Slashdot Mirror


Shuttleworth Answers Ubuntu Linux's Critics

climenole writes "Technomancer wrote: 'Mark Shuttleworth, Ubuntu Linux's founder, maintains that he and Ubuntu are doing right by the Linux community and the even larger open-source community. In recent weeks, Ubuntu has been criticized for not giving Linux enough support. Specifically, the complains have been that Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu, doesn't do enough for producing Linux source code.'"

76 of 382 comments (clear)

  1. Proper link by yelvington · · Score: 5, Informative

    The IT world link takes you to an interstitial ad, followed by a godawful mishmash of crap.

    Here's a link to the original post: http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/517

    1. Re:Proper link by HermMunster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm a regular Ubuntu user. I use it on 13 machines in my shop and personal life. Having it done and well integrated with easily obtainable extras makes my life much easier. From less powerful to my most powerful this product just seems to work. So, to that end I do thank Mark Shuttleworth for his efforts and I hope he realizes that he has made other's lives better.

      Not everyone contributes back to society or to the world at large in equal measure. Canonical does some things that others don't and others do what Canonical doesn't. To use code contributions to the kernel and to Gnome as a measuring stick just doesn't seem right. Let's be smart and look at the overall effect this has on the world.

      Here's to you guys.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    2. Re:Proper link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Good point. We should judge them on their use of brown. I think they're first place, ahead of the microsoft zune.

    3. Re:Proper link by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I like this article even better: http://blogs.computerworld.com/16651/ubuntu_vs_red_hat_who_really_contributes_the_most_to_linux

      To summarize:

      Atari vs. Commodore!
      ST vs. Amiga!
      Nintendo vs. Sega!
      Mac vs. PC!
      PS3 vs. Xbox 360!
      Ubuntu vs. Debian!

      All stupid and silly arguments that serve no purpose. Especially when Debian and Ubuntu are both part of the same family. (Of course that didn't stop Catholics and protestants from fighting.)
      .

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    4. Re:Proper link by geekmansworld · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So we can see the thought process here:

      Developing Linux Kernel = Valuable

      Getting Linux into users hands with convenient, easy-to-use installers, providing support, etc. = Not Valuable

      To borrow one of Shuttleworth's analogies, a brain can't function without a body to house it.

    5. Re:Proper link by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > To put that in perspective, I have OSX running natively on my desktop PC with 0 KPs since 10.6, with all components working except a PCIe NIC

      That's interesting since I've had Ubuntu happily running on 2 generations of genuine (mini) Macs.

      Real Mac hardware seems to like Ubuntu better then your Hackintosh. That's a bit odd considering the fact that you wouldn't expect MacOS to be able to deal with much of anything that deviates from a genuine Mac.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    6. Re:Proper link by g4b · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, so to sum up:

      * You tried the tailored Operating System to your Hardware.
      * You tried Ubuntu
      * Ubuntu was worse, than the tailored Operating System to your Hardware.

      If your Hardware has errors, or some specific quirks, which may not be detected by an overblown Debian fork (which however wasn't in the summary of tried Operating Systems - only the tailored Operating System to your Hardware was) you blame Ubuntu for not being userfriendly, as response to a post describing he was glad, that Ubuntu tried to fill small gaps for the end user experience, (I am speaking for those who still remember kernel compiling because of unsupported binary drivers, if there was something more interesting to do), and tried to satisfy the need for especially those people, who simply want to install linux, without really wanting to get deeper into the system - at least not every time. You blame Ubuntu for something, which it actually does. It tries to be easily installable by people, who do not want to learn kernel compiling and manual patching or for those who want to learn it, but not do it every time and for every machine they encounter - with mostly typical driver problems caused by licensing issues.

      You can take your Mac as an opportunity to learn how Linux works, detect the errors and file bug reports to distributions, you think this problem maybe should concern. Feel lucky. You can learn a lot from this experience. You might even be the one who fixes it.

      Your distro is just as strong, as the people supporting it. Hating canonical for just being successful and not delivering solutions to everybodies needs magically, is not what free software or open source is about.

      For my taste, they could invest a little bit more in the areas, they already do, and don't try to push too much on the server market. And support debian financially and by playing after their project principles. I am still glad about Ubuntu existing and happy user on everyday machines. As I am about other distros, which are used by various other machines I work with - where Ubuntu has nothing to seek.

    7. Re:Proper link by Flamekebab · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm sure someone else will have said it, but I reckon this is one of those cases of "it can't be measured, therefore it must have no value". Ubuntu has done amazing work getting Linux more visible and better established, that alone is worth a significant amount.

    8. Re:Proper link by Millennium · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So we can see the thought process here:

      Developing Linux Kernel = Valuable

      Getting Linux into users hands with convenient, easy-to-use installers, providing support, etc. = Not Valuable

      That seems to be the gist of the article, and is one case where some members of the OSS community have really lost sight of something important: code is not the only thing projects need. It is true that Canonical hasn't done particularly much in the way of code, but it has found other ways to pull its weight, particularly in terms of user support. And pull its weight it most certainly does. Whether or not it does more than other companies, I can't say: you can't measure it like you could lines of code or number of applications. But it is grossly unfair to call it parasitic: it does things that frankly nobody else is bothering to do on the scale that Canonical does it. It has earned treatment as an equal to the more established players, even if it fulfills a very different function from them.

    9. Re:Proper link by MBGMorden · · Score: 3, Informative

      This I can definately agree with. I recently attended an open source software conference. Ubuntu and Fedora sent people there (I remember that Jono Bacon was there from Ubuntu specifically).

