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...'"
Like AOL was bad for the Internet?... Oh wait!
several weeks ago when rebuilding an HP machine with XP just got too frustrating and time-consuming. Threw in an Edgy install disk and it worked perfectly. Upgraded to Feisty with no drama. I've been using it exclusively for over a month.
How can Dell be bad for Ubuntu? Yes, I RTFA and I think most of the potential problems are non-issues. The update mechanisms can scale; Dell can help if need be. I can buy support from Canonical or Dell can outsource it to them if Dell can't handle it.
I don't really see the downside. I'd love to see a few completely clueless oldsters accidentally get one of these Ubuntu Dell machines for their first and only computer. Then we'd have converts who simply didn't know any other way.
Even a clueless newbie can figure out Feisty. Now, I think there's another Slashdot post I want to read.
1) Exposure to something, whether good or bad, is good. More people will, at the very least, know what Linux is now.
2) Anyone who actually chooses to install Ubuntu over Windows will probably either have the motivation to try something new, or they'll already know what they're doing.
3) The FOSS community should be embracing and celebrating this. This is a huge step for Ubuntu and Linux in general. The general computing public is now seeing more alternatives from the big beast in Redmond. The more they see choice, the more likely they will be to choose - either now or in the future.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Download our Super Super User software to make all your programs run without that annoying password box.
As an added bonus, we will throw in an instant free to download screensaver*.
*Screensaver is pay per use, so we can bill you honestly for the time your computer is resting, do not be put off by substitutes who charge a fixed fee no matter how much time you actually use your screensaver.
liqbase
We've all heard the joke about how cars would behave if made by Microsoft, but how about if they were made by the Open Source Movement?
1. The car would come in a kit, and would have to be assembled by hand.
2. The instructions for assembling it would be free, but so poorly written you'd have to hire specialists, who would in the end cost more than a Microsoft car
3. The gearstick would be designed by EMACS fans. It would be powerful, and feature rich, but changing gear would be an 18 step process designed for a driver with 4 hands.
4. If the passenger wanted to read a map, he'd have to enter the driver's seat in order to get permission.
5. The steering wheel would be gone. In its place, an "innovative" interface designed by the Blender and Gimp teams, consisting of 2 dead fish and a broken plastic spatula.
6. Richard Stallman would insist the vehicles be described as GNU/Cars.
7. It would be broken into as frequently as Microsoft cars, despite it's much touted security claims. Joe Sixpack couldn't be bothered to lock the door on his MS car, and he can't be bothered to lock it on his GNU/Car.
8. In car entertainment would consist entirely of items cloned from Microsoft.
9. Your grandmother wouldn't be able to drive it.
In the 500MHz days, I tried Mandrake Linux, which I was told was "as easy as Windows". "It finds all your hardware and just works." After spending a month trying to get it on the network and talking to a Windows share (with some success), I decided it was just too difficult, like the previous post is saying.
That was then, this is now. I installed Ubuntu Feisty on 2 laptops and it just worked. All the hardware really was found and installing programs with--ready for this--the Add/Remove Programs menu option...is brain-dead simple. Connecting to network shares is just as easy as Windows. In some cases, I have gone to the command line to install something, but 99% of the time, it's just:
Ooh, that's hard.
The biggest problem was that I had to type in 3 command-line commands to get a wireless network card to work. But on Windows XP, I had to call India 3 times to do the same thing, so what's really easier? Hint: the command line was much faster...
Linux is no longer a frustrating command-line-ridden exercise for a Windows user. In fact, if you are already using Firefox and OpenOffice, which I was, you will find it to be very similar.
I have found Linux equivalents for most of what I do. Also, I have gotten many programs to work under Wine just fine. I haven't even found the need to install a Windows virtual machine yet, and it's been over a month.
All that to say, your comments are a little outdated. I thought the same as you did until Vista frustrated me so much that I gave Ubuntu a spin.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
Users occasionally need to perform administrative tasks. This happens frequently enough that if they needed to log out and log back in as root to do them, they would just stay logged in as root all the time for convenience. That's obviously not secure.
So, that means that there needs to be a way to get administrative privileges temporarily. In order to have any security at all from this, it has to require user interaction (otherwise programs could automatically get root, and there would be no security). That leaves the choice between the Windows Vista "press OK to perform admin task" solution and the Mac OS X / Ubuntu "type in your password to perform admin task" solution. Making the user type in their password at least proves that it's not someone else sitting down at their computer, and makes sure the user notices that something special happened.
-- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
Turn the pop-up off. (...)
gpedit.msc -> Local Computer Policy -> Computer Configuration -> Administrative Templates -> Windows Components -> Windows Update
Set "Re-prompt for restart with scheduled installations" to disabled.
Judging by the standards that are usually applied to linux distros I conclude that Windows is not ready for the desktop.
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns