Slashdot Mirror
Mark Shuttleworth Reveals Ubuntu Netbook Remix
Glyn Moody writes "In an interview with the Guardian today, Mark Shuttleworth talks about the upcoming Ubuntu Netbook Remix, a tailored version for ultraportables, produced in collaboration with Intel." The new version of Ubuntu is barely mentioned in this interview, but it's tantalizing -- SUSE looks nice on the HP Mininotes, but for people who are used to and enjoy Ubuntu, it's an option to look forward to.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
As a Linux user, I despise Ubuntu, I can't explain why, but I think it's too GUIsh along with other things like /sbin/dhcpcd doesn't exists. /etc/rc.d/rc.X instead of /etc/init.d or /etc/rc.d/rc.(level)/rc.ssh?
Not using conventions i.e (at least in the Ubuntu versions I've used)
I prefer the slackware way of
but there are few good things about Ubuntu, it made Linux and Open Source much better to new-comers, works almost always out of the box
It's friendly (but silly IMhO) to people who migrate from Windows, and it's the greatest achievement made in the last few years. friendly OS for Windows migrating users.
Read and Comment at my BLOG
!!!
MS Not close. It will require time and ongoing investment. We've positioned ourselves for what we see as the future of software - unlicensed software, people having access to the software that they want at the time that they want it. The service ecosystem around that software will fund it. And if we are the company that has best anticipated that future, then we will be best positioned to benefit from it. The bolding, of course, is mine - however the quote is from the article. This, my friends, is dangerous thinking right there.
The GPL **IS** a License -- It's right there in the name. Same goes for BSD, Apache, MIT, etc. They are licenses.
The notion that copyright or license don't exist or are evil is the downfall of free software, which exists only because of protection for so-called "imaginary property."
Ubuntu is unlicensed, eh? And everything that's included in it, eh? So I guess I can change some #IFDEF s, release a "new" operating system, and get rich, eh?
Free software is not "public domain," which is what unlicensed/uncopywritten means. And that means I can totally jack it and never have to admi to it -- not even in a BSDL fashion.
I'm starting to think that Shuttleworth might be moving up the "dangerous idiot" scale.
He said the future is in unlicensed software. Which, IIRC, was the end-game goal for GPL. GPL is a temporary system to enforce freedom in an age of copyright restrictions. If software in the future becomes truly unlicensed, then there's no need for GPL.
In the article Mark Shuttleworth only talks about his space trip. MS answers all the other questions. Conspiracy!
My spirit takes a journey through my mind...
A guy on my team has the new hp mininote or whatever it is - with Suse. Out of the box wireless causes system crashes and the camera doesn't work. Maybe Novell wont mind the lack of publicity.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
Diversity differs!
Hah! Prove it!
This guy's the limit!
There isn't much on the project's website: here
This post climbed Mt. Washington.
One of the things that's with Ubuntu is that it's the only group with a real sense of marketing. Granted, it's viral marketing, but if you look at http://ubuntu.com/ versus http://debian.org/ you'll notice that one is quite pretty and modern, and the other looks like it fell out of a wormhole circa 1996. I even tried talking about a site redesign on #debian on freenode once and got flamed by someone saying "why the hell should the look of a website matter?" Perhaps it somewhat matters because when I was a newbie and knew nothing about the merits of distros, I overlooked Debian as being a fairly amateurish distro because, well, its website looked amateurish. Yes, I know better now, but we should acknowledge at least a little that appearances do matter.
Of course, it's not just the website. Ubuntu also has an army of Diggers, and it's overall just a really easy distro to get started with when you know nothing about Linux, because the project has made appealing to that crowd one of its goals.
http://mediagoblin.org/
Uh, that's because it's called
My blog
I think Ubuntu is a fine OS. I know there are other distros that are great and if you like them you should use them. However, Ubuntu provides two things a decent user experience with a great community for both novices and power users and more importantly momentum for "non traditional" Operating Systems. Any exposure people get to alternative platforms is a good thing. It's really nice to show people that there is alternatives to the crazy M$ way of things.
Our bugs are smarter than your test scripts.
They do that because they get better integration that way. For example, when you install Ubuntu, it installs OpenOffice with GNOME support, but when you install Kubuntu, it installs OpenOffice with KDE support. Plus all the art differences, etc. Plus, problems with KDE packages won't hold up an Ubuntu release and vice-versa.
My blog
Do you really want to know Ubuntu's plan?
BAWWWWWW! Someone expects newcomers to Linux to learn the way Linux works! I don't want to use my brain! I want to be 1337 but put no effort into it!
Ironic captcha: sicken
Look, I use kubuntu and occaisionally develop for it (well actually kde). And I think that Mark is normally right on. But calling OSS unlicensed IS dead wrong. It is FULLY licensed and that is what makes it OSS. Mark almost certainly made a screw up in how he phrased it and I am sure will change it once it is pointed out to him. But to mod down bsDaemon over his last line is ridiculus. The entire rest of his comment IS the point of the license.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
ubuntu = Linux for Dummies
I'm on the bandwagon. I've been using linux for 12 years, longer if you include machines administered by others. Ubuntu isn't perfect, but from what I've seen it's the best thing out there - it just works.
/etc is simple and clean.
:)
Everything is easy. Install a new package. Get the source for that package that isn't quite working right. Configuration. Update packages. Upgrade to the new version. It's all trivial, and just works.
And my folks are running it. When i visit I f with things. But when I'm not there, they can still upgrade packages, etc. And they're on dialup, and it still just works
We run suse on the servers at work, and i needed a very recent gcc with fortran and gomp. Ended up building from source, including a half dozen dependencies. On my workstation (ubuntu) "apt-get install gfortran libgomp". done. 5 hours vs 5 minutes. Actually, I think it took several iterations, maybe spent 2 full days installing it on suse.
Great for the power user.
Great for the beginner.
My blog
You know, when people see the abbreviated version of your troll it reads:
Anonymous Coward = EPIC FAIL
the point was: bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaa it was not using MY conventions. call a whaaambulance
Seriously, what is it with ubuntu that everyone feels the need to speak about it? There is a new version of Ubuntu, so what.