      The Ubuntu folks seemed actually far more enthusiastic about drumming up COMMUNITY support, rather than just digging up more programmers. They were encouraging everyone to help - not just with code, but with testing and QC, and their biggest push was talking up the importance of volunteers for doing user documetation and translation work. Neither of those is coding, but both are indeed very important.

      In general, it seems the Ubuntu just "gets it" as far as making Linux easier, more cohesive, and a true platform for USERS rather than just for programming geeks (even though I belong to the latter category :D). Now, I think a few of their ideas like left side buttons and their butt ugly color schemes could be imporved upon, but eh, nobody's perfect.

      I will say this though: I've used Linux in some incarnation or another (Slackware or Gentoo for the longer durations) essentially as a toy since 1998 or so. It was something interesting to play with. It wasn't until Ubuntu came along that it really started feeling like a real platform, and it wasn't until Ubuntu that I transitioned completely over to Linux (at least at home - can't kick Windows at work but that's not in my hands).

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    10. Re:Proper link by BrokenHalo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Getting Linux into users hands with convenient, easy-to-use installers, providing support, etc. = Not Valuable

      I can see how this might be a perception, but it's not reasonable. Lots of good C programmers are quite poor at systems administration. Maintaining a distro can be a horrible task, since you are essentially being sysadmin for a completely unknown system. The situation is made worse when programmers who write the source code you're implementing capriciously change things around (or break them) for no beter reason than to fit some trendy philosophical notion of how it should work.

      I once went down the path of Linux From Scratch, and the experience was a worthwhile learning for a single-purpose system. But doing that for a desktop box is just stupid, since it's just too much work to keep all its components up to date. Now, Ubuntu is emphatically NOT my distribution of choice (that is currently Arch), but anyone who is prepared to undertake the task of maintaining any comprehensive distro long-term deserves a round of applause.

    11. Re:Proper link by index0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      By that logic, you admit sales people are just as important as the engineers?

    12. Re:Proper link by Myopic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Without attempting to establish equality, let's just say both of those are essential.

    13. Re:Proper link by worx101 · · Score: 2

      Yep, exactly... You can have the best product in the world, but if you cannot "sale" it to anyone, then what good is it?

    14. Re:Proper link by hedwards · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To be fair, unlike those other fights, Protestants versus Catholics is a pretty important one. Religion as we know it, at least in the Christian parts, was seriously shaken up by the reformation. Even the Catholic church which insists upon being the one true Christian faith, was forced to make serious changes some of which are still being debated nearly 500 years later.

    15. Re:Proper link by HermMunster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      An engineering project that can't be sold is just a project.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    16. Re:Proper link by walshy007 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      and Ironically, the first distro that I could completely get rid of my windows partition was fedora core 3, which was released about the same time as the first version of ubuntu (2005 or so I believe)

      Ubuntu succeeds in marketing more than anything else, they had a clean name already when the linux desktop was becoming easier for the masses, and rode the wave.

      Initially the only difference with ubuntu as compared with other distros was the inclusion of proprietary codecs and drivers.

    17. Re:Proper link by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 3, Insightful

      About a year ago I upgraded my synaptic (the only user-friendly package manager I know so far). Turns out that the Debian guys missed a critical flaw which made Synaptic crash when loading the repos. Downgrading synaptic using command-line tools was a royal pain in the ass. That's the kind of errors that I hate, and the guys criticizing Ubuntu are much more prone to commit them.

      While I don't like Ubuntu myself (for some glitches I've experienced - ironically, in the user-friendliness area), I do agree that it has set the bar on user-friendliness. More user-friendly = more popular. More popular = more pressure on the devs to write software that just works.

      As an example, I'll use Mepis 8.5 - it's being released with the latest version of KDE. Well guess what, the installation screen is quite unusable if you have an nVidia video card. You're stuck at 640x480 (or 800x600 if you're lucky), and the installation screens are clipped. Sure, you can install the drivers in RAM, but then you have to reboot. DOH. All installed drivers vanish. Another problem that could be solved with community support.

      With more community support, these problems will go again after the devs realize that the world they're writing software for is NOT a world filled with closets stacked with old network cards, cables, old consoles, a hard disk full of debugging and developing software and regexp cheat sheets stappled on a nearby wall.

      As much as it hurts, the devs need to get off their clouds, open their eyes and see that the people who use distros like Ubuntu are people who have a life - ok, a busy life - and don't have the resources, the time, nor the brains to solve those pesky problems.

      I still remember the days where one had to edit the xfree86 .conf file by hand after following a series of instructions. I sincerely hope those days don't ever come back again.

    18. Re:Proper link by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 4, Insightful

      An engineering project that can't be sold is just a project.

      You hit the nail on the head. I've recently been promoted to a more bureaucratic place at my company, and I've come to realize that a lot of things I considered of uttermost importance in software development were not as crucial as I thought. Now, I'm not saying they're not necessary. But I overestimated them. Also, I've learned that it's the sales department which makes the companies earn their income. No income, no salaries. No salaries, no employees.

      Linux devs who have never understood the management and marketing side of companies, simply lack the vision needed to improve and promote the kernel/OS they love so much.

