Ask Matt Asay About Ubuntu and Canonical
A week after the announcement that open source advocate and blogger Matt Asay is leaving Alfresco for Canonical, in the role of COO, Matt has agreed to answer your questions about his role at Canonical, his vision for the future of Ubuntu, or the prospects for open source as we begin to emerge from recession. Usual Slashdot interview rules apply. (Disclaimer: Matt is on the board of advisors for Slashdot's parent company, Geeknet.)
I and my employer have been long-time Gentoo fans. We've recently switched almost everything over to Ubuntu. Also, I've just installed Zimbra at home. Because it's looking good, I am also in the process of installing it at work. I am already convinced that Ubuntu is in good hands, and Matt's appointment only strengthens this impression. What I'm concerned about is what's going to happen to Zimbra under VMware. I'm working on my management about buying the full-featured version for our Blackberry-using salesman, but please tell me that the current free version will continue to be loved.
Acts 17:28, "For in Him we live, and move, and have our being."
Every so often I see an adoption story about so and so taking up some open source solution and sometimes I think "Wow, French government? Now it's really going to take off. This is it. It's time." And then I wait. And wait.
Are these stories at all positive for the project? I mean, you would think with states and governments using Ubuntu or Red Hat that it would catch on like wildfire if the savings are there so why isn't that happening? I know Microsoft sends out a lot of Wormtongues to stick in the ears of important people, do you plan on targeting governments in a similar manner? Does/will Canonical work on making a presence in things like the EU Commissions where we've seen corporations collecting members in their pockets?
My work here is dung.
This, I believe, is an opportunity for Canonical to tighten its focus. While Shuttleworth suggests that Silber's appointment "doesn't mark a change of direction," perhaps it should. With over 300 employees and products that span mobile, Netbooks and other personal computers, cloud computing, enterprise servers, and more, Canonical has its fingers in a lot of pots.
As COO, what are you going to do to improve the products you highlighted above? I'm not looking for a soft answer like "I'm going to promote Ubuntu on netbooks" but more so an itemized list of measurable goals, with milestones, dates and areas of focus (for instance, power minded ARM distributions). Is there anything about their vision you intend to change or influence the most?
My work here is dung.
I'm curious as to what efforts will be made to keeping frameworks like Mono, Java and WINE current in existing releases. It seems that by the time a release happens these frameworks are already several versions behind. It would be nice to have an "edge" set of repositories that keep up with this in addition to backports that is.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
How come NESticle and Stella (emulators) work flawlessly on Windoze but only play one-quarter of the roms on Ubuntu?
How come I can't connect to my Netscape dialup ISP?
Why can't I find a simple way to look-up my computer's RAM space, or how many tasks are running, or to kill a misbehaving process?
Why when I switch to 640x480 mode (gaming), why doesn't the desktop properties window fit (thereby leaving me stuck)?
Why, when I tried to upgrade from 8.10 to 9.04, was I told that I don't have permission to change the folders on my laptop?
Why can't I get Opera Browser installed?
Why. Is. Ubuntu Linux. So. Damn. Unfriendly? Hell my ancient Amiga 500 or Quadra Macs are easier to use.
And no this is not a troll. :-)
It's an opinion.
Learn the difference mod.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Do you ever bathe?
Do we really need Mono in the default installation?
because your an idiot.
You used to write a lot about desktop Linux distributions but now that you're COO of Canonical, the revenue comes most from enterprise support. Do you plan on trying to change that or maintain any value in pleasing the at home Ubuntu user? Your blog post talks about your kids achieving basic tasks with Ubuntu, will you still keep them in mind despite the fact your new employer doesn't see a dime from them? Any plans to make it more user friendly or make it more mainstream and less server room?
My work here is dung.
Now that Mark Shuttleworth has stepped aside, how long until the Microsoft coyotes come in and either implant a new CEO or insert stealth ex-employees into the fold to subvert Ubuntu or suddenly announce a new pact with Microsoft and Novell? How long can we expect Ubuntu to continue free of Redmond's grasp? Many won't speak of this, but you know the feelings are there. Just you wait, the "let's make a deal" Microsoft fairies will swarm in and around Ubuntu eventually.
: We promise we won't sue you today for the hamburger you eat from out of our interoperability kitchen, but we may always change our position once you become addicted to our hamburgers!
... I was just wondering if there were plans to move the default color scheme away from burnt orange.
It just seems that if Ubuntu wants to appeal to more mainstream users, a good approach would be to have a color scheme that doesn't look like a desert wasteland.
Will Ubuntu continue to periodically suck my focus away from whatever task I'm doing with sociopathic notifications that refuse to leave until they're good and ready, however politely I ask.
Will Ubuntu avoid unnecessarily fiddling with applications as part of the default install [OK Pidgin/Empathy is the only case I can think of]
How much influence over Debian's future direction does Canonical have?
[Disclaimer: Big fan of Ubuntu, use it for most server installations and al personal desktops.]
The Ubuntu brand has worked well while KDE4 was working out the kinks, but as KDE is now (or becoming) better than Gnome, will there be brand name confusion, when people praise Kubuntu, and say Ubuntu is inferior?
As over watch of operations management, what kind of performance measurements are you going to make to decide which direction Ubuntu development is heading? Number of bugs? Just cash flow? Number of supported packages?
Simply put: what are you going to improve Canonical's operations and how are you plan on measuring it to prove you're making a difference?
