Slashdot Mirror
Ubuntu Tablet OS To Take On Android, iOS
snydeq writes "Canonical CEO Jane Silber discusses the Ubuntu maker's ambitions in the mobile market, saying there is plenty of room for a new player in tablets, TVs, and maybe even smartphones. 'There is a real demand for an alternative platform. We believe Ubuntu has all the characteristics that are needed to become that platform,' Silber says, adding that she expects to see Ubuntu on tablets later this year. 'And we think we can do that effectively because of characteristics of Ubuntu as a platform, industry dynamics, and an increased wariness around the walled gardens of Apple and to some extent Google and even Amazon, as they are increasingly in this game as well.' Silber cites openness, open governance, collaboration, and a strong developer ecosystem as key for Ubuntu as a tablet platform, when compared with Android and iOS."
This will probably be the first tablet I buy. While I hate unity for the desktop, on a tablet it might work.
Since tablets are considered a fundamentally different device than a desktop/laptop, I feel this is where Linux could shine. Ubuntu always seemed to be in the best position to capitalize on it as well. I am anxious to see what they come up with because I would almost definitely ditch my iPad for an Ubuntu tablet. I should note that no machine in my regular use runs Ubuntu or any other form of Linux as it could not replace what I need my desktops and laptops to do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Hasn't competition in the Linux community always been the case, between the various distros ?
My two bits
Clive DaSilva Email: clive.dasilva@gmail.com Ubuntu 18.10 Kernel 4.18
This is so meta I can't take it. Is everything not-iOS defined as "fragmentation"?
Consumer start to use linux more (android), but they still dont understand the main point of open source and linux's force...Choice. So if ubuntu gets a tablet in the market, that would be really nice, more choice to people. And also the tablet could do REAL work, not just consuming and that s the big difference between the available tablets and the ubuntu version.
Not after witnessing Canonical's meddling with (what used to be) a once decent distro.
Network guy here - I've got a WebOS tablet, and 2 recent Android smartphones, none of which are usable for work due to reliance on crap apps in the software store. If Ubuntu becomes available, it will be all Ubuntu - give me NetworkManager for VPN, and a terminal window with actual ssh and telnet, and I'm happy. Oh and I can run bash and python scripts from my phone? I WANT I WANT I WANT
Anyone who has seen Unity saw this coming. Its not very fluent for most peoples desktop usage, but would be great on a tablet or smart phone.
Unless you believe competition is good for the consumer. If so, then this is exactly what is needed.
Ubuntu and unity are only fit for tablets at the moment. If they could admit that and make it a separate distribution many would be much happier.
This is so meta I can't take it. Is everything not-iOS defined as "fragmentation"?
Yes. Apple are spending a lot of money feeding this line to their paid media lackies, repeated by gullible zealots. Apple are terrified of competition, and like MS before them, and IBM before them, will do everything they can to block it.
I see it as a very positive development. Ubuntu is just a sugar coated Debian. Most of vanilla Debian is still there, from command line utilities, configuration files and GUI toolkits (GTK+, Qt). If the Ubuntu tablet preserves this, it would be light years ahead Android in terms of bringing the "Free Sotware" ecosystem to a mobile device.
Check out my cross-platform apps
It's not a bad idea, but they can't provide apps like Netflix and Hulu which most people want, I don't see it succeeding. Only a few hardcore geeks will buy it. Besides, why can Ubuntu offer that's not already available on Android or iOS?
-- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
For those functions, I believe it's already possible to hack your phone and put Linux on it.
Yes, and it's been a major factor in Linux never gaining any meaningful traction outside the server market.
(Note: I don't consider Android to be Linux, any more than OS X is Mach).
TODO: Something witty here...
Touch-screen hand-held devices require radically different metaphors to desktop/laptop computing. They are much more context-sensitive in terms of how and where they are used, and in the amount of attention the that user can give the UI. If Canonical can actually address this and are innovative, that would be great.
Unfortunately, looking at how Canonical are trying to force (other people's) mobile metaphors onto the Desktop, I seriously doubt their ability to build a better UI experience for mobile users. They don't even get that mobile and desktop computing is like chalk and cheese, let alone express any real innovation.
It depends. Sometimes increased competition is good, sometimes its bad. The world isn't black and white.
It shouldn't have to be a 'hack' though. Any general purpose computer you buy should let you load any compatible operating system and any operating system should let you run any compatible programs. You shouldn't have to jump through hoops just to do what you'd like with your own damn hardware.
For most consumers, the idea of "openness", especially when concerning the software itself, hardly ever crosses their mind. It's not really going to be a selling point that they will latch on to.
>Network guy here - I've got a WebOS tablet, and 2 recent Android smartphones, none of which are usable for work due to reliance on crap apps in the software store.
You know, with Android at least, you don't have to rely on what's in the Android Market; you can sideload apps you download from the internet.
Or you could write your own.
How about nobody cares about that. Unless you have a multi-billion dollar marketing budget to match Android or iOS and a market place that can run all of the apps that Android does Ubuntu has no chance of being a serious player. I'm not against more players in the game but lets be real with ourselves, Ubuntu is used by power users who care to work with Linux. I'm going to take the plunge this summer when I can safely back up all my data and take a few days to play with it but I realize I'm part of a tiny minority. While the minority may be wealthy enough to make this venture possible it is highly unlikely they'll ever unseat one of the big two or even be a serious third. Android won't win awards from the open source community but they aren't a walled garden and that is in particular unless Ubuntu can seriously cut the cost of Android products will have a hard time competing in the marketplace for mOS's
People in the WebOS community are already running Ubuntu on HP TouchPads..
Besides, why can Ubuntu offer that's not already available on Android or iOS?
Real freedom? Actual desktop-type apps on a portable device?
This is exactly what's needed, you jar brained fuck up.
LOL!
See Barbara! That is an ad hominem attack. But it's at least targeted at someone who can defend themselves, and it's based on evidence. Regardless, he is correct in that it is exactly what is needed, and the jar brained fuck up comment is at least slightly relevant.
Competing against itself is what the Linux community does best.
Have you ever written an app for Android?
I have, that platform utterly SUCKS to program for.
"or you could write your own" is the same as, "or you can build your own car from scratch"...
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Most people? really?
Or are you talking just you.
Because "Most people" if they want netflix, they dont watch it on a tablet. They watch it on their TV.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I dumped Ubuntu a while ago. I don't like the direction they're going in.
Instead...well, I've been a fan of Maemo, then MeeGo, now Tizen for a while now. If I don't want to run Android, I'll wait for a usable Tizen build to put on my tablets, thanks anyway.
If manufacturers start adopting Ubuntu, they would no longer need to pay royalties to Microsoft for using Android.
And, given the open source nature of Android, I don't see why can't Ubuntu get some of the features of Android, either by just grabbing the code, or by recoding the same features in the style of the Linux vs. SCO case.