    19. Re:Proper link by Artifakt · · Score: 4, Informative

      The value of contributions to Gnome depends so much on the rest of the Gnome community, on the long standing Gnome/KDE rivalry, and other external factors. If you use contributions to Gnome as a major metric, shouldn't Canonical get some points for indirectly contributing to KDE, XFCE and such via their Kubuntu/Xubuntu connections?
              There's also Canonical's hardware certification program and their 3rd party software certification program. The hardware cert program has three tiers, and these are designed to give some needed flexibility to hardware makers and software (particularly driver software) authors.
              Ubuntu Certified is the most involved, and from Canonical's viewpoint, probably the most rigorous. OEMs submit systems to Canonical's testing facility. Certification and testing is done by Canonical's engineers.
              Ubuntu Ready is much easier for Canonical, as the OEMs self-test their systems using Canonical's certification test suite. OEMs still have to submit their results to Canonical for final review if they want to claim to be Ubuntu ready, but can also use some elements of the test software for other purposes such as internal validation. A good way to evaluate Canonical's over all contribution to the Linux community might be to include how well they have shared this and related code and how well they have modified it based on OEM feedback.
              Works with Ubuntu. This designation is used for peripherals, such as printers or USB storage devices, that don't usually need the time and associated costs of a more rigorous certification process for testing before it's reasonable to certify them. It makes it easier for makers of such peripherals to keep up with the Ubuntu 6 month release cycle.
              Canonical offers frequent symposiums and group meetings for hardware makers wanting to use this process - in fact, there's one scheduled this month.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    20. Re:Proper link by jo_ham · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ubuntu even runs on my 15" Powerbook G4 without issue, although it's less graceful with the fan control compared to OS X.

    21. Re:Proper link by mwvdlee · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Linux is GPL licensed.
      Ubuntu is using Linux according to the GPL license.
      If the developers didn't want this to happen, they shouldn't have used the GPL license.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    22. Re:Proper link by the_womble · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are other distros with equally good installer that are more user friendly in some ways, which still manage to contribute code as well.

      Consider Mandriva. Much less well funded than Canonical. Better installer. Better config (I find myself needing to edit config files in Ubuntu for stuff I can use the Control Centre GUI in Mandriva). Mandriva all time contributions to Gnome 's are about half of Canonical's, and they have contributed significantly to KDE, and are still doing quite a lot of other stuff http://www.mandriva.com/enterprise/en/company/r-d

    23. Re:Proper link by BlackCreek · · Score: 2

      I really do not see what is so special about Ubuntu. As far as having a user friendly desktop is concerned, Mandriva is better and Mepis and others at least as good.

      Because Ubuntu's marketing is better than Mandrake/Mandriva ever was, so users actually know about it. Some 5, 8 years ago loads of people wanted a Linux desktop. Mandrake had it, but everyone installed "server oriented" Redhat or Suse, because those were the names they knew.

      Besides Cannonical/Ubuntu went out of their way to give anyone a ISO file, back in the day, if you wanted Mandrake (Mandriva, now) they wouldn't just give you an ISO. So Ubuntu came along and really took the crown, despite the years of head-start that Mandrake/Mandriva had.

    24. Re:Proper link by Vintermann · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know. I'm a fan of Ubuntu, but I find that after three or four dist-upgrades, enough things don't work that it's worth doing a reinstall (keeping all the important customizations and custom installed programs, naturally - /home, /etc and /usr/local).

      Such as right now. One of my customizations was alt+left/right to switch workspaces, combined with a devilspie script to start common applications on particular workspaces. The idea was that since you switch between tabs/open files with alt+up/down in many of those apps, I could quickly move between and into applications where I wanted, faster and with less thinking/watching than alt+tabbing or similar.

      It worked reasonably well, but when I upgraded, it broke badly. It would frequently trigger a bug where all UI elements except menus become unresponsive - text fields, buttons, everything. The bug would also prevent all forms of workspace switching. The only way to get it responsive again would be to open up a menu and close it. If the bug triggered on a workspace with no windows, killing the X server was the only practical fix.

      I had to switch workspace switching to super+left/right (sacrificing elegant in-application switching) and still the bug triggers occasionally. I've tried to report it, but I don't expect it to be fixed - my setup is too unusual for maintainers to care, even though it triggers something that really shouldn't be possible (killing all non-menu responsiveness in Gnome). Next version I expect I'll do a reinstall, reactivate my customizations and hope for the best.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    25. Re:Proper link by walshy007 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Besides Cannonical/Ubuntu went out of their way to give anyone a ISO file

      Everyone gave iso files, but ubuntu marketing did one better, they sent you actual discs with art by the bucket load. I have around 25 of the 2005 first release of ubuntu, they formerly sent heaps to anyone that wanted them. Being a linux guy I gave them to a heap of people to get them on to linux.

    26. Re:Proper link by walshy007 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or it is entirely possible that the devs conclude it suits their needs, and the needs of their clients and don't really care what other random people think of it.

      Linux doesn't need to take over the world (as nice as that would be) it only needs to be good enough for your own uses for it to be of utility for yourself.

    27. Re:Proper link by Rogerborg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Ubuntu folks seemed actually far more enthusiastic about drumming up COMMUNITY support

      Bingo. I've been using and developing on UNIX and then Linux for close on to twenty years now, and I now choose to use Ubuntu on my home machines because of one thing and one thing only: the Ubuntu community forums. It's the first UNIX/Linux forum that I've ever used where the default answer to any question isn't "I'm far to busy to answer this. You've got the source, debug it yourself, noob". More often than not, there are actually answers to the questions!

