, has millions of dollars in R&D behind it, and functions as a day-to-day low maintenance system to boot. Yes, I know it's a nix, but it's still a hell of a lot better than Linux.
One thing I want to know - If Ubuntu wants to be taken seriously, why don't they give their products professional names, rather than "Feisty Fawn"... Something not seemingly right out of a Warner Brothers cartoon, perhaps.
Even if the obscurity argument made sense, which it doesn't, how many remote attacks have you EVER heard of a) being attempted and b) being successful in bruteforcing a root password? Any security this might add (and I'll argue it adds NONE) is wiped out and then some by the danger of giving full root access to any exploit that can compromise a user account.
So with the security argument well out of the way, sudo exists for only two reasons. 1) to inconvenience the people who would even know what a root account was in the first place, 2) to show just how little respect the ubuntu developers have for their users' intelligence.
The Farewell Tour II