So it is a win win situation, Ubuntu adopts the characteristics that make Android good, maybe even adding some of their own features to the OS, and present it as an alternative to manufacturers that are currently being bullied by Microsoft and others to pay royalties for using Android.
Variety and choice, trial and error, natural selection... these all lead to robust software.
The walled garden, god complex, "In know what's best for you" software gives everyone mediocrity (apart from a few fanatics who "just love" it).
Give people lots of choices and everyone will compete to offer the best... and "the best" may be different for different people.
If you don't like one system, you can easily choose another.
This is a good thing.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
It is not wise to say that Ubuntu could really work on tablets just basing that to Unity.
As UBUNTU is not Unity. It is GNOME 2.x series. And GNOME would not work with tablets. As it is not designed for tablets and you can not so on modify it to work with tablets.
Why did Tablet PC's fail on tablet markets until Apple brought iPad?
Because Microsoft tried to push a WIMP interface with Windows applications to tablet.
A WIMP stands for Windows, Icons, Menus and Pointer (if you didn't know). And GNOME (at least 2.x) needs pointer and is about Windows and drop-down menus.
That Ubuntu now comes by default a Unity, does not make Windows, Icons, Menus and Pointer go away. Unity is just a launcher and a shell.
KDE SC would work on tablets, as it is designed to be customizable and it is possible to make so user does not see windows, drop-down menus and does not need a pointer. (Icons, menus, toolbars... everything is possible to hide or make so big that they come usable with fingers).
And KDE has done great job with the Plasma. As they have different shell for different devices.
Plasma-desktop
Plasma-netbook
Plasma-mobile
Plasma-active
Plasma-Mediacenter
And thats it.... All KDE applications allows customization well to be possible fit on those device classes.
Canonical has not done anything than Unity and it does not fit to anywhere well.
Apple understood the problem, they have XNU operating system (Open Source btw) and lots of closed source sub-systems like Core animations and so on. And then they made a totally new shell for smartphone and tablet with totally new application design rules. They went and throw away the WIMP and toke just IM. Icons and menus (not drop-down).
And now Microsoft is trying to do the same, but totally wrong way. As they get second glass idea for GUI (Metro) and what was designed for smartphone (does not work so well when starting to add more functions and applications... the Zune interface does not work and Metro start screen is hard to understand) and they slaps it to desktop computers and tablets....
Desktop computers can not support Metro either. And tablets.... It is as well second glass GUI for it.
And Microsoft has pushed the "Ribbon" interface for its applications, what it copied from Lotus document writer...
And it does not work well on tablets either.... Apple and Open Handset Alliance has understanded this and made new GUI's for tablets what fits for them.
Everyone else than Microsoft and Canonical knows what to do. That every GUI needs to be designed per device class and you can not push single GUI to all of them.
And it is funny, that Canonical what is the Linux communitys Microsoft, does same thing as MS does.... Are they collaborating someway?
Linux has gained traction in any market not dominated by a single vendor that had a greater than 90% share of the entire market even before Linux got started.
You mention MacOS in passing.
Apple couldn't unseat MS-DOS with a product that implements just about every "well meaning" suggestion ever hurled at Linux.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Actually, if you haven't spent your money on a closed device, you should be able to install Ubuntu on your tablet as a matter of choice. Personally I'd like a less consumer oriented more developer oriented distribution.
At the end of the day, more than anything else, what I want, is the right to choose.
And then it should be called as Tubuntu with T for Tablet?
Canonical should go and pull all othes, Kubuntu, Lubuntu, Xubuntu and Ubuntu and make a single Ubuntu DVD with a installer what gives a user a choice to choose what to use.
On LiveCD user could logout and back in to try other desktops.
Just like how Mandrake made it.... boot, choose and login... logout and try next one. Install what you wanted...
Openness is all fine and dandy, but ultimately consumer friendliness and usability are what will make a successful platform. Whether geeks want to admit it or not, that's why Apple's offerings are so successful.
I wouldn't say that.
Has Canonical burned an epic amount of karma with Unity? Absolutely. But now we see the strategy of Canonical and why the (at the time) weird decisions were being made - for moving into the mobile & embedded market.
1) The nasty split with the Gnome community over Gnome3. Due to the Gnome community designing for the desktop and ignoring Canonical's input for the most part. Canonical decides to develop Unity so it can control the development path.
2) Wayland - X has way too much overhead and features for low-power mobile devices. Wayland keeps it nice and light.
3) Close/minimize/maximize debacle - pure usabilty idea. It was thrown out there to play with the code and how far people will accept change.
4) Ubuntu One - iTunes/Amazon fighter.
Being as they are one of (if not the) largest GPL distros on the planet, they know they have a massive built in base they can use for beta testing ideas, Q&A and bug fixing (since the code is all out in the open). That's huge. Add in the rock solid dependability of Linux and they have a winner.
I call it 'The Aristocrats'
I guess the problem is that those phones aren't really compatible with other OSes. With Linux, you will only be able to use them as a general purpose computer, not a smartphone.
LOL! You think?
If you don't want graphics, yes sure, chroot Debian like I have now.
If you want graphics it's xvfb and vnc, shudder.
Replace the OS all together? Good luck with that, there is binary blobs drivers to contend with.
There is no reason at all they couldn't have provided at least a skeleton of a normal graphical Unix. A modern smart phone has crazy spec from the future compared with what was around when Unix graphical standards where laid down.
Why the hell should I have to port cross platform stuff to Android?
If they hate X, help with Wayland. If users want normal graphical Unix, we can at least install the Wayland X server.
> Yes, and it's been a major factor in Linux never gaining any meaningful traction outside the server market.
Not at all. The major factor is that zero OEMs have offered it as a real choice. The Dell N series doesn't count, almost every time the Windows version sold for the same or less. Never once did a real major OEM offer up a PC preloaded with Linux at a price advantage over Windows. The few times small fry tried it they managed to sell a few but they almost always went so cheep that most Linux folk were not going to buy the junk they were preloading onto.
Nobody even sold a dual boot, even as an option. That wouldn't have even cost them anything. Had Dell offered Canonical a deal where Canonical would provide a preload image and a utility to quickly convert the Linux partition into additional space for Windows or to just collapse it into C: if the customer decided they didn't want it, who doesn't think Canonical wouldn't have jumped at the opportunity to put product in front of a few million potential new users? But Microsoft would have had kittens, Balmer would have thrown a chair, etc.
Remember when Be offered their OS for free and got zero takers? That is the problem, the same one we have had for decades now, the MIcrosoft Monopoly on preloads.
Only us hard core types will load an OS, any OS. Everyone else uses what comes preloaded and that is Windows.
Democrat delenda est
It has, yeah, but that's also why Linux is just a rounding error in desktop OS use. Outside of a handful of geeks, nobody wants to have to figure out which distro to use, what the hell it even means to pick KDE or Gnome or XFCE or Enlightenment or which one they should want, what's the difference between yum and apt, and so on. People want this: plug it in, and it works. That's all. They don't want to pick between 57 different distros, 7 different package managers, and so on.
Unfortunately, geeks appear totally blind to how the real world works.
Android is Linux, running Linux kernel and a real FOSS, but Ubuntu is lacking one important thing here, the marketing machine that is Google inc.
Actually, Ubuntu screws around quite a bit with configuration files. I find this particularly annoying, it seems that nothing is where it used to be, or works as it used to work.
Very annoying.
Actually, it's kind of fun. I mean it's essentially just like writing Java.
Yeah, there are some lame String based hooks that provided the programming interface to most of the User Interaction, but really, you can encapsulate your code to avoid all that, except wherever it becomes absolutely necessary.
Life must be difficult living under that tinfoil hat of yours.
(Posting AC because I'm at work)
There is a real demand for an alternative platform.
Um, no there isn't. Or, more specifically, there isn't sufficient demand for an alternative platform to lead to success. Just because a small handful of people want an alternative does not mean the market wants one...
You may be correct, for the moment. Consider though, that currently all you can do on your tablet is run apps downloaded from an app store (or that you have written yourself) and these apps can only do what the OS allows them to do.
This scenario may have it's good points, but consider how much it constrains innovation on this cool new hardware we all have. Wouldn't it be more fun to have access to the whole enchalada?
A small handful of people who are interested in such things may very well open up a whole new market.
You have to admit that the possibilities are alluring.
More to the point, it's variety and choice on the things that don't matter much for compatibility, and a standards on the things that do matter for compatibility. If I write software for my own machine, with not a lot of extra work I can make it compile and run just fine on any Linux distro and probably BSD as well.
So variety and choice about which desktop widgets you're going to use, but no (non-bug) variations regarding what an fcntl(2) call will do. That's a very effective combination.
I am officially gone from
I think his point is, Netflix and Hulu might spend the development effort on Android because that's what the remnant of the market not using an iPad is using. It reaches significant numbers of people and they have #1 and #2 in the market covered.
Tablets are not what people really buy, what they are really buying is a thin way to access content. Without content, without the most popular apps they could get elsewhere people will say "What can i DO on this thing?"
What we really need is not some other Linux-based fragmentation device, what we need is a high quality Android tablet that is priced in line with the iPad and doesn't require mobile contracts.
We've had decent tablets that were massively overpriced, and goodness knows we've had plenty that were affordable garbage. But no decent and affordable tablets.
I think Android is failing to win over the tablet space because they're about 3 iterations behind Apple and still don't have a really good device with widespread adoption.
In the meantime, adding more pirates to the sea of Not-Apple doesn't expand the market, it means everyone will just continually get a smaller piece of the pie.
They don't want to pick between 57 different distros, 7 different package managers, and so on.
Unfortunately, geeks appear totally blind to how the real world works.
Phew, it's fortunate that there's only one version of Windows and people don't have to decide between Windows XP Pro 64 and Windows 8 Home Ultra Pro for ARM.
I used to be a big fan of Ubuntu, but it seems that all of this recent effort to make Ubuntu work on tablets/touchscreens has come at the cost of the stability and robustness of the desktop product.
But that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
X has way too much overhead and features for low-power mobile devices.
I always find this argument funny, considering I first used X on a 32MHz CPU with 32MB of RAM.
I would agree that it's not ideal for a tablet that's mostly used for full-screen apps and media consumption, but 'overhead and features' are not the reason.
Actually, I *love* my HTC Flyer and Samsung Galaxy Tab Plus; both 7" form factor tablets.
In fact, nothing has changed the way I live more since my first personal computer. Albeit, I use them almost totally as ebook readers, music players, occasional browsing and the rare sudoku game.
I carry a tablet with me everywhere these days. 7 inch tablets fit nicely in my pants pocket, the battery lasts 8+ hours of *active* use. What's not to like?
Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
I have to go with Bill Gates on this one. I am willing to pay for a better Desktop Environment (Windows or OS X) for non work applications.
Whenever I have to reboot from Linux to Windows to run Word or play a game that doesn't run in Wine, I remember what a horrible, clunky kludge the Windows interface was.
Network effects count for a lot too. I wouldn't inflict a Linux desktop on my family. My dad is a programmer and my mom only uses a browser. But, no one that either of them talk to use Linux. Figuring out how to do stuff requires googling because no one they know (besides me) would have any ideas. Hardware compatibility becomes a concern instead of an after-thought. Most software that mimics what they (well, mostly my father) would use is much less polished than what he would find on Windows.
Also, the reason why the Windows version of any offering will be as cheap or cheaper than the Linux is because OEM Windows comes preloaded with a lot of crap that companies pay the OEM to include. Linux doesn't have this, thus it actually costs more to load Linux than it does Windows, even including the Windows license.
When it comes to Linux, fragmentation is inevitable. If you can't accept that, you are the one with a problem.
Figuring out how to do stuff requires googling because no one they know (besides me) would have any ideas.
I know Gnome 3 is bad, but surely it's not _that_ bad.
And my girlfriend has no problem using Gnome 2 or Unity.
I don't know where Jane Silber she draws her conclusions from but I humbly disagree. If Microsoft, with all their millions (dedicated to marketing) haven't been able to gain barely any market share in smartphones with windows phone 7 I don't see what could Ubuntu do. Besides that, there are several alternative smartphone OSes which have failed and not because of technical reasons. E.g: WebOS, Maemo/Meego. She's just expressing her wishes and hoping it becomes true but seems unlikely.
"increased wariness around the walled gardens of Apple and to some extent Google and even Amazon"
Apple, google and amazon are who gets decide which OS is on their device. Not the customer.
And? She never said Ubuntu tablets would be on sale tomorrow.
Tablets are still a new thing and they don't seem to be going away anytime soon. As long as the market still exists a year from now, they Canonical has plenty of time to hammer out OEM deals (if they haven't already.) There are desktops, laptops, and netbooks sold with Ubuntu pre-installed. As tablets become a commodity item I don't see why they'd be any different.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
Not at all. The major factor is that zero OEMs have offered it as a real choice. The Dell N series doesn't count, almost every time the Windows version sold for the same or less. Never once did a real major OEM offer up a PC preloaded with Linux at a price advantage over Windows. The few times small fry tried it they managed to sell a few but they almost always went so cheep that most Linux folk were not going to buy the junk they were preloading onto.
Way to move the goalposts, buddy. No OEM has ever given Linux a chance except for the ones who did, and those don't count because it didn't work, you say? Linux failed to gain traction because it wasn't something consumers wanted, even back when you can pick it up off the shelf. If it needs special treatment and markdown to be considered, because it can't compete on equal footing, then you should take that as a hint. After all, Apple has always sold at a considerable premium over Windows, and has done quite well for itself.