      Linux for Human Beings is exactly the right note to strike. Ubuntu 9.10 was the first distro that I've ever recommended to non-techie friends and family as a realistic substitute for Windows or MacOS. Linux has been ready for the desktop for years, but Ubuntu is the first distro that actually presents it in a way that makes it palatable.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  2. Shuttleworth's Post by fandingo · · Score: 4, Informative

    We could link to Mark's actual blog post http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/517 instead of linking to some crappy IT World "article."

  3. Re:Ubuntu users have more problems by Beelzebud · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do you think it might have something to do with the fact that Ubuntu also has more users than those other distros combined?

  4. Crowd sourcing by WarJolt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ubuntu has encouraged me to submit bugs and even maintain a ppa for packages I couldn't find on ubuntu. Ubuntu has encouraged me to contribute because the community is active and friendly. Redhat never did that for me.

  5. Re:Suse is for business, Ubuntu is for Linux by Jorl17 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have Ubuntu installed on 8 machines and agree. It solves all my problems and...whenever I mess it up, which I sometimes do, the huge community or the ease of use helps me repair it. I once even deleted the entire MBR + parts of the partition table and then managed to restore it before I rebooted.

    --
    Have you heard about SoylentNews?
  6. Re:Ubuntu users have more problems by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Further, it probably has the least number of technical users because it's probably the most popular "plug-and-play" (or close to it) distro there is. Thus, there may be fewer people who can trouble-shoot their own problems.

  7. Re:Ubuntu users have more problems by Osgeld · · Score: 5, Insightful

    heh I applied for a membership on the DSL fourms 4 years ago just to post a question, and have still not been approved I spent nearly an hour today on slackware trying to see what options I had with a no cd no usb boot system, finally on some 3rd party blog I found a 5 page walk though that read like Russian stereo instructions so yea they may seem to have more problems, but its honestly hard to get any other distro's to even setup a localized place to ask questions, I love it on my home machines, hm how do I do that, Oh I know... google XYZ on ubuntu and there is a half dozen threads all pointing me in the right direction and that is a good thing, no matter how much the hardcore nurds want to spin it

  8. Re:Ubuntu is a distro by EvanED · · Score: 2

    Okay, Gnome is part of the GNU project, I'll admit forgetting about that when I posted that comment. Never mind.

  9. Critics are MORONS by airfoobar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A lot of Ubuntu's critics say what they say because they think they are "too good" for it since it comes with training wheels on. Ubuntu, being a distro, has no obligation to write source code -- that is done by thousands of programmers elsewhere, and they are doing a damn fine job. A distro is meant to package the work of those programmers in a way that people can use it without needing a CS degree, and Ubuntu is getting that right imo.

    So, the critics need to stfu and stick with their obscure distros.

    This is the "cool people" phenomenon, like we see in music. These people will go round telling everyone how much they like X niche band as long as nobody knows about it, but if/when that band becomes popular, they'll start saying "Oh, I don't like that any more!". Same here, except with niche software.

    1. Re:Critics are MORONS by baka_toroi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Could you tell me what "training wheels" means in this context? Having a streamlined distro? Fixing bugs? I know you haven't said that, but it sounds so utterly retarded that I'm having a hard time just trying to understand the concept.

    2. Re:Critics are MORONS by Pharmboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My guess is that "training wheels" means using a GUI and a mouse click to do configuration, instead of vi and editing the config file directly, then sending a SIGHUP signal to the process directly.

      Personally, I lean toward the manual editing (using nano/pico, not vi) but I mainly use Linux on servers with no GUI. For individual use, it would seem a GUI would make more sense, assuming your goal is to make it easier for more people to actually use the software.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    3. Re:Critics are MORONS by kestasjk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So, the critics need to stfu and stick with their obscure distros.

      Red Hat are the main critics as far as I know, and they're not obscure or trying to look "cool". Their criticism is that they pay a lot of money to develop Linux's core software while Canonical doesn't pay nearly so much, which is true.

      On the other hand you're right that Canonical have no obligation to do so, and you can make the case that Canonical are much less profitable and don't have the sorts of clients which need to kind of support provided by having programmers which work on Linuxes core software.

      It's a gray area and both sides have a point. Personally I hope that Canonical becomes more successful and starts to find it useful to their business to work on Linux to a larger extent, so that no-one has to try and guilt them into doing so (which won't work if it doesn't make business sense).
      I also hope Red Hat take a page from Canonical's book and make a friendlier/cleaner distribution for non-enterprise installations. (Yes I know about Fedora, but clearly Ubuntu has a nicer mix in many ways.)

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    4. Re:Critics are MORONS by Kjella · · Score: 2, Interesting

      (...) you can make the case that Canonical are much less profitable and don't have the sorts of clients which need to kind of support provided by having programmers which work on Linuxes core software.

      I think the last bit is really important. A lot of the core kernel stuff that Red Hat does are things that aren't very relevant to the average desktop user like heavy multi-CPU/NUMA/virtualization/network/other server loads. The average *buntu user would be much better served if they e.g. funded a flash replacement or ran a laptop compatibility testing program or shaved 10 seconds off the boot process. Don't get me wrong, there's things in the core systems that would help the desktop too but I don't feel that's what is holding it back.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  10. Re:Ubuntu users have more problems by c0d3g33k · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've been paying attention for a long time. I've done the distro hopping dance for years, and I've been advocating Linux all the while. In 15 years of Linux use, for me personally, Ubuntu comes second only to OpenSUSE as far as getting out of my way and letting me get my work done. Ubuntu is the clear favorite among family and friends whom I have foisted Linux upon over the years. I've gotten far fewer "tech guy support" calls than any other distro, spent less time dealing with computer issues over the phone and I have definitely gotten fewer complaints. Therefore, I *am* inclined to believe the stats. They are doing something right, as much as it pains some to admit.