My work here is dung.
Will Ubuntu continue to treat KDE as a second-class citizen?
I loathe Gnome personally but don't begrude people the freedom of choice. However, with Ubuntu becoming almost synonymous with Linux, do they have a responsibility to try and put out a quality KDE desktop along with a quality Gnome desktop?
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
I have been using Ubuntu as a software developer for the past several years. I have been extremely disappointed with the most recent release of Ubuntu, 9.10, as it has been extremely buggy and seems like a step backwards to me. The conclusion of this review http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ubuntu-karmic-koala,2484-13.html also expresses a lot of my thoughts about Ubuntu 9.10. I had so many problems in using 9.10, that did NOT exist in 9.04, that I switched one of the two computers I use at work to Windows 7, for stability (yes, these are crazy days). Do you have any plans to increase quality control in Ubuntu, even if it comes at the cost of delaying the every six month release schedule?
Shuttleworth is still funding Canonical. At some point however, this needs to turn into a protibable vendure to endure. How does Canonical create lasting revenue streams, and will those decisions come at the cost of usability and freedom in the distro, such as the recent decision to use Yahoo search (powered by Bing) as the default)?
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Smartphones have become another computing device. There is Android, and there is MeeGoo. Ubuntu has missed the oportunity of creating a phone version of Ubuntu like Apple did with iPhone OS....what is Canonical going to do in this area? Create a phone version of Ubuntu and hope that some vendor chooses it? Support Android? Or Meego?
In the 21st century, why is it that we still don't have a simple, user-friendly tool to help both home and enterprise users to migrate their existing documents and settings while performing a Linux install?
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
You often praise proprietary, closed-source products on your blog (especially products from Apple and IBM). What is your stance on mixing proprietary and open products?
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Even as Ubuntu soars in popularity, we see forks of Ubuntu (such as Mint) pop up. Do you feel that distro fragmentation detracts from acceptance and adoption?
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Does Ubuntu have any plans for trying to recruit business software makers to make Linux versions? Before Ubuntu can be useful to me, at the very least, there needs to be at least ONE functional financial package (ala: Quickbooks, Simply, etc.), for example.
I don't respond to AC's.
what will you do to ensure proprietary software, proprietary licenses and related legal uncertainties/risks will not be further migrated into ubuntu? What will you do to further the goal of free software/open source? It's not safe to program anything using mono due to the obvious legal risks, for example.
The yahoo search deal (after yahoo announcing a MS partnership) and having mono (and fspot) in ubuntu are two notable issues in that sense.
The last few Ubuntu releases have been plagued with bugs on release. Do you support steady releases every six months, and what can Ubuntu to do improve from a quality perspective?
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Quality control in Ubuntu seems like a huge problem. Every release fixes something broken and breaks something that was working. Wifi used to be broken and now it works. Power management used to work and now it's broken. It's a huge waste of time and it makes it hard to recommend Ubuntu.
Probably best not to pay attention to a guy who can't count to three.
More importantly, we see GNOME falling further and further behind KDE. We need to know exactly when Matt will be pushing for GNOME to be deprecated in favor of KDE (or even XFCE). He really doesn't have a choice; GNOME needs to go, and it needs to go very soon.
Even if it wasn't as great as everyone was expecting, at least KDE managed to get their 4.0 release out the door quickly, and have been making great improvements on it since then. We see them innovating, and creating a desktop environment that keeps getting better and better. Their underlying toolkit, Qt, keeps improving rapidly thanks to the efforts of Nokia and others.
GNOME, on the other hand, has been spinning its wheels for years. It has no real leadership, and we aren't seeing any innovation out of them. GTK+ is basically in maintenance mode.
We're seeing the GNOME community fragmenting, and quite badly. Some people still advocate using C, others are saying that Mono is the way to go. And yet others are pushing for Vala. Frankly, the internal strife will tear the GNOME project apart, much like happened to XFree86. I, for one, sure hope that Ubuntu has moved away from GNOME far before then.
I have a few questions as a loyal *buntu user:
1) Do you feel Kubuntu's 'Operation Timelord' is a step in the right direction for the distribution? If so, why do you feel it was allowed to slip far enough to warrant a complete overhaul?
2) Do you see Kubuntu & Xubuntu becoming purely community-supported distros with Canonical focusing solely on Ubuntu desktop & server?
3) With Xubuntu's memory & CPU requirements being on par with Ubuntu's and Mark Shuttleworth's invite 'to become a self-maintained project in the Ubuntu community' (according to lxde.org), does this signal an end to Xubuntu as a whole or at the very least the 'lightweight' *buntu distribution?
I call it 'The Aristocrats'
You must be making a lot of money in your new position. Can I borrow some, and when would you need me to pay it back?
Sorry, I know my viewpoint is going to anger and annoy some people, but I've been thinking about the relative lack of success of Linux on the desktop lately. By "relative lack of success" I don't mean to bash the quality of Linux, but only that it doesn't seem to be very widely used in spite of being pretty good for a lot of purposes. So first, my obvious question would be, to what do you attribute the relative lack of success, and what plans do you have, if any, to do something about it.