And the fact of the matter is that it has even failed with the deck stacked in favour of it, as you suggest. If it couldn't sell on cheap Walmart computers at a considerable discount, it's just not going to sell anywhere. Same for the early netbook craze and MSI's reported massive return rate on their Linux OEM'ed models.
Nobody even sold a dual boot, even as an option.
Nobody offered dual boot for varying version of Windows either, there's no demand for it. Believe it or not, most consumers just want to turn on a computer so they can do their thing.
That wouldn't have even cost them anything.
Except for time, which is money, and oh, I don't know, development and support costs to support their hardware for the sake of a product the market has shown no indication of wanting.
Had Dell offered Canonical a deal where Canonical would provide a preload image and a utility to quickly convert the Linux partition into additional space for Windows or to just collapse it into C: if the customer decided they didn't want it, who doesn't think Canonical wouldn't have jumped at the opportunity to put product in front of a few million potential new users? But Microsoft would have had kittens, Balmer would have thrown a chair, etc.
Again, there's never been any indication that the market has wanted any of this, it's wasted costs. The whole "Microsoft would get angry herp derp" argument is completely stupid, I'm pretty certain MS wasn't thrilled about Dell offering Ubuntu OEM's systems, that didn't stop Dell, and it certainly didn't result in Microsoft doing anything stupid like cutting off Dell. Their primary customer is, after all, the OEMs, and has been since the days of Microsoft as the dominant Unix vendor,
Remember when Be offered their OS for free and got zero takers?
Yeah, let's pretend that whole thing about how at first you needed a PowerPC Mac to even do anything with BeOS never happened, and let's pretend that the Windows incompatibility and complete lack of third party application support were never problems.
Only us hard core types will load an OS, any OS.
Bullshit. There was a time when nearly everyone upgraded or installed Windows on their own, but that's the problem, that's what people see when they see alternate offerings, the whole unpleasant, pretentious "only us hardcore types" attitude. And it's complete bunk to boot, loading in a LiveCD and rebooting is not complicated, It's not complicated to press the install button on said LiveCD. What stops adoption is that you "hardcore types" don't realize that Linux brings absolutely nothing to the table that people want. What they give up by switching far outweighs any imaginary gains. Give people something they want, and they'll buy it up, it really isn't complicated.
Doing what you want != doing it dirt simple. Congratulations, you own your own "damn" cellphone, so you can run any ARM instruction you want.
Oh, what, running the bare hardware is actually useless to you? You're actually dependent on a loose confederation of a thousand programmers working in their free time around the world, who never guarantee anything will ever work, in order to turn your hardware into something useful to you?
You should get over the whole "it's my hardware" thing. Computer hardware by itself is useless and inert, particularly when 99.999% of the time you're just running someone else's instructions. Is someone really in a position to claim that when they run Linux (or Windows, or OS X) "you" are running what "you" want? Isn't that claiming a lot of other people's work for yourself?
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
Offering Linux costs OEMs money because MS gives the OEMs cash incentives for preloading Windows. That's why the Dell laptops with Linux on them cost the same or more.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
And this is why the GNU/Linux distinction is important, even if we (understandably) can't be assed to say it most of the time. Without the GNU tools it's hardly "Linux" at all.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
"or you could write your own" is the same as, "or you can build your own car from scratch"...
I'm pretty much already there, luckily it's conceptually much easier than building your own computer, and the parts aren't so tiny.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Yep, it would take some time (mostly waiting) but you could hack Ubuntu into a really nice OS with little more than changing packages around.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
"Fragmentation" is what Apple fanboys call "diversity." They see it as a bad thing, they want a one-true-platform future, it's such a neat and tidy concept...
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
"Take on iOS?" What the hell are people smoking? The Apple devices offer a pure e2e experience. There is no competition within that space that does nto reveal APple, once again, got it right. people like the walls, albeit a little annoyed , at times, with the control issues (Flash, Porn). But the fact is Apple makes wonderful devices for the consumer that simply work , are seamlessly integrated, and have high quality usable apps. the markets are not the same, and people how buy tablets could give a rats ass about Ubuntu, Red Hat, Linux or anything else hackers/engineers think is important.
I have Ubuntu running as a touch-optimized LXDE environment on my touchpad. It runs in a card, no dual-booting necessary. Not sure if it meets all your needs, but instructions can be found here:
http://forums.webosnation.com/hp-touchpad/293028-new-touchpad-heres-your-get-started-guide.html/
Scroll down to the "Advanced Stuff, there be dragons ahead" for instructions to get you started. There's an easier way and a harder way to do it, but the harder way will result in a more configurable, easier to startup system.
...tighten things up a bit more. I found the 11.04 an 11.10 releases to be terribly unstable if you are upgrading in place. Let us hope that any tablet, TV or phone OS release of theirs has a much tighter development model. People who buy TVs, phones and tablets want to have those devices "just work". Computer users are used to having to work around problems. Can you imagine the horror of having to wait for a TV to boot, or to have functionality of the TV change to the point where you have to relearn everything after an upgrade? And I'm an Android user... I love to tweak things which is why little else appeals.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
It's not our fault the real world doesn't work right!
This should be Slashdot's real tagline. Not 'news for nerds'.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
I don't know about that - maybe most do, but probably by a narrow and narrowing margin.
In our household we watch Netflix on various portable devices (80%), different computers (10%) and yes on TV(10%) via consoles (Wii, PS3, Blue ray player) where % is % of Netflix viewing time.
While my household may not be as typical as most, in our demographic neighborhood, we are not that unusual.
And certainly that is one question I get asked about a lot - can we watch videos on portable device x ( ostensibly follow up question possible to watch video without 4g or other form of wireless).
As far as most users are concerned, there is only one version of Windows; the one that came on the computer they bought. Buy a new computer, with a new version of Windows? Oh well, just use the new one. The vast majority of home computer buyers (and many many business buyers) don't ever deviate from the OS that comes in the box, even to simply roll back the OS to the one they were familiar with before.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
Perhaps more to the point: with Linux, fragmentation is a feature. Not always a very useful one, but a feature nonetheless.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
Remember the last hype from those guys? "Canonical sent along a note announcing that its Ubuntu Linux OS (10.10) is now available pre-loaded on three ASUS Eee PC models including the 1001PXD, the 1011PX and the 1015PX. More models packing Ubuntu will be made available throughout the year.", back in June 2011. Didn't happen. Still hasn't happened. Canonical has no credibility.
InfoWorld: Will you compete with Google Android, Apple iOS [4], and others?
Silber: Yes. And we think we can do that effectively because of characteristics of Ubuntu as a platform, industry dynamics, and an increased wariness around the walled gardens of Apple and to some extent Google and even Amazon, as they are increasingly in this game as well. There is a demand for a platform that has characteristics that Ubuntu meets. The characteristics in my mind that are important are openness, and by openness I don't just mean open source code, I mean the governance structure, the ability to collaborate, the ability for there to be multiple devices from multiple vendors.
There is? Last time I checked, the things people care about most are getting nice phones at a good price that they can play Angry Birds on and snap pictures with to upload to their Facebook/Twitter accounts.
This is the first quote that frustrates me from this snippet: I mean the governance structure, the ability to collaborate, the ability for there to be multiple devices from multiple vendors.. Do they not realise that this is exactly the status quo? Collaboration and governance are HUGE objectives for all of the major players in this game. Apple has iCloud, Microsoft has Windows Live and Office 365. Android has Google account synchronisation, control and access deeply ingrained into its fundamentals. All of these are free. Ubuntu's offering costs money. Umm...
This is the second most frustrating quote: we think we can do that effectively because of characteristics of Ubuntu as a platform. Let's not forget that this is the platform that's changed their stance on the minimise/close button three times in between, what, the last three releases?
There has to be a strong developer ecosystem, and we've spent a lot of effort and time in the last couple years building up that developer ecosystem. Building up our software center, building tools to be able to connect the dots between developers and users so that a developer can write an app and submit it through a website and get it into the hands of users very quickly. A free app or a commercially paid app.
Like Android's NDK with Eclipse integration or Apple's iPhone/iOS SDK with XCode or Windows Phone's leveraging of .NET with Visual Studio? Still wondering what they're bringing to the table at this point.
There's a certain level of quality and features that is needed in order to be a viable platform in this category, and Ubuntu has that, whereas some of the projects that have come and gone in the last couple years have never really cracked that. We've seen Moblin [5] come and go from Intel, Maemo [6], MeeGo [7]. Tizen [8] is the latest incarnation -- we'll see if they ever produce anything.
No, those projects never cracked the marketing required to reach the big time. Nokia could have really flaunted Maemo/MeeGo but chose to ride the sidelines while Apple and Android made themselves known everywhere. MeeGo, as far as I undersatand it, was actually a pretty reliable mobile OS and had a lot of potential.
This "advantage" is weak at best. In fact, I'm hard pressed to rely on this since I can't trust Ubuntu (or any Linux distribution) enough to install it for my non-technical peers and clients. While it certainly offers the nicest GNU/Linux UX experience available, there are some things still left to be desired on the hardware side.
The other problem I have with this is that Unity, compared to Android or iOS, does not really offer any real usability advantages over those other platforms. As far as I see it, it offers an OS-X like icon dock (that doesn't work nearly as nicely) and a focus on searching for things. It's a good starting point, but it's hard to see where they are going with it and how
Tell that to HP.
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
Actually desktop type apps on a tablet SUCK. Honestly if you think you want MS office on a tablet using a screen keyboard you are plain old nuts.
Netbook for "desktop type apps" touch designed apps for tablets.
And yes I know what I am talking about, I have used tablets for over a decade since the first Dauphin DTR-1 came out. Tablets are NOT NEW.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Really? What abount games - just about every indie dev that considered porting to linux and then stopped cited the hassle of making builds for Fedora/Ubuntu/Suse/etc, dealing with the various dependencies and packaging formats, etc.
TODO: Something witty here...
Here are some reasons why:
* You don't have to think about drivers and hardware conflicts. Once you get a tablet working with Ubuntu, it just works.
* If a tablet costs $100 or $200, no one is going to want to pay for an OS.
* People don't have expectations about what should work on their tablets. They aren't going to be all, "But what about Excel on my Tablet!"
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free
" X has way too much overhead and features for low-power mobile devices. "
I think you are confusing X with windows.
X is very light and runs on a LOT of low power embedded hardware. Do you know what X windows is? Because that is what "X" is typically referring to.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Ubuntu used to be a great distro for education, academia, and general desktop use. It now is chasing futile dreams of dominating the tablet market.
Futile because almost no Linux developer writes tablet software, and it seems doubtful that a lot of them will start in the future.
There is a real demand for an alternative platform... we think we can do that effectively because of characteristics of Ubuntu as a platform, industry dynamics, and an increased wariness around the walled gardens of Apple and to some extent Google and even Amazon, as they are increasingly in this game as well. [emphasis mine]
Oh please. I have a fondness for Linux as much as the next average Slashdotter but if the last 15 years of "X will be the year of Linux on the desktop!" has shown us, the world at large does not care about privacy, security, data robustness, or the consequences walled gardens. You buy something, you use it, and hope all goes well. If you lose your data for any reason, you rebuild.
People are already used to the possibility of losing real-life items to theft, loss, or damage, so if a picture collection or list of contacts disappears because a company went under or changed their TOS or didn't have good backups, people deal with it an move on. Is there a better way? With data, yes, there usually is. Do people care that much? No. (People have moved away from DRM a tiny bit, but that has more to do with Apple's and Amazon's music services being naturally popular than the Microsoft's "PlaysForSure" debacle.)
I'm guessing that 2012 in tablets will look a lot like 2011 did, with the one difference being the Kindle Fire. The price and prominence of that device will move a lot of units, but I'm predicting that on December 31, 2012, the market will be 60-70% iPad, 20-25% Kindle, and 10-15% everyone else combined. (Though I'm not sure how to count Windows 8 if it starts shipping on a large number of touch-based tablets that are 95% similar to the current crop of Windows-based, stylus-using tablets. I'm mainly thinking of a "tablet" as "a touch-based device that doesn't ship with a keyboard, and functions 100% as designed without one.")
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
Not so much Microsoft giving cash incentives, but all the ISVs that pay the manufacturer to install "trial versions" of their software on the machines. I guess that does include Microsoft if you count the trial versions of Office, etc.
It's the crapware (AKA bloatware) that gives you your discount. Such as it is. Linux doesn't have that going for it.
Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
However, despite the huge variety of android tablets on the market, none of them have really been all that successful in gaining market share.
Google has enormous resources, and yet hasn't succeeded in gaining significant market share in tablets in competition with Apple; Microsoft is gearing up to make a play in that market. Microsoft has enormous resources, and hasn't succeeded in gaining significant market share in smartphones, in competition with Apple and Google.
As far as I know, Canonical has a tiny staff, little in the way of resources, no revenue model that's proven to work, and relies upon the contributions of its user community. This last is important, and is as it should be for FOSS. The trouble is, Canonical has been risking the loss of its user community by pushing major changes to the default user interface, apparently in an effort to move to a unified user experience across desktops, mobile devices, and entertainment devices. Personally, I like the Unity interface, but I'm unhappy with the way Canonical has ignored criticism of it.
So tiny Canonical is going to make a play in markets that are hotly contested by some of the wealthiest, most powerful, and most ambitious corporations in the world, and in so doing, is apparently sacrificing its greatest strength. All in all, this seems like a suicidal move, and a sorry end to a promising effort at popularizing Linux.