  11. A solid distro by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ubuntu is without a doubt the best distro for most users. Yeah, I know I could have more customization with Debian, yeah, I know I could be faster if I ran Gentoo, yeah, I know I could be more on the bleeding edge if I used Fedora, but when it comes down to it, Ubuntu is the best distro for most people. I -like- the fact there is a forum where I can post a question and it is answered in about 15 minutes, I like the fact I can do 99.999% of the things I need to do without using the CLI, and I like the fact that I have a lot of software in the repository.

    And the best part is there isn't really any sacrifice. Is there anything that I can't do with Ubuntu that I can do with Debian? Just because I don't have to use a CLI for everything doesn't mean I can't if I want, etc.

    Yeah, so Ubuntu doesn't have the nerd "cred" that I'd be getting if I ran Gentoo, but I have a usable system that is nearly infinitely customizable without having to sacrifice usability.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:A solid distro by cynyr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      fdisk is much much faster than a gui could ever be. Same for most of the command line.

      remove "$artist - $album - " from the front of 300 mp3s using the gui sometime... it's a simple loop in bash...


      cd /Music_Dir/
      for file in $(find . -type f -print); do name=${file##*/}
              name=${name##-*}
              mv $file "${file%/*}/${name}
      done

      I'm not sure the above is space safe, but the use of -print0 and a bit more should fix that right up.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
    2. Re:A solid distro by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Informative

      > Ubuntu will NEVER be a better Windows than Windows.

      It already is. Linux in general has been that for awhile.

      The real main problem is 3rd party vendor support.

      Although most of that success is due to WORK DONE UPSTREAM and isn't really anything that Ubuntu can claim credit for.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    3. Re:A solid distro by Pentium100 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, at my work we use Linux (Debian) even though users do not like command lines. However, Linux is cheaper than Windows and users do not see command lines anyway.

      At home I use Windows, but have a couple of Linux (again, Debian) VMs. I also like setting preferences in a program using GUI instead of editing Registry (Windows) or config files (Linux).

  12. Re:Ubuntu users have more problems by amicusNYCL · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Blech, there's no worse "statistic" than counting the number of Google results for various terms.

    If you compare "bible" with "quran", you can see that there are about 10x the results for "bible". What does that indicate, are there 10x more Christians, or readers of the bible? You can also see that Malawi, Swaziland, Ghana, and Zimbabwe have the highest regional interest for "bible", so what can you conclude about that? Are those the most "Christian" nations? The US isn't even in the top 10, in fact all 10 are African nations. I see that Indonesia is ranked #8 for regional interest in "quran", can we conclude that Indonesia is the 8th most "Islamic" nation?

    If you went on only those numbers, you would conclude that followers of the bible greatly outnumber followers of the quran. The actual difference is about 2x, not 10x. You would also conclude that Pakistan, Gambia, and Somalia are the worlds largest Islamic countries, but the largest (by population) is Indonesia.

    Google "stats" are pretty useless.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  13. Re:Suse is for business, Ubuntu is for Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Odd. Myself and a couple of my colleagues recently got laptops preinstalled with SLED at work. The experience was generally less positive than with other (free) distros. The SLED repos are only installed after you register with Novell, and trying to get any sort of multimedia setup going on it was a nightmare. OTOH we have openSUSE on several desktop machines, works like a charm.

    I guess the only advantage of SLED would be that it plays nicer with Microsoft solutions, but we don't use those too much at work.

  14. Re:Ubuntu is a distro by baka_toroi · · Score: 4, Informative

    You are getting trolled. Just thought you wanted to know that.

  15. Re:Mark should answer the following question: by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Informative

    LXDE, the Lightweight X11 Desktop Environment.

    Comes with http://lubuntu.net/

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  16. Oh the Irony (was Re:Idiot) by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2, Funny

    "you, sir, are and"

    So he's the guy who has been comparing my bits and telling me if they match all these years!

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  17. Re:I love ubuntu except... by h4rr4r · · Score: 2, Informative

    They want to put other stuff on the right side. I just wish we could kill the whole title bar idea. It serves no purpose other than to waste space. Just put the buttons right on the same bar that says File Edit View in 90% of apps.

  18. Isn't Ubuntu doing enough good already? by Jugalator · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ubuntu is a very popular Linux distro, which I can only assume is pulling quite a bit of interest to Linux. A fraction of these new Linux users are also logically speaking developers. And these would then be potential Linux contributors.

    I have a hard time seeing how spending a lot of effort into making the most popular desktop Linux distro on the market could be a bad thing even when going as specific as Linux contributions. Developers are just a subset of users! Any successful distro is a good distro for Linux, and heck, it's not even important to be successful. That's kind of what this whole open OS is about. Play around and have fun. If you're doing well too, well, that's a nice bonus for Linux!

    And Ubuntu is among those that are doing well.

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  19. Re:Ubuntu is a distro by Sal+Zeta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, neither "A Glass of Coke" is actually a recipient made of a sugar-flavoured drink. It's a common grammatical rule called Metonymy, and it's commonly used to exemplify the language to avoid excessive verbosity.