To be a little more specific (and to answer my own question a little bit) it seems to me that a fair amount of the problem isn't the OS itself, but the associate applications. For example, lots of people have complained about GIMP for reasons ranging from lack of specific functionality to an unconventional UI, and even to the awkward connotations of the name "GIMP". Even having personally gotten some graphic designers to try the GIMP, I have yet to know any professional designers who find it adequate. I'd like to use Linux, but don't find I can come close replicating an equivalent workflow to what I have available using tools like Microsoft Office, Adobe Creative Suite, and Sound Forge. (those are the applications I'm personally stuck with, though I'm sure other people have other applications on their personal lists.)
Sorry if this is a vague or offensive question, but I'd really like to know, is there a plan to attack those kinds of issues at any point? I feel like Ubuntu (and other Linux distros) have done a pretty good job in polishing the installation procedures and the "look and feel" aspect of things, but does there come a time when you say, "We need a serious Adobe CS competitor for our OS to be competitive on the desktop, so let's make that happen"? If so, what happens then?
Sorry, I know people are going to tell me that I should just use the GIMP and if it doesn't do what I need, I should rewrite it. Sorry, I don't have the programming skills and and I don't have the money to single-handedly fund development of all the applications that I'd need to switch to Linux. I'd be willing to buy them once they were developed, or even make modest contributions to a project that I thought would actually deliver on what I needed, but I'm not a software developer.
Really, honestly, I'm not trying to be offensive to FOSS developers. I'm just speaking as someone who, for both practical and ideological reasons, would love to switch away from using Windows, but I keep finding that I can't. I use Debian and Ubuntu when I can, and have even contributed money to FOSS projects. So ultimately my question is, does Ubuntu have as one of its goals to enable someone like me to finally make the switch to Linux? If so, what's the plan? What can I do to help?
Has Ubuntu Server considered directly challenging Red Hat through competitive marketing? Is RHEL seen as a direct competitor with Ubuntu? I know Ubuntu Server has put a lot of work into being a cloud computing platform; has any extensive thought gone into more explicitly targeting traditional Linux server/RHEL deployments as they are seen now (Java application server stack, web stack, etc.?)
And a suggestion: With the upcoming LTS release, please hire documenters, pay volunteers for quality documenting work, SEND PROGRAMMERS TO DOCUMENTING SCHOOL. I don't believe I'm the first to say that quality, thorough documentation of all tools and use cases of a piece of software is as critical to the usability of software as the quality of the software itself. Community/volunteer documentation can be handy and cheap.
But, I believe this LTS cycle (and the first year post-release) is an excellent time to stabilize, update, and expand on all official documentation. Everything in the following list should be documented accurately and thoroughly. Test every line of instruction!
I know some of this is already fairly well documented. I know some of this is usually left to upstream documentation, or to the community, or to skilled authors like Kyle Rankin and Benjamin Mako Hill (The Official Ubuntu Server Book). However, Ubuntu is useless by itself. Software is useless if businesses of any size cannot figure out how to set up and configure the software and distribute it easily. If you want small/medium businesses with semi-skilled IT workers, and large enterprises with RHEL or Microsoft-accustomed IT staff to be able to deploy Ubuntu Server (so you can make money), you need to make it clear that your ease-of-use is not questionable, and that Ubuntu Server fits the job better than the competition you clearly have.
According to The Register, "...Alfresco he'd helped the company to 18 straight growth quarters, with Alfresco's most recent quarter - ending February 28 - the company's biggest ever"
Yeah, well as Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown lead the Great Britain to 49 straight quarters of growth before becoming Prime Minister when Tony Blair fled.
Believe me, it don't mean Jack.
Everyone knows Ubuntu is an ancient African word for "I can't configure Debian". How come you can't configure Debian but were able to create a whole other distro?
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
1) When will you release a truly up to the job KDE Release, or even better, FIRE the ENTIRE KUBUNTU dev team and hire Boo and the dev's from KMint aka Linux Mint KDE CE.
They clean up Kubuntu's crap distro each and every release and make it PERFECT, KDE 4.x aside, PERFECT! ! !
KDE needs to be the DEFAULT and only main desktop.. Offer lxde, xfce etc. for the tasks and areas they are suited for, gnome needs to go!
2) When will you REMOVE mono and gnome and miguel who is tainting your distro with his programs and DE? mono has no place in any distro, period. mono and miguel need to go! Now is the time! New COO, New X DE, clean house and get the disease out of the distro!
3) How do you plan to make software installs easier for users to encourage migration from that other os?
4) How are you going to curb the "google is your friend" and the "When are you going the fix or feature code then?" attitudes that hamper desktop Linux adoption.
5) Whats you plan and vision for Linux in general and Ubuntu specifically for the next year, 5, 10 years?
1311393600 - Back to Black
We're seeing more and more vendors trying to target their OS not only to specific devices, but to very specific components (vid cards, resolutions, network cards...), following in Apple's footsteps. What percentage of dev time does Canonical spend on driver and config support ? Do you think it makes sense for the 'official' distros to alleviate the burden at the cost of some users no longer getting official support ?
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
Matt, you were intensely criticized by members of the Free Software community for your critical stance facing "vague concepts" like software freedom and "no vendor lock-in." Reading your blog, it seems to me like you are still a fan of focusing on "high quality software at a compelling price" rather than these other concepts. How will this position affect your work with Canonical and more specifically, its relationship with freedom-first software advocates?
Indeed! I have never had random black screen crashes and buggy wifi connections with any version of Linux as I have had with karmic. It has taken a month of tweaks, upgrades, back porting and such to get a 'nearly' stable machine. Karmic is Ubuntu's Vista.