Actually there are two versions of windows. 32 bit and 64 bit.
The more you pay, the less disabled the OS is.
It's only a matter of habits.
I had to use a Windows 7 machine yesterday after three years of Linux and many years of previous versions of Windows (from 1994 to 2008). It was a little nightmare. I couldn't find things because their locations changed from the WinXP times. Alt-tab didn't work in the same way it used to work and there were many other little nuisances. Would I inflict it on a family used to Gnome 2? Definitely not but that's subjective and the same would happen to somebody moving from Windows to Linux. Habits are habits and every GUI must be explored, learnt and get used to. Even Macs are difficult to use if you come from other desktops.
But there is more. Would I inflict to my family all those Windows's "new hardware found", "install driver" moments? Nope. I plug new hardware into my Ubuntu notebook (a former WinXP one) and everything works without even a notice and without asking me to install software. All I needed to do to make my webcam and my scanner work was plugging them into the USB ports. The most difficult installation was a network printer. I had to do System, Administration, Printing, Add, Network Printer, Find and it found the printer, downloaded the drivers and set it up. There was CD with the drivers for Windows in the box. After hardware installations like the ones I have on Linux one wonders why can't Windows be as simple as that.
Yes, but the computer you buy has one or the other, or at least one or the other is active, and the end user doesn't care which one it is or whether she could switch between them. The point isn't that there aren't different versions of Windows, the point is that most end-users don't care.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
I've heard that, but honestly, I'm more than just a bit skeptical of that claim. IMHO, the *MAJOR* factor in Linux never gaining any meaningful traction in the home user market is because most PCs ship with Windows already installed. If I'm Joe User, I don't know the difference between Linux and Windows. Consequently, if my PC comes with Windows installed, that's probably the OS I am going to use because 1) I don't know that another choice even exists, 2) I don't know why I might want a different OS, 3) I don't know how to remove the OS that's already installed even if I *did* want another OS, and finally, 4) I wouldn't know how to install an alternative OS. If what shipped with the PC works good enough*, why would the average user go to the effort of installing another OS (not to mention the effort of learning how to use that alternative OS)?
*Yes, I'm using that term loosely. I may prefer Linux to Windows (and I do), but the average user will look at it like this: "Can I get on-line with Windows? Can I check my e-mail, stocks and bank account on Windows? Can I buy things on Amazon? Then why is Linux/Mac/$randomOS better than Windows?" If it meets those requirements, then Windows is "good enough" and honestly, that's not an entirely unreasonable definition.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
I agree with your point but Unity looks like as if it were designed for tablets not for desktops. That's why I'll move to MATE when I'll upgrade my notebook to 11.10: it's the GUI closer to what I consider to be a desktop that I was able to find among the ones I tested (I setup a 11.10 virtual machine to research that). Gnome Shell and Unity just don't fit well there.
Network guy here - I've got a WebOS tablet... If Ubuntu becomes available, it will be all Ubuntu
You do know you can run ubuntu in window on the touchpad right? works pretty well too.
You can also get terminal on the touchpad (real terminal). All inside WebOS.
I have an ASUS Transformer with keyboard dock and I think it's great. I really do. It's my netbook as necessary and a tablet which is particularly good for tabling events.
My problem with the Transformer is that it runs Android. I would prefer Android over iOS any day, but Google continues to develop Android as a single-person data collection device (requiring me to be constantly signed into a variety of services) instead of a multi-user platform where *I* get to choose who sees what.
If/when Ubuntu gets prepped for tablet distribution and I can install it on my Transformer, I will do it the very night it's available. Google has just over-stepped its bounds for me to give it the benefit of the doubt with my data any more.
I wasn't disputing what you said. Rather I thought I was supporting it.
I will say again that I don't care how many people use Linux, as long as I can.
Some may argue that Linux benefits from having more exposure as a user desktop, while this may be true, Linux is ubiquitous in so many areas I think this is not so important.
Linux rocks for me, if you and the rest of the world want to use Windows, I'm fine with that.
The only real hole I find personally in the Linux portfolio is CAD.
My pipe dream is a tablet that comes with decent RAM, speed, ports etc and NO OS! Just the ability to plug in a USB drive and load your own choice.
> Offering Linux costs OEMs money because MS gives the OEMs cash incentives for preloading Windows.
No. Go look at Microsoft's balance sheet. The only divisions making significant coin are the OS and Office lines and almost nobody buys those products at retail. So logic dictates the lion's share of their revenue is being extracted in OEM contracts. Which it is. The way it works is they charge such insane prices for WIndows that an OEM is totally uncompetitive. Then IF and only IF that OEM plays ball they will refund enough in co-op marketing credits for them to survive. But it has been true for some years that the Windows license is often the most expensive component in a lower end PC and is is now moving up to the midrange. It is so bad that for netbooks they have to offer Starter Edition to prevent the netbook makers from going back to Linux[1]. At those price points the normal Microsoft Tax just isn't an option.
And Intel plays exactly the same game btw. You should hear the Intel splash at the end of PC adverts as "We are being paid not to do business with AMD." The difference is that Windows is so pervasive they don't even bother insisting on a sound or logo because they prefer to maintain the image that there aren't even any competitors.
Now it is true that OEMs collect money for the crapware that gets loaded atop Windows and that does offset some of the license fees to Microsoft and that revenue isn't yet available on a Linux preload. But I really doubt the trialware/crapware truly equals the cost of a Windows license.
[1] They initially went with Linux because Vista wouldn't run on the first netbooks and XP wasn't being offered anymore except as an option with a Vista Business Edition license. Microsoft quickly realized the problem and made XP available at a special cut rate to netbook makers; at which time Linux instantly vanished and has not been seen since in the netbook space. Plus the original netbook was a small, inexpensive and netcentric device. Which customers loved but OEMs hated because of the small margins. Moving to larger, more expensive small WIndows laptops and calling them netbooks was far more profitable, even with the license fees. Observe how the 9" netbook went extinct at about the same time as the shift to Windows.
Democrat delenda est
I don't dislike the Windows interface. But I don't see it having any significant advantages over free desktop environments. I can say the same of OS X; in general, most user interfaces for general purpose desktops and workstations have been functionally equivalent for years, and the differences are matters of taste. Frankly, if you look at photos of the monitors of computers at the Xerox PARC laboratory from the 60s, you can see most of the basic elements that most graphical user interfaces have been using ever since. They don't really vary that much.
The thing people really care about in choosing an operating system is whether they can use the applications they want or need to use. And given how frequently the application wanted is a Web browser, serving as the interface to internal or external services, even that question doesn't matter much.
sorry, I misinterpreted your post, then.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
As big as Ubuntu is getting can they be trusted any more?