    The same could be said about the idea of prepending GNU to Linux, giving to the name the dubious function of being considered somewhat an homage or representation of the intentions of the author. Personally I'm not offended if my friends just call me "Sal" without citing everytime my father's and my grandfather's name like some aristocrat used to think. It would just make every conversation tiring, ad would give an idea of self-importance more annoying than anything else to my speaker.

  20. Don't bite the hand that gives you free stuff by ksandom · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've done a little back reading on this now to see what it's all about. And all I can say is for goodness sake, don't bite the hand that gives you free stuff. Personally, I usually choose gentoo or fedora. But I still recognise the value of Ubuntu.

    --
    Funnyhacks - Wierd, unusual, and fun hacks
  21. I'm a Redhat/CentOS/Fedora user by erroneus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I am an old school user from the beginning with Slackware and such. I settled on Redhat because it felt the best to me. This was before Ubuntu came out and Debian was on the map but no competition yet for Redhat. (I'm sure that will be a matter of opinion for many though.) In spite of all the great things about Ubuntu, I'm stuck with Redhat because I simply know it too well. It is largely quite predictable in the way they do things and in their philosophies. That they are active contributors to the source and supporting software is nice but not the reason I continue using and supporting Redhat.

    I was dismissive of Ubuntu at first. One of the biggest turn-offs to me was the fact that nearly everyone refuses to say the name properly. (Damnit! The U makes the same sound each time! Ooo-boon-too! Why is it so frikkin hard?!) To me, that aspect alone makes me think idiots will use it. (I know I am WRONG as hell about that, but at some level, I tend to tie intelligence with linguistic skill) On top of that, I don't like the colors the defaults are using. Moreover, the naming convention? What plans have they after "Zippy Zebra?" And really? Are they intentionally copying famous comic books where the first letter of the first and last names have to be the same? (You know, like Peter Parker, Bruce Banner and all that?)

    But you will notice I make no TECHNICAL complaints about Ubuntu... (well, there is one... apparently the way they set up their Avahi daemon doesn't work well with my SME DNS server... turn that off and it works fine.) That is mostly because I don't have any.

    As far as the response of Shuttleworth? He's right on all counts. I completely agree with his responses. If any one distro helps make Linux a household word, it's Ubuntu. It's slick. It's polished. It seems to perform well everywhere I have seen it. And it is especially true about the source for information for the most solutions. It is the Ubuntu forums... good for me that I don't have much trouble translating from Ubuntu to Fedora. In some extremely important ways, Ubuntu is a huge contributor.

    If Linux is being taken more seriously by the various industries out there, you can thank Ubuntu for a big part of it.

    1. Re:I'm a Redhat/CentOS/Fedora user by dangitman · · Score: 3, Funny

      Are they intentionally copying famous comic books where the first letter of the first and last names have to be the same? (You know, like Peter Parker, Bruce Banner and all that?)

      Yeah, because as we all know, comic books invented alliteration. It was a completely original idea of the comic book writers, and certainly not something that is so commonplace there's a word for it in the dictionary.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  22. Re:Ubuntu users have more problems by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Insightful
    This doesn't change the fact that WAY more people complain about ubuntu f$cking their machine than everyone else combined. For a distro that was supposed to get people "from here to there", it's not doing the job.

    This is a combination of poor targeting to your market, and poor communications of what the end user is to expect "as good as windows" (which is a lie. linux is better than windows, but it is not a drop-in replacement, and anyone who says otherwise is a troll).

    Apple doesn't market OSX as "as good as Windows". They're not stupid. The real advantages of linux are not price or as a windows replacement, and until the people who pimp ubuntu get a clue and realize that this is NOT the way to push linux, you're going to see 100x more complaints about ubuntu than about other distros.

  23. Ubuntu is good but... by Spy+Handler · · Score: 2, Interesting

    what's up with doing things their own way, instead of the standard way? On every other apache distribution I've seen httpd.conf is the main config file, but not on Ubuntu... it's apache2.conf. I had to look that up. Ubuntu is full of things like this.

    Mind you, their way works, and Ubuntu has great support and lively community and so on... but why do they insist on being different?

    1. Re:Ubuntu is good but... by xthor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      on Ubuntu... it's apache2.conf.

      It's been quite a while since I was an admin in a Debian shop, but I'm pretty sure that's how it is in Debian. Which makes sense, since Ubuntu is based on Debian, right? I guess I'm sayin' it's not hard to say "the standard way" and mean "the way I'm used to doing things." I prefer Fedora since I use CentOS/RedHat on all my servers, but I don't know if their way is "the standard way" or if that's just how they do things.

    2. Re:Ubuntu is good but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      That's a Debian peculiarity. The Debian way is quite logical and clean, and recognizes that Apache2 and Apache are separate software packages that may collide. It also supplies a nice and clean modular configuration system for Apache2 which avoids cruft, and demarcates maintainer and sysadmin configs clearly.

  24. Re:Suse is for business, Ubuntu is for Linux by nxtw · · Score: 2, Informative

    From my experience, the distro that gives less back to the community is Suse.

    Novell is one of the biggest corporate contributors (of actual code) to open-soruce projects like GNOME and the Linux kernel. They are behind probably only behind Red Hat in total contributions.

  25. The Essence of the Critique by emblemparade · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most people don't seem to understand the criticism that Shuttleworth is responding to.

    The open source community does not begrudge Ubuntu's success at all. The issue is that the Ubuntu project fixes a lot of bugs from "upstream" open source projects, but has so far done a poor job at submitting these patches back to the upstream projects.