Come on now, there are at least 10 stories everytime Windoze releases a new OS.For the vast majority of Windows users, Linux needs an identity. They see Windows, OS X (Apple), and the great confusion and diffusion that is Linux. If Ubuntu is putting a face on Linux, then more power to Shuttleworth et al. For most new migrants, Ubuntu gives them the impression that Linux is fast, easy to use, and (more and more) friendly. These are tremendous inroads. Perhaps they can be starting points down other Linux paths.
I personally like the design of the Debian site. It's easy to get the information I need, and the format hasn't changed in years so I'm comfortable with it. Besides, Debian isn't trying to take over the world, they're trying to make a kick-butt FOSS gnu/linux distribution.
There is a new version of Ubuntu, so what. In the summary there was also e mentino of Suse's package for the HP notebook, why don't I hear anyone about that?
The version of SuSE that ships with the HP 2133 has big problems: it's slow because it's burdened with inappropriate packages like Beagle, its wireless connectivity is poor, if you try to install packages, it asks you to insert a non-existent DVD into a non-existet DVD drive, external screen configurations are limited, and there's something wrong with the touch pad driver causing it to "stick". In addition, I found the administrative menus and preference menus to be cluttered and pretty obscure at times.
I used to be a SuSE user. I was going to give SuSE another try with the 2133, but it was such a miserable experience that I just blew it away and installed Ubuntu.
So, now you heard about SuSE on the 2133.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
*pssst!* over here, in the AC section!
Stop and think about it. Do you really want the Windowtards bussing into all of the Linux distros, spreading their pollution and flamage wherever they go? Do you want Debian and Slackware dumbed down to the Fischer-Price toy that Ubuntu is so the Windows converts can comprehend it with their tiny little minds?
Keep it like it is. Ubuntu makes a great asylum.
That's great. I don't get why ubuntu needs to release a new "distro" for every single configuration.
Because it's easy for end users. And that's what should count. One reason Ubuntu is so popular is that they understand this.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Will they stop pointing fingers and actually attempt to fix Ubuntu killing hard drives on laptops?
I boot Ubuntu on this laptop, and it sounds like there's a midget inside of my laptop with a Nintendo Zapper. "clicka clicka clicka" every other minute.
The "fix" of just turning off all power management isn't a fix.
Could it be because all the good developers bailed from Novell after selling out to M$? Those that are left are busy injecting M$ Patented Technology into as many SuSe packages as possible in as short a time as possible. That leave precious little time and staff for actually making stuff work. Thanks Miguel.
You have to start somewhere.
Ubuntu has the advantage of being easy to try, so people aren't immediately put-off. It also has enough standard features that, over time, someone who is comfortable with Ubuntu could realize what suits their needs best, and seek the appropriate distro. This approach would in many cases be less of a shock than picking the "most appropriate" distro with zero Linux knowledge.
I see nothing wrong with using Ubuntu as a stepping stone for those who are interested in learning more, and an end-point for those who are satisfied with Ubuntu.
To answer your question: "Seriously, are we looking forward to milions of clueless Ubuntu users?/P" My answer, is yes.
I would prefer millions of clueless semi-secure Ubuntu users with the potential to become more Linux-minded to the current millions of clueless XP users.
For no other reason than the security flaws which cause their actions to affect us all.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Probably for most users, Ubuntu is the best distribution for their situation (if they've fixed the wi-fi hassle, that is), or at least as good as any other options. Expert users will have a better idea what distro they need, but they're probably not looking for an alternative to Windows.
Since Ubuntu seems pretty serious about ushering in the Year of the Linux Desktop, yes, we may be soon seeing millions of clueless Ubuntu users.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
Aww, you mean it's not "Ubuntu Castlevania Goron Temple Remix?" Damn.
If, for example, a user doesn't know how to choose which DE they want during installation, they should seriously rethink their choice to switch to Linux.
I understand that Canonical wants to make Linux user-friendly, but the extent that they go to achieve that is ridiculous at times. I don't think it's asking too much of someone to learn a bit about Linux before switching. If someone really wants to switch to a *nix OS and give it no thought whatsoever, then OS X has been a great choice for years, and it doesn't come with the problems that plague ubuntu.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I decided to re-purpose a G4 powerbook that I wasn't doing anything with and decided that it was a decent time to give a newer *nix ditro a shot. I had recently used Ubuntu to create a headless fileserver and was pleased with it. On the laptop, not as much. Airport Extreme support - from the OS, _NOT_ the Ubuntu support forums - was really, really painful. I tried YellowDog, SuSE and a few others but no love from any. I went back to Ubuntu (actually Xubuntu) and spent a number of hours working through the Support Forums, which are really well categorized into different topics. I ended up getting wireless to work with _a lot_ of help from the numerous posts responding to Ubuntu beginners like myself. Was it easy? Nope. Was it doable? Yup, thanks to the great community support. I think that's the best answer to "What is it with Ubuntu." But as always, YMMV.
Bark less. Wag more.
I'm running Ubuntu 8.04 on my Lenovo X61 and had to go back to XP until linux catches up with things or until I have time to fix all the problems.
Problems = No hard disk protection, bad power management, rotation only works if you disable DRI (and therefore OpenGl), pen input is problematic. Fan control = broken. Basically, everything that makes a portable or a tablet work on a hardware level is at version 0.1. Sure XP is broken on many things, but, the basic stuff seems to be there, and, XP's handwriting recognition is outstanding. Too bad it's on XP.
Other than that, Ubuntu 8.04 makes a fine desktop OS.
If, for example, a user doesn't know how to choose which DE they want during installation, they should seriously rethink their choice to switch to Linux.
I know how to do it, I just don't want to bother. With Ubuntu, I stick the right CD in the drive, boot up, see that everything works, and click on "install", and I get a predictable installation. I can give a CD to others, and they get the same installation. It's easy. It's good. It's user-friendly.