What are Canonical's plans for mobile platforms? With Maemo, another Debian based distro, now available for smartphones, would Canonical also get involved with either that or maybe develop a completely new Distro?
With the desktop Linux market being extremely small and server markets being dominated by Red Hat and Novell, mobiles probably are the sweet spot for Canonical, with its strong focus on usability. Additionally, the lack of standardisation means that users are more willing to experiement with interfaces. So what is the relative priority of Mobile, Netbook, Desktop and Server platform in Canonical's roadmap?
What's under yellowstone?
What exactly does a COO do, at an organization like Canonical? I don't mean vague organizational goals, like make us wealthy and cool, but specifics.
I do not mean rephrase the wikipedia entry for COO, but how would you APPLY the wikipedia entry for COO at Canonical?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_operating_officer
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
>(Disclaimer: Matt is on the board of advisors for Slashdot's parent company, Geeknet.)
Revealing the interests of parties involved is good journalism. But unless the author feels this means they consequently have no obligation to objectivity or accuracy, it isn't a disclaimer - it's a disclosure.
He supports Arsenal.... so he can do as he pleases :)
What will make Ubuntu different or better then any other well maintained Linux distribution? How can Linux distribution truly compete by offering minor modifications of the same basic set of software?
Quack, quack.
As the years pass, one thing becomes more and more obvious:
It's all about the data, and keeping it intact.
For me (running Ubuntu/Debian on around 20 machines)
the most frustrating thing right now is the lack of Sun's
(now Oracle's) ZFS or equivalent filesystem. Do you have
plans to address this by obtaining the right to incorporate
ZFS into Ubuntu at the kernel level, or to fund the development
of an alternative like BTRFS?
We have heard much about Ubuntu's desktop goals toward social networking. Eucalyptus is excellent and will mature excellently. We havent heard any goals for the server product.
Linux total backup; imagine something that could be a backup system; backing up the entire server platform into a livecd or virtual disk format; while also being able to roll back to the image.
Active Directory competitor: Need more?
Alfresco takes what is essentially an unstable snapshot of the publicly available and GPL'd Community Edition, branches it into a private source repository, stabilizes that private codebase, and makes stable point releases of the commercially licensed Enterprise Edition from that. Sure, fixes from Enterprise Edition are eventually rolled back into the unstable Community Edition trunk, but there is never a stable point release made for the GPL licensed Community Edition. So, if our company wants open source (ie GPL) code for all the products we use in production, we can't get it from Alfresco!
Alfresco partner companies are banned from providing services to clients against the open source Community Edition.
If I fix a critical bug by patching the code for my licensed copy of Enterprise Edition, then I can no longer receive support from Alfresco for the product.
If I try to take part in the open source community and send patches for the product upstream to Alfresco, they either languish untouched:
https://issues.alfresco.com/jira/browse/ETWOTWO-1125
https://issues.alfresco.com/jira/browse/ALFCOM-2810
https://issues.alfresco.com/jira/browse/ALFCOM-3301
Or are just flat out closed with no reason given (despite being obvious problems):
https://issues.alfresco.com/jira/browse/ALFCOM-3308
So, it seems to me Mr Asay, that although you really like to talk the talk, and although you might just meet the basic legal requirements to qualify as Open Source, when it comes to the spirit and community surrounding Free Software, I don't think you really understand how to walk the walk?
what's your business model going to be?
Hello,
I have a question about the results of asking a question. I administer a few Ubuntu VMs and I want to simply turn off screen blanking (please note I didn't say anything about running X). How does one simply turn off screen blanking with regards to the standard text login window? Note that setenv and friends aren't the answer because I want screen blanking off always, not just when someone is logged in.
But this isn't about that question specifically. While I still want the question to be answered, what I feel is a more important point is this: the answer is horribly difficult to find. Extensive Googling hasn't provided one. Posting on the Ubuntu forums hasn't provided any help. man pages and digging around in configuration files hasn't demystified anything. This is just an example (but I think it's a good example) where someone decided, "hey, this might be a good idea", but never documented it anywhere nor discussed it publicly.
This, I think, is a growing problem with GNU/Linux distributions. While each attempts to make things easier for the casual Windows convert, the overall cohesiveness of each distro diminishes.
Do you see this as a problem? Do you plan to make changes to the way decisions about Ubuntu are made and, just as importantly, documented? Do you plan to make Ubuntu more cohesive and better organized?
Thanks,
John Klos
Back in 2006, Ubuntu was in a strong position. Microsoft was mired in XP and Windows Mobile was just an afterthought. Then Vista came out to widespread disappointment. Netbooks created an important new market that Vista couldn't serve. Ubuntu had two years to do something amazing. Then Windows 7 came out. Then Google released Android. Then they announced ChromeOS. Now Microsoft have announced Windows Mobile 7 and it looks great. There doesn't appear to be much room in the consumer market any more. Is Ubuntu going to even try to fight the big boys now? Or is it going to take the standard Linux route of retreating back into the bespoke corporate world?
I've used GNU/Linux for over 18 years in both a personal and professional capacity. In high school I compiled my first Linux kernel on an old 386. Over the years, I've exchanged emails with Richard Stallman, Matthias Ettrich, and other notable free/open source personalities. I've also developed a significant open source application myself. Further, I've used Ubuntu on both servers and desktops and advocated for its use by many people.