    I can understand why this happens: It's very, very hard to manage a project as big as a complete operating system, and very, very time consuming to have to adhere to every single protocol for contributing patches to every single upstream project. If the point is to get things done for the end user, then it happens that the upstream packages lose here. And that's where the bitterness comes in: because the upstream packages don't get these patches, it means that other operating systems that use these projects don't get these patches, either. It thus seems as if Ubuntu is only patching for itself.

    I'm sure this isn't the intent, though. Some of the critics have gone a bit overboard in accusing the Ubuntu project of doing this on purpose. I think that's shortsighted and unhelpful, and that's what Shuttleworth is responding to here. Though, as eloquent as he is, he's not doing a good job in this post of addressing the critique.

    My own opinion is that the fault is not with Ubuntu, but with the staggering diversity and fragmentation of the open source world. It's hard enough to create a distribution that consumes all these projects, to produce back to them is monumentally hard.

    What should be done is create a more uniform way for projects to receive patches. Perhaps a central repository where these patches could be places, and project maintainers can pull these from and merge in, if they think it's appropriate.

    Fat change this will happen? Maybe, maybe not. I'm very impressed by Ubuntu's leadership in getting the open source world to think more about diverse end users. I think there's an opportunity to use this leadership to try to create a more streamlines path for "upstream" contribution. Projects would benefit from bug fixes and patches, other operating systems will benefit, and everybody will just be so happy forever.

    1. Re:The Essence of the Critique by emblemparade · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are wrong. The core OS packages do come from Debian, but many major packages are maintained by Ubuntu for Ubuntu. Even the kernels are Ubuntu-specific. (Though the Debian project has done the initial work in packaging them for the Debian build system, which Ubuntu uses -- and "packaging" is not a trivial task.)

      You can argue that these small changes that Ubuntu makes are small compared to the bulk of the work that the Debian project has done. In fact, that was a common critique of Ubuntu when it started.

      I think it's a separate critique from what Shuttleworth is responding to here, but it is related in the sense that the critics in both cases are underestimating both the importance and the size of the task that the Ubuntu project is taking on. They imply that Ubuntu is just adding some pretty little bells and whistles to "market" and get credit for (see the Slashdot comments here!) the real hard programming and administrative work that others have done, and is selfishly keeping this "marketing" stuff for itself to further this selfish goal.

      So, the response is twofold:

      1) The critics do not understand just how much work is involved in the "bells and whistles". Implementing a color scheme, editing and translating documentation, fixing a usability issue, adding accessibility controls, responding to newb questions in forums -- ends up taking as many man hours as optimizing an algorithm or fixing a security bug. It might not earn you as much geek credit, but it's challenging, important, and rewarding work in its own right.

      2) The critics do not understand how hard it is to follow the patching and quality assurance protocols of so many upstream packages. Doing so fully would easily double the man hours counted up in step #1. (The GNOME project has an especially difficult process.)

      In my opinion, #1 is a dying issue. Shuttleworth has done a great job at getting respect for the "non-tech" aspects of open source and the people who work on it. But #2 remains a point of contention, and it's not one that Shuttleworth has addressed quite convincingly enough yet.

  26. Re:Ubuntu users have more problems by Cylix · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You want a non-standard install on a no usb and no cdrom system and you wonder why you have issues finding help.

    At that point you are far into the realm of advance because you have to use an alternate means such as staging the contents on disk or using a pxe based install. The latter isn't terribly difficult if you haven't done it before, but the first time setup isn't for the novice.

    That is a really awful example of a problem solving situation.

    With that said it is very unlikely that you need a distribution specific solution. There are many differences between distributions, but I have had little issue navigating the various system types. The exception for myself being Gentoo which made me do a triple take when reconfiguring some very legacy host I once found hiding in a rack.

    --
    "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
  27. ... not being listened to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That is why I left Ubuntu. I game a lot on my PC, and I couldn't stand PulseAudio. I don't give a rat's behind about slinging audio over the network, or bluetooth support. I just want the sound to come out of the speakers ASAP with low resource usage. Debian is my new distro of choice. For a time, I contemplated just going back to Winflaws, but then I had to re-install XP on another box the other day and I was reminded how MS treats it's customers like ****.

    That said, even if they made PulseAudio an option (rather than a requirement) in Ubuntu, I doubt I would go back. I generally prefer a compact system with as few unnecessary things running as possible. My debian installs use much less memory because of it.

    I guess Ubuntu and I have gone in different directions over the past 5 years.

  28. Ostrich algorithm by notandor · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In the blog entry, Mark writes about "... a willingness to chase down the problems that stand between here and there." From my experience, problems are not chased down but rather the Ostrich algorithm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostrich_algorithm is applied.

    While running karmic (9.10), I noticed a bug with the network-manager pertaining static IP addresses and wireless connectivity, which made it unable to connect to certain configured wireless access points. Lets take a look at the network-manager released with 9.10: http://packages.ubuntu.com/karmic/net/network-manager , it is (0.8~a~git.20091013t193206.679d548-0ubuntu1).

    Now lets look at the updates for karmic at http://packages.ubuntu.com/karmic-updates/net/ , there is not a single one (!) for network-manager. For the whole six months until the next release of 10.04, not a single update for it has been provided! They just took the git snapshot and left it in 9.10.

    Just compare it to Fedora 12 and their updates on http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=172857 , karmic (9.10) was released at October 29th, and one can see the fixes and updates through Oct, Nov, Dec, Jan for F12.

    I do not care about the marketing strategies and public image of Linux distributions, but rather about exactly what Mark said, about " ... a willingness to chase down the problems that stand between here and there."