I understand that Canonical wants to make Linux user-friendly, but the extent that they go to achieve that is ridiculous at times.
Good. That's the right attitude.
Agreed. The Ubuntu website is the amateurish one that breaks the rules. For example, it is fixed width and doesn't flow to fit the screen, and it fails validation (Debian's site passes validation and flows). I also feel it just isn't as functional as the simpler, cleaner Debian site.
However, I am a bit of a minimalist (use IceWM, Emacs (small by today's computing resources), play nethack, etc.), making me less likely to be interested in Ubuntu anyway (besides some other reasons).
I feel the same way as you. I want to know what happened to GNU/Linux. "Huh? what's GNU/Linux? when I type in GNU in google it sends me to sum website wer i cant dl the dvd?!!111" I dunno. It's like distributions with good commericial advertising are completely different OSs. They're all the same. I'll continue to install "linux" via the slackware distro, and install it with all the added GUI goodness included that new users want. It's simple, not bloated with shit, and with a well compiled kernel.
I don't think Linux will ever leave it's development stage for a while. However, preinstalled OSs, and specific hardware is something different.
Maybe because it's the only distro of Linux that's managing to make it into mainstream PC sales for the computer-illiterate? You can buy a PC with Ubuntu pre-installed, plug it in, and it just works. And you don't get shafted with an over-inflated software price!
This probably has to do with the goals & philosophies of the different distros. Debian's goal isn't to create the most marketshare for desktop linux as possible; ubuntu's is (sort of - see ubuntu launchpad bug #1).
Its = possessive. It's = "it is"
The repositories nearest to me, (in South Africa), are updated first.
Please keep this quiet. Who want's to be Mainstream? It's where all the hassle is.
Yeah, but which one is more appealing to the know nothing-"ooh this is pretty" crowd? That's where Ubuntu's website has it.
It's because the word Ubuntu is so damn fun to say!
Move all sig!
We already are; have you read ubuntuforums.org lately? Half the threads sound like they were posted by 12 year old AOL children, acronyms and horrid grammar included.
Luckily when there are hundreds of threads on the same exact problem it generally gets fixed in the next version of ubuntu. (Case in point - you hardly ever see "I can't fix my screen resolution" or "X won't start on my ATI card after a fresh install" threads anymore.)
Its = possessive. It's = "it is"
minimalist and EMACS.. two words I never thought could be next to each other.
Seriously, what is it with ubuntu that everyone feels the need to speak about it? ...
Regular updates, good marketting, and it's just plain fun to say out loud.
Think of Ubuntu as a gateway drug, uh, distro. The switch from Windows to Ubuntu is a major change, but from there user can go to any gnome-based system with ease, even Fedora and Suse will have most of the same, familiar apps. Even if the Apps differ, they will use the same protocols and formats. Anything produced on Ubuntu can be used by other Linux users.
Yes, monoculture is bad, the recent issue with Debian's OpenSSH package proves that point painfully enough. But an Ubuntu monoculture will be short-lived, because once people get used to choice, they'll start making their own choices, and it won't always been Ubuntu.
http://www.mhall119.com
2) Ubuntu is most certainly an OS. It's a flavor of Linux. Windows XP, Windows Vista Home Premium and Windows Vista Ultimate are all different flavors of the Windows OS, however, each of them can be correctly called an OS. The fact that it isn't a completely separate OS does not make it any less an OS.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
I have installed Ubuntu on multiple macs, a B&W Powermac, a G4 Mac Mini, a couple of different models of G3 iMacs, and an Intel Powerbook pro. Almost none of them went smoothly, there was always a major problem just getting it installed.
:-( but, take the bad with the good I guess, it really is a superior Linux breed overall in terms of usability.
I like Ubuntu, I use Ubuntu, but one of the reasons I got into Linux was because it didn't have mysterious problems that kept things from working all the time. Ubuntu has re-introduced this into my life and I don't like it
two words: System tools.
On a default installation of 8 (Hardy Heron, I believe) 'system tools' was not visible by default. Combined with the fact that it didn't accept my nvidia drivers. took me a bit longer before I was able to get the bloody thing up and running. I'm no linux noob, and Ubuntu isn't quite ready for mass desktop distribution. I'll stick with my tried and true RH9
Hi, I Boris. Hear fix bear, yes?
but if you look at ubuntu.com versus debian.org you'll notice ...
Alternatively, one may as well realize that there exist different target groups with different attitudes, needs, (and average age, (and knowledge), presumably).
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
Because for some people the Distribution = Operating System. They believe that everything what gets installed from CD/DVD disk to computer, is part of THE Operating System. For them it's hard to understand that Operating System stands between hardware and applications (HW - OS - Applications). For normal people, KDE or GNOME (any GUI) is THE Operating System and you have different OS if you change GUI, name or you get technical support from different company.
Many non-technical person believe that Ubuntu is different Operating System than OpenSuse, Mandriva, Fedora or any other distribution. Actually many technical person even believe that those are different OS like Windows and Linux (GNU/Linux) are.
And there are technical persons who believe that: Distribution == Operating System and "Distribution" is just a "nerd talk" to confuse normal users and it should not be used, instead using phrases like "You change Operating System if you delete Ubuntu and you install Debian".
Ubuntu is an OS in the sense that most people use it. It is the kernel, the GNU system tools (it's misleading to call them userland for most users), and the GUI applications they use to do what users today do, browse the web, read/write email, chat, write document, etc. Most new Ubuntu users will rarely ever touch a GNU program.
Gnu/Linux alone may be an OS for geeks and command-line aficionados, but the vast majority of computer users include the desktop and GUI applications for standard tasks as part of their "OS".
http://www.mhall119.com
As someone that designs websites this is the frustrating argument. Design is a combination of the organization of a website's content (function) in addition to its aesthetic appearance (form).
The two websites mentioned have very different goals in mind when structuring their content. Debian opted to hit users with a lot of data and options up front assuming their visitors are more advanced. Ubuntu has restricted the information on their home page in order to channel visitors to a few of the more common tasks, or reasons people come to the site, so as to not frighten off noobs with data overload.