Just giving you a sense of where I'm coming from. My personal opinion of what is holding Ubuntu back is the management organization, or lack thereof, around various open projects. Intimately connected to this is the lack of an elegant and straightforward business model around funding open source software, including training, marketing, documentation, support, etc. Marketing and sales are often what both compel users to use software that they may not at first know they need, and often drive feedback back into the development process as far as what new direction to take the software on behalf of the users.
As much as the GPL focuses on the "freedom to modify the code", this is targeted first and foremost at developers. Outside of an academic need to learn and modify a program's code, most people would never want to *need* the freedom to modify the code, as it implies that for some reason the software doesn't do what they want. They would often rather, even if they do know how to code, have the organization behind the software add the capability to the software without having either to roll up their sleeves and do it themselves or get someone else to do it (on a contract basis), much less "beg" on some mailing list.
So my question is, what can really, truly be done to change the perspective of FOSS away from developers or technical users who use the software, and on to end users of the software, whether individuals or businesses? Most users don't even know what a web browser is. I've seen your blog posts about the simplicity of Apple and making technology as transparent as possible in peoples' lives.
Can anything be done to change the culture around who the target demographic is for users of open source software, for many of whom the whole notion is actually a huge liability rather than a benefit, if they even understand what source code is?
Don't get me wrong, I've been a very true believer for many, many years. I'm just feeling a bit despondent with the trends moving at an ever accelerating pace away from an individual's having any hope of control over their computing experience and context. While that control implies having access to the source code if you absolutely need it in a "worst case scenario", more often than not, it implies having an organizational and management structure around projects that both service the customer's existing needs and anticipate needs they didn't even know they had. An economic ecosystem around the software that includes economic transactions and the implied relationship between buyer and seller with respect to expectations on both sides I think is a big part of this.
Can you see any way to duplicate this effect within the FOSS community while simultaneously changing the culture around who the software is serving, besides an "itch"?
Thanks!
David Thomson
suprasphere ___ a_t ____ gmail
Seriously, what were you guys thinking? The Great Pumpkin only comes once a year.
Everyone made fun of XP and the Fisher-Price theme ... but Ubuntu is worse. It looks like it was thrown together by a bunch of Hallowe'enies.
"Oh, but it's earth colors, like autumn!" Sure, pick the time of year when everything DIES! That sends a great subliminal "use-me-be-happy" message.
Fall colors - remind people that Old Man Winter is right around the corner, it's only going to get worse for the rest of the year, slush and ice and heating bills and salt stains on your boots and coat and clothes and the dogs dragging dirt in from the freshly sanded sidewalks all over the comforter and ice storms and dead cats frozen in snowbanks flying through the air as the municipal snowblower sucks them up and ... you get the picture.
You want companies to take you seriously, you don't have your reps wear a bow tie so they don't look like Bozo the Clown, and you don't make your prime product offering look like the artwork from a pumpkin pie box.
If you have to do a pie-themed color scheme, order a pizza pie and use that for inspiration. Everyone likes pizza. Or do apple pie - American Pie! Even the Band Campers can relate to that! Or cherry pie. There are so many nerds in basements who dream of cherry ...
It's not just ugly - it's fugly-ugly. Even in Soviet Russia.
It is ugly on the screen. It's so ugly it's obscene.
It is ugly every day. It is ugly like old whey.
It is ugly on a boat. It is ugly with a goat.
It is ugly like brown turd. It is ugly as a nerd.
It is ugly, don't you see? It is ugly like green pee.
It is ugly, all the way. It is ugly, Matt Assay!
I will not use it on a boat. I will not use it with a goat.
I will not use it at the fair. I will not use it in my hair.
I will leave it with the nerds. They like it colored like brown turds.
I will leave it, Matt Assay, It makes my eyeballs bleed all day.
In summary, you only get one chance to make a good first impression, and that color scheme works great - for your competitors.
I had the same pain with Kubuntu 9.04: very buggy, many things broken, it was a real struggle. The most annoying thing was notifications were broken: a message would get "stuck". Many widgets did not work (weather for example) either.
Luckily, Kubuntu 9.10 solve all of these issues, and now I have a stable desktop again.
I normally stick with LTS releases, but the KDE 4.x vs 3.5 issue made Kubuntu 8.04 a non-LTS release. Once an LTS is released, I will stay with that.
2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
I've been using Ubuntu since 5.10. Sound used to work well for me, including reasonably low latency and mixing. In recent years, I've had to remove PulseAudio from every install I do, because it increases audio latency, uses more resources on my limited hardware, and sometimes breaks program functionality altogether (like Orca).
In 9.10, if you attempt to remove PulseAudio, your volume control breaks. If you try to change the sound system in preferences/sound, it refuses to open, too. This is really unacceptable.
I can tell you that the average user does not care about routing audio over the network, or combining 2 stereo sound cards to make a surround system. We just want the audio to come out of the speakers as fast as possible while using the lowest amount of resources possible. That is all.
Pulseaudio may help some folks, and that's fine. I just don't want this thing shoved down my throat.
I think that fragmentation is a huge issue for linux distributions.
When you're seeking support, the potential community and support companies are split between hundreds of distros and different versions too.
Is there anything you are planning to do gather Linux users under one umbrella?