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
The main problem as I see it is that they're years late and 3/4ths of an app-store short. Microsoft came late and they're having a hell of a time making any ground. One could argue that the abundance of .Net developers should have been a boon to their app store but it seems they haven't hit critical mass.
How is Ubuntu planning on overcoming this? They're not seriously considering using their vanilla apt repository as a source, are they? Few of the desktop apps I use would work worth a damn on my phone. Working off of the assumption that they have a plan for designed-for-mobile apps then they will be behind even Microsoft. As someone above mentioned... no OEM deals? So right from the start this will be a very niche OS unless that changes. Mindshare and recognition of their brand... that is going to be a tough one to get past even if they snag some OEM support.
Having competitors to IOS and Android is a good thing. I just can't envision Canonical spending years trying to gain back ground without any appreciable market share (and income from it) while either juggling the desktop or blowing it off altogether. IMO they jumped the shark on this one and it's going to bite them(no pun intended).
Yes, there is a little frustration in my post. Former Ubuntu user.
I'll believe in corporations having personhood when Texas executes one... - advocate_one
I think that was definitely part of the reason for Unity, the other I am pretty sure was for Touch PCs which are starting to gain some popularity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Linux was never going to capture that market - Joe User doesn't know what an OS is - but look at all the developers and powerusers that have moved to OS X. I'm certainly in that category. I tried Linux for years - as far back as when Mandriva was still Mandrake, and Red Hate wasn't "Enterprise" - and since, through Gentoo, Debian, etc. None of those systems ever really worked very well for me. I mean, sure, if all you need to do all day is surf the web, read e-mail, and compile C code with GCC, written in Emacs, Linux is great. But if you actually want to experiment with multimedia, plays games (REAL games), or have hardware work reliably (I've had FAR more driver nightmares on Linux systems, and not just graphics drivers...), it's just not in the race.
TODO: Something witty here...
You can get all of the functionality you just listed on a Nokia N900 running Maemo. I regularly use the terminal and ssh. I can run bash scripts and python v2.5.4 is installed. I have a GUI for OpenVPN which integrates nicely with the built-in wifi manager (although you can use the terminal and config files if you want). The problem is that the N900 is a dated platform. The GUI isn't as nice as what I've seen on Android and can be buggy at times. The device can be slow. I really wish that they could update the whole thing: hardware, operating system, and user interface while keeping the Linux base (and keeping the hardware keyboard!).
What can I say? They don't bother learning the territory they are trying to expand into and then complain when they fail? This isn't rocket surgery. If you want to sell games on Linux I can tell you everything you need to know right here.
1. Realize you aren't on Windows anymore. Adapt or die. Boxes are out. Custom installers are out.
2. Look at the distributions you think might be viable sales targets. Look which version of SDL is available on them and pick the lowest common version. Develop your game against that. If you end up running into library problems anyway just say screw it and static link on targets giving problems.
3. Setup repositories. One in .deb format will cover Debian, Ubuntu and all the splinters from that tree. Then one in .rpm/yum format to cover the rest. Have customers install a repo, not your game, make it one click. I know this is easy to do for Yum, Adobe certainly manages to pull it off and if those idiots can and you can't you suck and should exit software development.
4. Ensure ALL of your products are in the one set of repos so once you get a user to install access to your repos they SEE all of your products. Make sure they are all playable demos without a license key.
5. Don't go nuts with the DRM. Using license keys is ok, but overly clever copy protection is suicide with the vast differences in the underlying OS you will be up against. People hellbent of stealing will steal it, so don't annoy the folks who gave you their credit card first time they upgrade their kernel or go distro hopping.
Democrat delenda est
My dad is a programmer and my mom only uses a browser. But, no one that either of them talk to use Linux. Figuring out how to do stuff requires googling because no one they know (besides me) would have any ideas.
Really? My mom is a 70-year-old grandma and she picked up Fedora 15 on Gnome 3 with no hassle. She got about 20 minutes of training. The only support she has called me for was to help deal with the crappy Comcast webmail interface.
this signature has been removed due to a DMCA takedown notice
Sorry, but you can't get that app until you update your repositories
That sounds so worth it to get a few dozen sales.
TODO: Something witty here...
Please... I have only been using Gnome 3 shell for a few months after years and years and years of using Windows. There is no question, when I go back to Windows, it feels old, clunky and slow to me.
this signature has been removed due to a DMCA takedown notice
can I just run 'startx' from a console?
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
+many!
- Submitted over the course of 30 minutes from my Android SDK emulator...
Still doesn't change the fact that you're not purely beholden to what is on the Android market.
True enough, especially with the incentives for trial ware making Windows effectively free (as in beer) to the end user. The prevalence of bot nets tells me they're not thinking enough about viruses to make resistance to them a selling point.
But now we see the strategy of Canonical and why the (at the time) weird decisions were being made
Um duh, it was made for Instant-On web devices, it just so happens that tablets fall into that category nicely.
But let's look at each point individually because not everything you stated relates to Canonical's desire to go to Tablet's, it's more along the lines of, "it just happens to also help them out towards tablets."
1) The nasty split, isn't any more nasty than other things in the Linux world. Canonical wants Canonical stuff in Canonical's distro. GNOME 3 is still used in Unity, but just differently. It's hard for me to explain because I suck at summing things up, but trust me, Unity is GNOME 3 at the core and Unity runs more with how people predicted GNOME3 to be used more as a platform and less like a standard desktop. The main facet is that it removes a lot of upstream push from the GNOME community. Canonical wants their desktop to look the way they want it to look, not what GNOME developers want it to look like. You'll see this type of mentality in a lot of Ubuntu. Also, let's face it GNOME developers are difficult to work with at best. It's very easy to paint the main developers as being the pearly towers (metaphor for someone who dictates how things should happen, but have little to zero real-world experience to back up exactly why that's right.)
2) The choice to use Wayland over X boils down to the same debate that was had on xgl versus aiglx. Mark thinks running direct to the video card is a better method than the way X provides. This has been a common thing that comes up ooo, I'd say every five to six years. Someone comes up with a better way to run direct to the card and someone jumps on the band wagon. Usually there is just too much inertia to make the jump from X to the something else happen and we all go back to using X happily. There's a lot of misconception that Xorg (specifically) and X11 (in general) are bloated, slow, won't run well on older machines. X11 is a pretty hefty "standard," but not everything in it is in every implementation. There are multiple of X11 implementations (I'm given too, Google can help you see more) that target embedded systems that run quite well. Xorg implements a lot of stuff to keep backwards compatibility with older machines. Wayland doesn't. However, don't confuse that because just because it is implemented does not mean that it gets loaded if it is not needed. You aren't going to be using XRender when your video card offers the ability to use OpenGL pixmap to texture. The biggest problem with X is drivers (and that shouldn't surprise anyone) and the low quality those drivers exist in. That problem will not go away with Wayland. The idea is, and to me it's a bad bet, if we make the model more simple (remember the X11 "spec" is a pretty big tome) then vendors will be more incline to write better drivers since the model for those drivers is more simplistic. However, as bets go, that's immaterial to why Canonical wants to go Wayland. It really boils down to the fact that they want to do Window Decorations the way they want to do Window Decora
2) Wayland - X has way too much overhead and features for low-power mobile devices. Wayland keeps it nice and light.