From a purely aesthetic standpoint I give Ubuntu's site the edge but it could be a lot nicer. Debian would be the superior site all around if they just made some better color choices, toned down the absurd over-roundedness of their corner graphics and added some more padding/margin around the page so the content wasn't riding on the edges.
Just my $0.02.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I don't mind useless distros, having set a few of them up myself, but the package management madness needs to stop. What we really need is not a new PM, but a way for PMs to interoperate reliably.
You didn't really have to respond. I was merely pointing out the redundant tautology in that sentence.
This guy's the limit!
I understand the concept and differences on what the title, "Operating System" means. As long as an OS is a title, it's understandable. I guess it just has to do with how it's called Ubuntu. Why not Ubuntu Linux? My guess is they still officially call it Ubuntu Linux, and not just Ubuntu. The different "flavors" of Windows (lets focus on NT kernel models) all have the word windows in it, NT, XP, 2K, Vista. Though I still see windows as different, because they all don't exactly use the same kernel, they are, i assume, improved versions of the NT kernel. Anyways, I am in no argument here, I understand your point and the parent's.
Among the things that make Ubuntu great is this 2133-specific wiki, which someone took pains to assemble into a single document:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LaptopTestingTeam/HP2133
I tried it last night, and it's great. Just follow the instructions, and almost every feature on the 2133 works if you do: Suspend, processor scaling, 802.11G wireless, WPA2 encryption, etc.
With the stock SuSE installation, I couldn't get a wireless connection working and the wifi indicator light was always yellow (off)
I manage SUSE, RedHat, Ubuntu and Windows server boxes at work and i can concur. Ubuntu is by far easier to manage and keep running. When i need something or want to test something out its just an apt-get away on Ubuntu while it can take many hours on the others. Package management is where Ubuntu (or debian to be true) really shines. That coupled with the enormous repositories with most packages known to man makes it a very handy tool for me. I tried to use SUSE for a terminal server but i had enormous problems with it. For every new package i introduced i had conflicts all over and had to resolve them by endless sessions with "--force".
Debian should be very proud of Ubuntu. It just works and the biggest part of that in my view is that it got a package management system that really shines above everybody else. If it works because of hard work or technical merits i don't know but i do know it saves me endless of hours in the end.
I think Ubuntu chose the right way when they start at the desktops and then go for the servers. Even my boss runs Ubuntu at home and at work. When he run it at home chances are much greater he wants me to use it at work for our servers. Novell/SUSE must be out of their mind when they drop the desktop and gives it away freely to Microsoft. Why go for the enterprise market where competition already are fierce when you can go for a desktop market and the small company market? You can never take a market top down, it has to start from the bottom.
If Ubuntu do a real push for servers with easier setup of services and more or less key ready solutions they will make a real dent in the Linux server market. All that is needed is some polishing on the configuration procedures of some key components like OpenLDAP, SAMBA, Cups and some Groupware.
HTTP/1.1 400
Just my guess.
Website design is as much about the audience as anything else-and the Ubuntu site is perfectly geared towards it's audience, as is Debians towards it's- which is why it looks any other F/OSS project page where as Ubuntu's looks like a standard corporate page.
open source modern art: laser taggi
Minimalist, Emacs? ;-)
You've got nothing, I use ed
Do away with our corrupt tax code. Support the Fair Tax
http://www.mhall119.com
Debian overloads you with so much information that it's impossible to get anything done.
I wanted to learn how to package up software and I found the full circle magazine more helpful then Debian's 6000 page document on it, such a useless website.
Of course. When something only happens twice in a decade, it makes news!
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
Good, that's exactly what linux needs.
That makes no sense, especially the 2nd slide. If you're going to do a cartoon at least make it so I can follow it, not just start rambling on about freedom.
What kind of a waste of protein would you have to be to haul off and demand that everybody and God Himself and his dog and his fleas must have marketing? Hellooo-ooo?? They're giving it away for free-ee-ee? Is there anybody in there??? What's their cost-to-benefit ratio for attracting more people like you? The CEO and stockholders of Debian didn't have you in mind.
Debian's been happily thriving for 15 years. People who know what to do with it go get it. People who don't, pass it by. Which is as it should be.
When I see bazookas, brain-surgeon scalpels, and atomic submarine components on the shelf at Walmart, then I'll ask what's wrong with Debian's marketing. Until then, if it isn't going to great lengths to attract you, assume that it isn't for you.
Maybe because the Exherbo article was just a big "fuck you, we don't want you because we're too l33t for you" and they had nothing to show which made the whole news posting completely pointless.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I don't understand why "monoculture is bad" necessarily. It does lead to more possible security breaches, but it also leads to a coherent support network, familiar UI standards across most desktops, and a larger developer and user base with which to improve/test the software.
I myself see no need to switch away from the distro that gives me everything I need and has the most active community. This idea that users will switch to other distros once they see the "choice" is missing the point - 1: users don't want too much choice, and 2: given the choice, users will usually choose either what's familiar to them or what everyone else chooses. This is how Windows achieved and kept popularity! It simply became the standard. Linux needs this.
The other misconception is that this is bad -- it is not. It creates underlying standards and consistency across the board, which will confuse users less and help them adapt to the change faster and easier. It's also a lot easier to support a single distro than a dozen.
So it may not *always* be ubuntu, but it very likely will. I think Ubuntu has reached the tipping point where its momentum will support its growth. More power to it, in my opinion.
"!"
(drumroll, please)
NOOBUNTU!
Perfect for the masses. Includes warnings such as "Don't put this in the dishwasher."
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Only us nerds care when a website fails validation and only a tiny sliver of nerds - the same ones who run emacs and that keyboard-only window manager and nothing else - will actually just not visit a website because it fails validation. Those people are already running a 250-user netbsd system on their camera phone and are never fucking going to install Ubuntu anyway.