Certain software (Firefox, Sun's Java, Flash Codec, PHP, GCC, the linux kernel itself) should always be the latest stable version available from the main source itself. Yet Ubuntu lags behind by six to twelve months? All this talk of checking for stability etc is nonsense, since how much code do Ubuntu people actually read (or can even modify) in Firefox, PHP or Sun's Java codec? Just give us users the option to upgrade to the latest stable version within 24 hours it is made available. Let us decide which version we want to run. This is one of those rare things Windows does right, Ubuntu should not be ashamed to copy the right ideas no matter where they come from. These software are commonly used for web development and browsing, so there are clear security and performance benefits by using the latest versions.
I do not want to use Java 6.0.15 when I know Sun has made the 6.0.18 available on their website. I do not want to run Firefox 3.5 when I know Firefox 3.6 is so much faster. I do not want to run PHP 5.2 when the PHP changelog demonstrates anyone not using the latest stable version is an idiot. I do not want to rely on some random, untrusted person's "PPA". Nor do I want to download the source and compile. No, I do not want to wait for six months for next Ubuntu version either; six months is ages when security and performance are concerned.
Matt, are you going to change the culture of laziness and start giving us latest version of commonly used software (preferably within 24 hours of release)? I just want to be able to stay in GUI, run the Upgrade Manager and get the latest stable releases. Please, I beg you, is this too much to ask for? Because otherwise Ubuntu is the perfect Linux distribution for me.
What are your plans for getting educational institutions like schools to switch to Ubuntu, the way Microsoft and Apple have historically captured mind share in the past? There is a lot of work being done by volunteers in Edubuntu to make it easy to deploy and manage a school-wide network of workstations, but so far very little support from Canonical in turning that product into an initiative.
http://www.mhall119.com
I don't know about the Linux hobbyists out there, but I've seen time and time again the one reason Ubuntu is not used in a professional environment: Oracle database support.
The way I understand it, Oracle Database only supports Red Hat Enterprise Linux. That's reason enough for most places to exclusively run RHEL or a combination of RHEL and CentOS. Because the distros are so different (especially software packaging) it doesn't make sense for a company to run both.
So my question is: do you think Oracle will ever officially support Ubuntu?
Vote Libertarian
There are many outstanding bug reports. Waiting for upstream is not a good solution. How will you address issues and ensure customers can come to rely on your company?
I guess I'm an exception....I've been using it since edgy on a Dell D610 and it works mostly fine. Sound in karmic isn't great and was a bear to configure, but other than that, it's been good enough for me - it's not black-screened ever, and this is with pretty significant use.
"Truth is what works" -- William James "It works!!" -- o-dark-AM comment
It's that modularity leads to very difficult game development. Reducing the ecosystem of tools and configurations to a canonical (ha ha) set might make game development viable on Linux, but would be the antithesis of the Linux philosophy.
That implies the development of any mass market consumer application will be extraordinarily difficult under Linux. You will be struggling with problems that were solved in OSX and Windows no later than the mid-nineties.
The same way as he used to push the hidden proprietary-ness of the Alfresco stack?
Alfresco isn't really open source --if you want support from any of the Alfresco vendors, you have to pay for the commercial version first. That includes the upgrade headaches and all that goes with it. You can't get Alfresco support on the open source version. Period.
Posting anonymously since my project affiliation might make this sound like a personal attack, we were badly burnt by Alfresco in the past, so yes -- I'm a bit bitter. But really, look into how Alfresco is structured. It has little to do with the spirit of open source, and the free version lags behind the commercial version at all times.
Can you remove the Linux kernel too? It might work for some people, but I want the FreeBSD kernel and its ZFS support.
I would like to ask Matt what his intentions are for using and improving FLOSS tools and technologies in Ubuntu, as opposed to tools and technologies derived from proprietary platforms, and his plans for contributing changes/working with upstream projects (e.g. contributing/improving artwork like in the Wine project).
Some examples:
* RedHat help the nouveau project and are helping to get it to a decent working state so that it can act as a viable alternative to the nVidia binary drivers -- what are Ubuntu doing in this space to help people with binary-only driver support, specifically by helping the open source communities provide better support for this hardware?
* IIUC, the Ubuntu art team are using Photoshop to do the artwork instead of free tools like Gimp and Inkscape -- does Ubuntu intend to make use of free tools and help out where necessary (e.g. in the push to improve the Gimp UI)?
* The decisions around mono and the steady influx of more mono-based applications into Ubuntu instead of using applications build on the Linux/FLOSS stack for its default application set.
* What is the status of the various improvements of things like the "papercuts" initiatives to the upstream projects?
You really aren't running the correct disto if this is what you want.
And you discounted the legitimate way around this by stating you do not want to use someone's PPA that is designed to give you the latest packages while your core system remains part of the standard release.
And the option to upgrade within 24 hours of an upstream change is unreasonable.
The stable version is 1.1. The next stable version will be 1.2. Everything in between is considered a development release.
I've been using ubuntu since, I'm thinking, 4.10 or something. It was the best distro available and great for the relative newbie to linux I was then. I was sick to death of the probnlems of Mandrake and RPM's that never seemed to install properly, and ubuntu was a godsend.
But it's been on a downhill slide since 7.10. I still sort of think that, or maybe 6.06, was the best release. That's quite a long track record of inconsistency, regressions, and distro specific bugs. From the beginning of these nuisances when they decided to completely overhaul the init handling to this last fiasco with an essentially permanent bug in the disk i/o of 9.04 (which was nearly the last straw for me) it seems every new release I hope and hope and am, within days, am disappointed all over again. I just don't know which distribution I want to embrace in its stead. About the best I can say for ubuntu now is I'd prefer it to any release built on the hell of RPM that I remember... and to me, that ain't saying much.