    For me, Ubuntu did not deliver that.

  29. Re: Your sig by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Funny

    Grammar Nazi Karma strikes again...

    It only took a quick scan of your post to see that you fucked up your punctuation and misused the word "using."
    There's probably more there if I cared enough to read more closely.
    I recommend a new day job.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  30. Re: Your sig by daveime · · Score: 2, Funny

    Says the person who used "There Fixed That For Ya!" in the same post. Surely, you meant "There, fixed that for you" ?

    By criticizing ONE mistake in someone's spelling, you managed to commit THREE mistakes yourself. Namely, you omit a comma, capitalize all the words for no reason, AND misspell 'you' as 'ya'.

    Keep up the good work, Mr Pot, and soon you'll be as black as Mr Kettle.

  31. The Linux world would be better off without Ubuntu by judeancodersfront · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It isn't a community developed distro, they accept outside help but the direction of the distro is set entirely by Shuttleworth

    Just look at what happened when he moved the buttons to the left and the community protested. Did he care? Not at all, the left side buttons are part of his plan to copy OSX.

    Shuttleworth talks about the contributions of others but doesn't use the word 'linux' once on the Ubuntu home page. He wants to make an OSX clone and then keep all that nerdy Linux stuff in the basement.

  32. Re: Your sig by Nethead · · Score: 4, Funny

    We are computer geeks, we are not English majors. You are on the wrong site.

    Now, Mr. six-digit ID, get the fuck off of my lawn.

    --
    -- I have a private email server in my basement.
  33. Not really. by crhylove · · Score: 2, Informative

    Linux Mint is much easier for beginners, especially the myriad of people coming from Windows.

    It's more stable, it's faster (in cases), and has better default apps.

    Though I'd personally like to see them commit to VLC rather than the alternatives, and other default apps in addition.

    The real existing problem that I see is a lack of games for Linux that really run well, but honestly, after watching the train wreck that was GTA 4 for Windows, well, I still enjoy Urban Terror AND it runs flawlessly on almost every recent Linux.

    Still, I'd like to see a fully performing Dolphin on Linux, currently it's half the speed of it's Windows build. There's not even a commonly solid N64 emu that has updates or runs really well for most distros. You have to hunt all over Jesus for a .deb.

    That being said, BSNES, arguably the best SNES emu in existence runs as well in Linux as it does in Windows. But maybe that was under wine. Fuck it I can't remember.

    --
    I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
  34. Re:I'm about to read the article, but..... by epine · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But Ubuntu itself? Brown? With crappy wanna-be mac buttons on the wrong side? With some heinous orange and piss colored icons scattered to and fro?

    Many men choose their GFs on visual aesthetics rather than life skills, even counting "looking sexy" as a life skill (the aspects of sexy that can't be defined by a tape measure).

    I've heard all the complaints about the Ubuntu colour scheme before.

    Tell me, when you look at the Italian flag, do you see snot, blood, and semen?

    Now that you point it out, I think I'll move to Estonia. They seem to have gone to extra trouble to avoid colours based on bodily fluids. Gotta like that. Unlike the Italian white, the Estonian white is very pure.

  35. Thank you, Canonical. by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have used and toyed with Linux as a desktop OS since the mid 90's, beginning with Slackware, then including distros such as Red Hat, Debian, Suse, Fedora, Ubuntu, Mepis, Gentoo, Mandrake, Sabayon, and several others. I settled on Linux Mint a few years ago, which is known as a "more complete" and better derivative of Ubuntu; Mint is Ubuntu-based but includes a number of independently developed tools and a great user interface, though it is developed by a small group of fanatics. For a change, the Mint team recently released an excellent Debian-based version, in addition to their usual Ubuntu-based releases, which has been met with a lot of excitement.

    I am already using Linux Mint Debian Edition as my main OS, but I still have a ton of respect for Ubuntu and Canonical. They have done a lot to raise awareness for Linux, and have developed a very usable OS that non-expert enthusiasts can use, as well as providing a great base for many other distros. Ubuntu is not an ideal server OS, or the be-all end-all OS that is absolutely perfect, but Canonical have done a great job with it and have worked admirably to promote free and open source software. If nothing else, they have inspired their competition to make things easier for home desktop users.

    --
    This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
  36. Re:Ubuntu users have more problems by socceroos · · Score: 2, Informative

    User-installed Linux != manufacturer-installed Windows. Not what you were saying - directly - but its worth pointing out.

    I have installed Ubuntu Linux on a number of clients computers, and I've done it properly. All set up to do common tasks (DVD movies, music, flash, WINE, etc) with proper remote support. These same clients have spread the word to the point where people from all over my continent are shipping me their laptops and desktops to have it installed with Ubuntu 'properly'. Kind of overwhelming actually.

    My point is, vanilla Ubuntu needs some minor tweaks (software installed) before its completely ready for Joe Blogs, but once done - they love it.

  37. Re: Your sig by Vintermann · · Score: 2, Funny

    Surely, you meant "There, fixed that for you" ?

    What fixed that for you? I think you're missing an "I".

    --
    xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  38. Re: Your sig by daveime · · Score: 2, Funny

    When you are speaking about yourself in the first person, there is usually little need for the "I am", "I will", "I should" etc. It is implicit that you are talking about yourself.

    Example.

    Q. "Where are you going ?"
    A. "To the mall"

    There is absolutely no need to use the expanded "I am going to the mall". Unless you are six. How old are you by the way ?