I, on the other hand, have installed Ubuntu, and I try my best to never actually visit their front page. Their website (especially the forums) is one of the least-responsive out there so I try not to need it.
Luckily, Firefox seems to render broken websites fine, so I usually don't jump up and down and badmouth Shuttleworth's grandmother from my batcave in mom's basement.
Oh shit, I read only your first paragraph, and then wrote my reply, and then read your second paragraph. Too hilarious. I do still love nethack though.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Well, the big problem isn't with the Debian site; it's with the aspect ratio of most monitors these days. Flowing to fill the full horizontal width of the screen is actually a bad idea for such a text-heavy site, because such long lines are hard to read.
Look at the Debian home page in a browser window that is narrowed to allow about 7-10 words per line in the main text, and it looks -- nice. Not coincidentally, the Ubuntu site squeezes about ten words across into the main text.
I'm sitting here on a laptop with a screen that's designed for watching wide screen movies, but it'd be better for me to rotate it 90 degrees if I'm reading text.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Do you seriously expect me to look at their GIT repo after reading their front page? Fuck them, I'm not cool enough to look at their source code..
http://www.mhall119.com
I totally agree with you paroneayea. because of some problems with the two mouse setup on my computer I have been looking around at other distributions (mostly at Fedora). And it is the total package that the Ubuntu community has that makes it stand out. Why do I feel this?
When visit the forum you feel that you really haven't left the main ubuntu site.
When I surfed around trying to find some information and community around the Fedora distribution, I didn't feel the same thing. Mind you: I have just briefly checked sites related to Suse, so I can only describe my two distribution experiences.
"For example, it is fixed width and doesn't flow to fit the screen,"
Oh No! Call the standards police! that must mean the distro is rubbish and anyone that is interested in switching from Windows will be well advised to steer well clear.
The multitudes won't switch from Windows to a confusing mess of distros unless one stands out from the crowd and offers a easy entry in the wonderful world of Linux ok? fixed width or no.
I greatly prefer the Debian.org site design. Ubuntu.com looks like a business site selling a product, while Debian.org looks like the site of a community project.
An argument for a Linux-distro monoculture, though, is that more likely than not a de-facto "main distro" will be scrutinized far more by upstream. If the OpenSSH guys had looked at the Debian changes (because, under this hypothesis, Debian would be THE DISTRO), this error would have been found and fixed far sooner.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
Like most people, you're confusing two different concepts here: skillful vs. professional. Debian's site is clearly more skillfully done, and wins on technical merit. Ubuntu's site is clearly more professional; people are more likely to pay for a site like that. Debian's site is both technically superior and more amateurish. The very qualities you mention as signs Ubuntu's site is "more amateurish" are common and even to some degree desired in many professional web designs (fixed-width, for example, is required to accurately control precise layout, a common client requirement). If the Debian developers were trying to sell the site design, it'd look more like Ubuntu's, which is to say, more professional, albeit not as good in many ways.
Never confuse "professional" with "better" or "amateur" with "worse". The first terms relate to the compensation for the activity, the second refer to subjective criteria which are usually utterly unrelated to that.
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
You shall obey the tribal chiefs.
You shall not question.
You shall not invent what has not been set your way.
You shall not suggest that which might suggest another to innovate what is not set his way.
You shall not be the newbie genius who always wishes to topple the sitting chiefs.
You shall not be the enthusiast that seeks to help the sitting chiefs - they know better, you do not.
You shall not speak with perseverance for the chiefs like not unasked counsel.
You shall follow the debian order strictly as the orders tell.
You shall fear to speak against the mighty debian order overlords.
In simpler prose, the debian system belongs to everyone, to the public, which means it is "public property" which can be misused by overlords but must never be touched by the public. Customize on your machine, but suggest not the change to the ways of the debian greats. You own not that system. They do.
So, you shall now not raise this discussion again.
Go!
Hackers have long memories. It works both ways.
You work with exherbo, I presume? If you are interested in incorporating anything along the lines of Portage, sign me up.
Honestly, not trolling, just offering a possible explanation to answer your question.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
There's nothing wrong with the layout of Debian's site but the design is awful and hurts my eyes. It looks like it was made by one of the developers because it validates but looks like crap. By the way valid HTML/CSS doesn't make a website good. If it did I would be raking in money as a web developer because it seems that next to no one validates their websites except for coders. The really sad thing is that when using CSS you could alter the debian website quite dramatically with little time or effort and it would look 100 times better.
Time makes more converts than reason
Ubuntu releases every 6 months, Windows every 6 years.
Yes, let's instead go back to obsessing about every point release of every Apple product under the iSun.
mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
It's not hard to make a website that looks like that pass validation.
The same person who flamed you probably also get annoyed that Ubuntu gets more attention and praise than Debian. Some people just can't make the connection.
Because all the other distros are "Just another Distro"
I know people are going to disagree (mod away, points to burn) but without Ubuntu, Linux would still be for techies only.
I've used quite a few distros. I love some of the concepts behind DSL and have used it quite a bit, Knoppix rocks, but when it comes down to "Could I give this to some random person to use", I wouldn't do any but Ubuntu.
Part of it is that the Debian package manager puts all the others to shame. The precompiled installs make a huge difference in how often it works vs fails (I don't believe I've ever had an add/remove program fail in Ubuntu. Can't say that about non-debian distros I've used for half that amount of time)
An other issue is that Ubuntu works out of the box. Give an ubuntu disk and pretty much any other distro to a techophobe and see which one sends him screaming from the room.
All the tools in Ubuntu act like they are meant to be there, not just some pile of programs that were stuffed in. Things generally don't fail, and most hardware drivers auto-install correctly and just work.
I'm sorry, but to put it bluntly, none of the others rate much of a mention in non-techie press. On slashdot, maybe a little, but most will even admit that they simply do not have an interest in users that aren't technical (those that will give up before going to the net to find a solution for a device driver or X11 config problem).
For those who work on other distros, please don't read me wrong. Your work is valuable, and what you do is damn impressive... but most of the other distros are made to scratch some programmers itch--not to support grandma's web-porn and solitaire needs.