I so wish they would spend one release cycle with nothing more "new" than the latest kernel and stable libraries. Ubuntu already has lots of nice features; strip out the ubu-centric bullshit of mono, go back to gthumb and focus on making the core of the desktop - like nautilus and firefox and evolution - the most rock solid they can be.
You really aren't running the correct disto if this is what you want.
I chose Ubuntu since I am a bit of a Linux newbie, and with Ubuntu being so popular finding help was easy. Which Distro would you recommend?
Thanks for helping.
Linux users are used to a situation where a kernel or distribution or software module update kills their basic hardware support, like sound, graphics etc.
What role do you see for automated testing environments and hardware labs to ensure higher quality?
--
Why are Ubuntu's KDE packages so bad? Why aren't beta versions debug enabled by default?
In another thread someone was asking about games. That's a chicken or egg question, why should game companies invest to support Linux if the market is so small? How can Linux grow in the home computing market without games?
Wine is the way out of that dilemma. Having a way to play Windows games on Linux machines will remove one of the obstacles against Linux adoption. Tuxracer is not good enough for everybody...
Every time I see "the desktop" debated, there seems to be a group retreat into the logic of one-size-fits-all. I don't think *anyone* will ever manage to make a desktop operating system that suits all purposes.
Windows is designed to be convenient in many respects, but what was the opportunity cost to the web as a whole to support the idiosyncrasies of IE6? Could that effort have delivered more user value employed elsewhere? Hell yes. Monolithic design is good for the gaming ecosystem, but you pay for it in so many other ways.
I've never thought the value system of Linux was particularly desktop-centric. That always struck me as a bolt-on by people who crave affiliative affirmation. For me, the fundamental value system of Linux is as a method of software distribution and collaboration. If it also plays Flash--supposing you even want that--that's a cherry on top. 99% of the content I consider important can be had without Flash. For me the desktop is *not* a glorified media player. My goal on a computer is to interact with the desktop as little as possible. I prefer my screens plastered with applications so that the desktop can't be seen.
My biggest hardship with Ubuntu has been the default policy that you're stuck with whatever version of your favourite tool made the cut in the last release cycle.
I was working on a Windows system at work three days a week, and Ubuntu at home the other two (or three) days a week, accessing the same code base, and needing to run many of the same tools. I was constantly running into problems where some task could be completed on the Windows side by upgrading to the latest version of tool X, only to discover when I pulled the workspace onto my home network, that Ubuntu was stuck on some older version. I often wished it were easier to ask Ubuntu to install the experimental upgrade of some tool alongside the official version. Many times I only needed limited functionality from the experimental version for a small sub-project of some small sub-workspace.
Occasionally I fought to pull something in from some non-standard package source, usually with a fair amount of frustration, and not always with ultimate success. Problems get hairy in a big hurry if things don't mesh. I didn't choose Ubuntu for the pleasure of reverse engineering dpkg.
I find Ubuntu easy enough to work with if I'm prepared (on a semi-permanent basis) to lag six to nine months behind the latest major update of many highly popular tools. When I had to force Ubuntu to run something newer than whatever validated build came with my current install, I often lived to regret trying.
This is problematic on several levels. Ubuntu is often far enough behind that the upstream sources aren't terribly interested in your bug reports. Given the nature of my work, I generally prefer to run closer to upstream than what Ubuntu manages to package. Yet I don't want to live on a daily basis in testing. What I want is an easy way to live one foot in, one foot out.
There's a saying in sports that when you finally break into the major league, keep doing whatever it was that brought you. Stay with your strength and build your game from there. Too many discussions of The Desktop lose sight of this maxim. It's tempting to look around the locker room at what everyone else is bringing and deciding that "I need to be more like them". Desktop envy a good way to get busted back down to the minor leagues. You don't stick in the major leagues because you click in the clubhouse. Most discussions of the desktop feel like evaluating the roster by how great they are to hang with between games.
Areas where Linux could kick the snot out of XP on the field of battle are things like having a consistent, system-wide user-selectable spell checker. I've heard rumours of progress in this direction.
Spell checkers are typically tragic. Many times I work with text from elsewhere and I couldn't care less if American/British/Canadian spellings are mixed in every sentence. For text I wr
sidux. Just check the forums before upgrading and you will always have the newest packages available.
And I don't mean you have to search forums. They have a section for this. http://sidux.com/PNphpBB2-viewforum-f-29.html
Also, they roll out their own bug fixes using the standard upgrade tools (apt-get) so as long as you check before doing the upgrade, you should be safe (because if it is broke, they probably fixed it.)
I use Debian unstable myself. But if I ever get hit by a bug, their forum is the first place I check.
All serious desktop OS competitors clearly steer the GUI toolkit development. Just providing some GTK themes will not suffice.
Well, there's always that version of Debian that is powered by FreeBSD.
>>>>*although.. the manuals and tutorials seem to be getting thinner all the time...
Read the Manual for k-9copy the DVD back-up program
Almost Buddhist in its nature. It takes saying nothing to a higher plane.
And the first version actual turned the whole idea of a help page into a huge joke. I have never before laughed out loud while reading a help manual before.