Ubuntu just has a different target, so please don't get offended if you didn't hit a target you weren't aiming for; and don't be surprised if you aren't mentioned in as many articles, because "The Masses" are really more interested in products for "The Masses" than those for "techies"--even "the masses" on slashdot.
Debian FTW
Wow, you couldn't be more accurate about how dated their site looks. In fact, it looks more like 1990 than 6 years later.
Never get upset about someone responding to your posts because it means that at least someone is hearing you even if they are blind in their mind's eye--and that's a lot of zealots in the land of linux.
I used linux and have used it for the past 3 years. I'd tried it a couple years before for a year then went back to windows for a year. When Ubuntu started gaining popularity I returned and haven't even thought about going back. Sheesh, it does everything I want, everything, with the exception of windows gaming. In that matter I couldn't really care because I do have a machine set aside for that which only plays games.
In fact, it wouldn't bother me one bit if 5-10 years down the road we look upon windows as a gaming console-type OS where that's all you do--where your real work is done on Linux.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
It's boring and dated. There are advancements in web browser technologies for a reason.
These advancements say that looks matter as much as substance. Debian and Ubuntu have substance, it is just that Ubuntu has looks too.
It doesn't excuse the attack that the linux zealot made upon him for his suggestion.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
Unless you learn how to package. :)
I think Debian is the parent of enough distros to be "the Distro", so recent events would unfortunately prove your hopes wrong. The OpenSSH guys aren't ever going to be evaluating distro changes to their package, it's not their responsibility. As long as it works right in OpenBSD, they're happy, doesn't matter to them if some Linux guys break it in their package.
http://www.mhall119.com
For every new package i introduced i had conflicts all over and had to resolve them by endless sessions with "--force".
Using --force or --nodeps isn't resolving a problem, it's ignoring and compounding them. I have little modern experience with SuSE but an RPM system using appropriate repositories should never need to be forced, period.
I found it ironic, that for a time, Gentoo had far and away, the best website and documentation out of any of the distributions.
Then again, I suppose nobody would have used it otherwise
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
If they knew "the best distribution for their situation" they'd no longer be newbs.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
"Think of Ubuntu as a gateway drug, uh, distro."
.1% that are willing to play around for hours to get things working the way they want it to.
I've been using FOSS software since 1996, and the only 3 Linux distros i like are smoothwall, ubuntu, and knoppix. in 1996 i gave up on slackware (what all the Linux people were talking about then) for something that worked out of the box as a cross platform Internet gateway/file server... Free BSD.
I've never been cured of my desire for simplicity, never, and neither will the masses.
I don't want to fight with my software for 7 hours to get it 'just right' i want it to just plain work out of the box with no quibbles.
that's the #1 reason i hate Microsoft, despite all the other reasons to hate Microsoft. work with no hassles, and I'm not alone, most of the free world wants what i want, even if they don't know that's what they want.
for the few people who like to meddle with the guts of an OS, building gentoo from source is there, but at best, if the world switches to Linux, you will find the breakdown is the same as it is now, 99.9% wanting stuff that works and
you can't make people enjoy meddling with software who don't already enjoy it, and even then you can't increase the amount of spare time they have unless you put all food, housing and medical care under the direct control of the government... and believe you me, doing that is not cool, just ask people who lived in communist Russia how well that worked for them.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
open source modern art: laser taggi
if you look at http://ubuntu.com/ versus http://debian.org/ you'll notice that one is quite pretty and modern, and the other looks like it fell out of a wormhole circa 1996.
Eh, the Ubuntu site looks like every other corporate site out there. I prefer the Debian site, but those blue button links could probably be a less jarring color.Actually, EMACS is a pretty good example of what's wrong with the mindset of the GNU project.
It's a huge massive bloated piece of software that somehow managed to reject every single user-interface paradigm that ever caught on.
GUIs? A silly CPU-wasting trend! They'll never catch on!
Mouse support? Who needs it!
Documentation? For the weak!
I suppose xEmacs solves most of those problems, though at the end of the day, it's still emacs.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
Now, with Ultra-portables, this have been designed to run linux right off the bat. Often these will come with source for the drivers and other equipment it is meant to run. It is often older equipment with a lot more support in linux.
I think Ultra-portables will be far better supported than current laptops. Maybe manfacturers will start getting hit with a clue stick.
shuttleworth is almost a billionaire, and he's so far only ponied up 10 million for ubuntu.
if he has to hire 10 programmers to get ubuntu working on ultra portables, he can do it, and he can have it working so slick that anyone would want to run Linux on an ultra portable.
the fact that he hasn't done the same for laptops suggests that he doesn't value Linux laptop support. even if he did, he'd be targeting vanilla laptop support, the kind that OEMs without a big distribution can buy add an os to and sell... he wouldn't be targeting the 'aftermarket Compaq sales' because there isn't enough ROI for people who bought a windows machine and decided to switch to Linux.
remember Shuttleworth is not into Linux for charity, he's in it to get a return on his investment. he runs all his Linux projects as business ventures. clearly he thinks there is a market for Linux ultra portables, and is willing to assign developer time to try to get a decent ROI for the work.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
If someone really wants to switch to a *nix OS and give it no thought whatsoever, then OS X has been a great choice for years, and it doesn't come with the problems that plague ubuntu.
I have three OS X machines, and that's so wrong it isn't even funny. While the base OS X is fairly easy to install (it better be, given the limited range of hardware), adding applications and development software to it is a lot of work. And OS X lacks any kind of automated package management system, meaning that software constantly pesters users about installing this or that upgrade.
And once installed, OS X is full of problems. Not even its file system is UNIX compatible. Interoperability in a UNIX environment is a headache. The graphics subsystem is slow. And then there's the mysterious spinning beach balls of death.
I was merely pointing out the redundant tautology in that sentence.
:)
Hah! Prove it!
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
Right, I wasn't going to say anything but it sounds like this guy has no idea how to manage SUSE or RedHat systems and blames his ignorance on the distro instead of himself. I mean if apt-get is what makes ubuntu better then he really has alot to learn about the systems he's managing. I hope he reads on RHN, Satellite, yum, YaSt and RPM if he's being paid as an expert.
Sorry for being negative.
It's perfect for the user who doesn't know anything 'cause they'll never even know what they're missing
As an Ubuntu user; I find that vaguely insulting. Linux in general is missing an easy entry into its world for outsiders. Ubuntu helps with this by bring friendly on the outside; having good support forums and services, but being a full distro under the hood.
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
My only problem with Ubuntu's website is that it is a .com--I've been using Linux for ten years and every time I want to download Ubuntu, I go to ubuntu.org first. :-)
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
Dude, I've only been using kubuntu for a year (and it's my first linux distro at that) so I've got nothing but love for it's ease of use, nice ui, and general friendliness.
open source modern art: laser taggi
You are not alone in that. I guess we are driving traffic to World Forum of Civil Society Networks
Remember, millions of clueless users is what made Windows a wonderful platform for releasing software on.
So say hello to games, proper productivity tools and proper corporate support; all on a platform that is open source, and therefore not under the thumb of pointy haired amoral bean counting board members.
http://www.zombieapocalypse.tv/
Wrong. The 10 million you're thinking of is probably the emergency funding that he put into the Ubuntu Foundation, for use only if Canonical vanishes. I'm sure he's put an awful lot more into Canonical over the years.
"upcoming Ubuntu Netbook Remix" Upcoming? That would break Mark's release synchronization idea.
Ctrl + mwheel up/down (FF) is your friend there. Even /. looks clean after a lot of zoom for the text.
"I have little modern experience with SuSE but an RPM system using appropriate repositories should never need to be forced, period."
Well thats exactly my view on the matter. One of the stinkier messes i had to solve was when one upgraded package had been split into several smaller ones. Needless to say hilarity didnt ensue. I did try to solve it the right way but it was not possible in many cases because many times i found myself in moment 22 where i had no choice whatsoever. Files that a package didnt touch was flagged as owned by some other package etc. Not funny.
HTTP/1.1 400
"Right, I wasn't going to say anything but it sounds like this guy has no idea how to manage SUSE or RedHat systems and blames his ignorance on the distro instead of himself."
I have very long experience with all the major distros and see myself as a pretty decent admin. I have rarely seen this kind of issues with RedHat until i have introduced other repos to get other packages. In Ubuntu/Debian i have had pages of repos without any problems.
"I mean if apt-get is what makes ubuntu better then he really has alot to learn about the systems he's managing."
Apt is what makes my life easier as an admin and saves me time. I have no education at all on Debian/Ubuntu but have taken several ones on the others.
"I hope he reads on RHN, Satellite, yum, YaSt and RPM if he's being paid as an expert."
I really do not understand how me reading up on those would make dependancy solving better. Closing your eyes and calling everybody an idiot do not solve this problem.
HTTP/1.1 400
I think you're missing the forest for the trees.
Miniminalism does not necessarily imply functionality or utilitarianism.
Even in spite of the bare-bones design, Debian's site fails to organize things in a logical or comprehensable manner.
In all, the site's design feels very indicative of the GNU project in general. There's far too much space devoted to things that people simply don't care about.
The first item on the sidebar? Debian's social contract. The majority of the text in the welcome message is a paraphrasing of Stallman's GNU/Linux naming rant. Most users are interested in an operating system, not an ideology. Linux has gotten good enough that it can drop this crutch entirely.
The battle is over, and we won... not because the public woke up and realized that closed-source software is evil. F/OSS gained acceptance because the software actually became better than its commercial counterparts. Relying on ideology is a terrible marketing strategy, and implies some pretty huge weaknesses.
A better introduction would be: "Debian is a fast, reliable, and secure operating system available for several platforms. It is provided free of charge to all users, and is developed by a team of volunteers." Short, to-the-point, and pays homage to the F/OSS philosophy without forcing it down the users' throats.
The rest of that paragraph is useless. Unless you stumbled across the page by accident, you probably know what an operating system is. Nobody cares about the number of packages in the repository.
Actually attempting to download the distro is a chore as well. First the user must pick the release, then the branch, then the installation method, and finally their architecture. Most users aren't going to know what any of these things mean.
It's fine to offer a high degree of flexibility. However, when 99% of your users are going to be downloading an ISO for the most recent stable x86 build, it makes the most sense to put that option right up front.
Anyone with the need for one of the more exotic builds should be knowledgable enough to figure out where to look. A simple hyperlink to "Other Builds" that leads to a table of all the available releases would be perfectly sufficient.
I'm not even going to bother elaborating about the color scheme, inconsistent margins, or excessively linearized page flow (for both remaining Lynx users!). There are enough competent web designers out there that the crappy design of Debian's site must actually have been a conscious choice of the project's management. It achieves the impossible goal of being both condescending and incomprehensable all at the same time.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
I just repeat, Ubuntu has nothing special against other distributions. Actually it is not so easy to use than Mandriva 2008.1 GNOME edition, because Ubuntu lacks control center what Mandriva or OpenSUSE offers to handle whole system. Those are the real easy-to-use and easy-to-learn systems, not the Ubuntu.
I'm sure you don't intend it but your first lines of posting come over as the classic linux expert user criticism of newbies - "it's not the software that's wrong, it's you!".
I'm very pleased that many of the linux distros have got their act together to appeal to a wider audience these days.
Websites, like all things marketing-related, should be done with regards to those for whom you're trying to cater, which isn't always the largest population. Or, to put it more bluntly, anyone ignorant enough not to know the architecture they needis someone who shouldn't be using Debian in the first place, and I say this as a happy (x)Ubuntu user.
And, given that Debian doesn't rely on customers to survive, but rather on volunteers donating their time to the project, I'd say that their social contract *is* the most important thing they have on their website, maybe second only to the distribution itself, since it's the main attractive the distribution has for working on it.