I figured most of you haven't seen Alfresco and don't have any idea about the company. Here are a few tidbits from a small company user of the free Alfresco, not the paid "enterprise" version. These are my impressions and don't reflect that of my employer.
We've used Alfresco for about 18 months. The initial "Labs" deployment had to be dropped from our testing due to HUGE bugs in the permissions code. The testing team didn't test it at all. We are still running the next non-Labs deployment without many issues at all. Even if we need to drop Alfresco and migrate to another solution, the content is still ours and we can get it all out. In the ECM space, it is important for you to own your content. Ask Microsoft about that and Sharepoint.
At an Alfresco conference last fall, it was presented that the average deployment was $200+K and Alfresco was paid about $25K for the "enterprise software and support" out of that total. The rest was earned by 3rd party partners. IME, they have always concentrated on the paying customers. An enterprise deployment in licenses begins around $25K by the time you get test, prod/failover licenses. It isn't for the small shops or a company running MS-SBS.
In a BOF meeting, I saw where a developer in a tiny company was begging for help, offering his code, and the Alfresco guys stood there silent. I asked for help with a migration to the current release, but since we'd deployed a dead code line, there is not upgrade process. I only wish the version we deployed were clearly marked as "dead line" at the time. Some kind of dev-2-dev interaction would have been encouraging even if they couldn't help at all after the conference. When we do migrate, we will lose our older versions of documents without manual steps. We will end up with all the current versions of documents with very little effort, however. The content is still ours, as it should be.
Alfresco has become an enterprise solution. I believe the Alfresco team has decided to compete against EMC/Documentum, FileNet and those huge $1M+ cost solutions instead of against MS-Sharepoint. Alfresco has certainly started with a schema that rivals Documentum and their support models AND capabilities do rival Documentum at a much smaller price.
The currently released version no longer supports Oracle as a DB in the FOSS release. The "enterprise" i.e. paid version does. This was removed in the 3.2 community release. It worked in 3.1. Why the removal? I guess they decided anyone who could afford Oracle could afford to pay Alfresco too, but I honestly don't know. Perhaps the Oracle JDBC library license changed? I dunno. Alfresco supports Active Directory and LDAP for authentication - like all corporate software should. Personally, I'd like to see OpenID supported too - since I'm not a Java programmer, I'm not in a position to contribute code. Anyone need some C/C++?
Alfresco is encouraging front-ends to link to it. Drupal and Joomla already have working connectors, but each deployment will need to be customized significantly. The default, provided, Alfresco web front end is a little clunky, but workable after you learn a few tricks. Moving a document is "cut" and "paste", not "move." I don't want to admit how long that took our users to figure out.
OTOH, Alfresco has been fine in our small deployment. It runs easily in a 512MB Xen VM - no swapping at all. That VM runs 3 other internal applications too. I suspect I could drop it down to 384MB and still have acceptable performance. The code seems fairly efficient and the architecture isn't bad at all. We use a few other pseudo-FOSS tools and have seen how bloated some of those can become (Zimbra).
At a minimum, Alfresco is a good replacement for Shared Folders out of the box. Your users don't need to know that it isn't a shared folder to use it. The CIFS implementation is fast. I saw where Adobe is providing Alfresco as a paid document service http://www.cmswatch.com/Trends/1276-Adobe-and-Al
Has Ubuntu given any thought to creating a tablet remix, along the lines of the netbook remix but for tablet-based portables?
I attempted to visit a local Canonical office last year and was given quite a cold reception. Even though the person who invited me told me "Just come any time. You don't need an appointment," I was told he was in a meeting and not given the promised tour. The building the office was situated in was crawling with creepy, corporate security guards. The entire experience made me feel unclean. Given the fact that Ubuntu is supposed to be something for everyone, something where all people derive their identities from their relationships to one another, and the fact that Canonical is not Microsoft, what is Canonical doing to remain people friendly in meatspace?
All data is speech. All speech is Free.
Manufacturers are looking at Android on netbooks, do you see that as a threat? Do you plan to do any integration with Android or do you feel that it will be limited to a smartphone OS
NESticle == NES emulator. Surely I'm not the only one into classic gaming.
NESticle has been far surpassed by FCEUX and Nestopia. Even FCE Ultra, which is in the Ubuntu repository, is way ahead of NESticle. It takes literally four lines of code for an NES program to determine whether it's running on NESticle.
640x480 == Again, classic gaming.
I imagine that the excuse is that Free games can be ported to run natively in Linux at the native resolution of the LCD panel to which the computer is connected, and that's at least 1024x600 pixels for anything sold within the past couple years. Such a port can even upscale sprite cels algorithmically without making them look too crappy. Non-free games cannot be distributed with Ubuntu.
Dialup == Needed for use in hotels without highspeed connections.
I thought that's what phone tethering or MiFi was for. Even 2G EDGE is faster than dial-up.
"outlook does not look so good"
But does evolution look any better?
why is that a good quality operating system like Ubuntu (or other linux distros to be fair), which is given away for free not able to replace Windows or OSX.? 1. Lack of advertisement or consumer education, average joe does not know that there is an option. 2. Lack of OEM carrying Ubuntu pre-installed products, only dell does it so far. 3. Lack of apps used by people on daily basis, apps like Adobe photoshop, tax software, games etc. What are you doing in order to address these three basic hurdles in the path of Linux adoption in mainstream computer consumer market?