No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
Seriously, what is it with ubuntu that everyone feels the need to speak about it? There is a new version of Ubuntu, so what. In the summary there was also e mentino of Suse's package for the HP notebook, why don't I hear anyone about that?
And about all the other linux distributions, why not mention those as well. There are many ``yet another linux distro''s out there, but also enough interesting, unique one which ad value to the linux distribution landscape.
Diversity differs!
Ubuntu gets more mentions because it's more popular. Because it's fast becoming 'Linux' to those oft mentioned, "know nothing, new users". That's how things work, not just in Linuxland but out in the 'real' world too. You or your product are more popular, have a higher profile, better marketing, whatever and you are going to get spoken about more. It's that simple. Ubuntu deserves the attention it gets. It's achieved something no other distro has done. All those other Linux distro's you mention will benefit from Ubuntu's achievement(s). One way will be when some of those "know nothing, new users" have used Ubuntu for a while they'll have heard about Slackware, Gentoo, Arch etc. Then some of them will try out those other distro's and learn even more. To their and OSS's mutual benefit. I personally don't use Ubuntu. I have done and it would be my immediate recommendation to anyone wanting to try out Linux. We really should try to support Ubuntu. Most of us do, the elitist knob-ends voicing their distaste will eventually go away like the dinosaurs they are.Just resize your browser window?
My ThinkPad X24 laughs at you. Everything worked out of the box - on Debian, no less.
Suspend? Check.
Hibernate? Check.
Wired/Wireless network? Check.
Video? Check, up and running at the maximum 1024X768@24 that the monitor and videocard supports. Turning it down to @16 got 3D acceleration working, and with the free driver too.
Even the infrared worked, though I haven't done anything but play a couple of times with it.
So I suppose it's just down to IBM doing things right, and not throwing the cheapest hardware they can get into the case.
No tyrant thrives when every subject says no.
I sense a meme...
Is it Vaporware if the creators admit it's Vaporware?
Can you name a better distribution for people that don't know what a distribution is?
Seriously, are we looking forward to milions of clueless Ubuntu users?/P
Absolutly, YES.
Bah! Real programmers use cat.
Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
Oblig.
http://xkcd.com/378/
[quote](if they've fixed the wi-fi hassle, that is)[/quote] Seriously, this is your concern? The damn wifi has been fixed & working for almost everyone since Fiesty - it definitely works in Hardy.
The most important thing is not the technology - Ubuntu is just a Debian variant in technology. The important difference is that when a newbie finds something difficult, Debian says "RTFM" but Ubuntu regards that as a reportable bug.
http://rocknerd.co.uk
It's also the only group which appears to pay much attention to proper usability and human interface guidelines. Linux has been blighted for too long by TERRIBLE usability - dists would be content to slap together a generic GNOME / KDE, slap a few crappy tools into it, and too many users would snort at anyone who expected a GUI which (shock / horror) allowed you to configure your computer without wading through config files. Needless to say Ubuntu is getting a lot of publicity because they really seem to be trying to make it Just Work. That doesn't mean Ubuntu is perfect but its a damned sight better than most other dists.
Gee, that's great, too bad you only get one shot with people, to make that first impression.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
According to such stupid analogy any change conduces to communism.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Communism does not recognize copyright and private enterprise, fundamental cornerstones of Free Software.
For you information co-operative movements (to which FOSS is more akin) were born in capitalist societies...
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I completely agree. The worst I have recently seen among Linux pages is this. The design feels early 90'ish, with all the blinking animated GIFs and the general unreadability.
For the uninitiated, this page is made by a Swedish attorney, distributing modified versions of a range of Linux distributions. One of the primary modifications is that the user always runs as root, and the owner has been criticized for this many times, but completely ignores it. He also uses those distributions' trademarks without having asked for permission, and completely ignores any inquiries about this matter.
Ubuntu is made with people new to linux in mind, it's overly easy to install and "it just works". Debian doesn't need to lure you in with pretty websites and ads; you'll find out about Debian if you're actually interested in linux.
There's no justification for blasting old-school text editors. IDEs with modern GUIs universally suck as text editors. At the moment I'm developing an application on the Eclipse platform, so it's an obvious win for me to use the Eclipse IDE. Mostly I just grit my teeth and use the built-in editor, but a few times a week I end up pasting a block of code into emacs, editing it, and then pasting the code back into the IDE. (Yes, I use Eclipse's emacs mode. It's just a keyboard mapping, nothing more.)
Emacs used to be a decent IDE (maybe the first IDE) but standards have gone up. Modern IDEs kick its ass in a major way. That wouldn't be a problem, except that modern IDEs have text editors that would have been considered crap a quarter-century ago. Why the hell have standards for text editors gone down? Why is the Eclipse text editor a worthless piece of shit?
Eclipse is a huge and sophisticated IDE, but in terms of usability (for programmers -- that's who it's for) its editor is basically an extremely featureful version of Notepad. You can't do jack shit without popping up a dialog box, which forces you to take your eyes off the text you're working on and navigate to the appropriate boxes to fill in the parameters of whatever command you're running.
And since all the commands have to be represented somewhere in the already overcrowed GUI, commands that should be distinct are combined together into ridiculously vague meta-commands that force you to set a bunch of radio buttons and check boxes to specify the command you actually want to execute. And all those radio buttons and check boxes get popped up every time you run the command, so unless you remember what settings you used last, you have to at least glance over them all to make sure they're set correctly. I basically gave up on all of the commands except cut, copy, paste, and incremental search.
A text editor is to a programmer what a chef's knife is to a cook, what a brush is to a painter. The typical IDE editor is like a butter knife or a can of spray paint. It's really sad, because it's completely unnecessary. There's no reason a sophisticated editor can't be built into an IDE. The large number of programmers who forgo the benefits modern IDEs just so they can use emacs and vi is compelling evidence that there needs to be a dramatic revolution in the way IDEs are constructed. The belief that IDE technology obviates the need for sophisticated text editing tools is not justified by current IDE technology, and it probably never will be.