I think you're exaggerating X11's flaws. My Zaurus ran X11 just fine. It seems to me that decisions not to go with X actually have more to do with control than anything else. In Apple and Google's case, I think there's fear of letting in all those X11 apps out there, and a desire to lock down the interface if desired (Apple probably didn't like the licensing either). In Ubuntu's case, I think the devs just want something more modern to hack on, even if it breaks compatibility, that they won't have to feel accountable to all of Linuxdom for hacking. I'm not happy about the choice, but X11 will be easy enough to install anyway.
It's important to remember that Maemo/MeeGo was basically a Debian system running X. The benefit of this is that you can run a whole host of Debian apps that require X11 with (almost) no trouble, on a mobile device. Some mobile modders install WebOS + X11 for pretty much the same reason. Yes, I know almost all the apps in the big repos weren't developed for mobile, but I'm sure you can "get the job done" with many of them.
A stable ARM build of Ubuntu, aimed at tablets, smartphones, etc., is a big win for freedom; I was rooting for Maemo to really catch on, and now maybe Ubuntu can become that "3rd mobile OS without Google/Apple restriction". Think of the number of apps that will suddenly become available on these devices that won't run on Android! When developers of these programs have a reason to target mobile platforms, I'm sure the look and feel will become more "mobile".
Right now, I'm working on a fork of a program that requires the hildon libraries, but otherwise runs and looks fine on a desktop computer running Debian. I'd love to be able to bring it to mobile devices, but right now I have to say, "Well it runs on MeeGo but that's basically dead." Building for Android/Cyanogenmod is a hassle I'd like to avoid, and will require a ton of effort given the nature of the program.
Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone.-rms
There will never be a year of the linux desktop but every year will be the year of the linux tablet. I can live with that
Good luck sometimes arrives disguised as bad
Um, it was obvious that Ubuntu had abandoned the desktop since Unity first poked its awkward, unfinished head up. Exactly how is Canonical's consistently snide and condescending response to its user base about this decision "open and collaborative"?
Now that we know that Unity will remain the "one true" Ubuntu, the distro is dead. Shuttleworth announced months earlier that Ubuntu had not made him enough money and that he was going to abandon it if things did not turn around pronto; now he's just chasing rainbows on the way out the GNU/Linux door.
I beta tested their touchscreen interface on my desktop for about 15 minutes. I provided no feedback and I will not be downgrading from Ubuntu 10.04: When it hits EOL I will either use Mint or Debian, depending what mood I'm in.
And now Microsoft is trying to do the same, but totally wrong way. As they get second glass idea for GUI (Metro) and what was designed for smartphone (does not work so well when starting to add more functions and applications... the Zune interface does not work and Metro start screen is hard to understand) and they slaps it to desktop computers and tablets....
To be fair to Metro, even Microsoft is not abiding by its own Metro guidelines.
If it were, the company brand names and the icons wouldn't have taken over the Metro icons or the Metro actions. It's like the people that came up with Windows Metro started out with some really great ideas about usability, but then were all suddenly killed and replaced by the marketing and the branding people.
It's like the 'Program files' folder interface all over again, but this time it''s just on smaller phone screen real estate.
Ok, I'll feed the troll. Because I just remembered something..... The N series wasn't preload Linux except the highest end workstations which offered RHEL as a hefty premium option. Most were FreeDOS, i.e. effectively no OS but they had to ship something to make Microsoft happy. (But there was no secret illegal tying deal, no per CPU shipped license fees, nope, no way) So basically the pitch was just No Microsoft Tax, but the price was higher. So if you knew the secret URL that usually wasn't even searchable from the Dell homepage, you could pay a premium to be able to say "Yea, but at least I didn't give Bill Gates any of my money." When the reality was almost certainly that Dell was paying the per CPU fee and simply skipping the part where they image the hard drive and apply the sticker.
The only advantage of the N series was that since they were intended to run Linux even if they didn't ship with it, you could look at them and then buy the same model number without the N and know there probably wouldn't be any hardware incompatibilities.
> Tracking device drivers and resolving conflicts? Really? Dude, 1993 called, it wants its status quo back.
Have YOU ever tried to do a clean install of Windows on a laptop? Hint, they don't even come with driver disks anymore so if the preload is lost or you want to get around the crapware or you want to do a clean load of a newer version than than was shipped you are in for an adventure. Meanwhile you can stick in a Linux disc and everything either 'just works' or you are in a world of pain far worse than Googling up a bunch of Windows device drivers. These days you usually win though.
> "unwashed masses derp derp
No, the disdain for end users comes from having done tech support. EVERYONE who has done tech support hates the end users. It just is. If you don't know that I envy you for not having to ever do it.
> The fact remains that the market has already decided that desktop Linux offers nothing they want.
Since the attempt hasn't really been made it is kinda hard to say the market has rejected it. And since the DoJ is powerless to stop Microsoft's predatory business practices (after how many attempts now?) it is hard to see the experiment being attempted in the near future.
Democrat delenda est
Agree with that. I have an Acer Iconia W500 with Kubuntu in it. You can get a very satisfactory tablet experience using the "Search" desktop and any of the KDE applications. Okular for example (PDF viewer and more) is one of the most finger-friendly applications. GTK3 based applications on the other hand are NOT finger friendly. One example (among many): the changes they made in the layout of scrollbars (they are nearly invisible until you touch a 3 pixel wide zone). I tried GS, Unity, XFCE and the only DE that isn't a pain to use with a touch interface is KDE (but it still isn't a touch-ready DE). To have a decent browsing experience you have to install an extension to Firefox (Grab and Drag). I still can't make multitouch work though (no 2-finger zoom).
La culpa no es del chancho...
Never once did a real major OEM offer up a PC preloaded with Linux at a price advantage over Windows.
Walmart with a reputation for ruthless bargaining with suppliers, enormous purchasing power and absolute dominance of big box retail spent about ten years trying to deliver a credible ---competitive --- OEM Linux alternative to OEM Windows.
Nothing ever came of it.
The economies of scale in OEM Windows with an installed base of perhaps one billion units were devastating.
Nobody even sold a dual boot, even as an option. That wouldn't have even cost them anything.
You have got to be kidding.
Boot Camp is an admisssion that you have to support Windows in the corporate market.
Retailers hate maintaining expensive dual inventory and support structures for the convenience of perhaps one percent of their customers.
Ordinary users don't want to maintain two operating systems, two software libraries and two skill sets.
Dual boot into Linux?
Doesn't sell worth s***t.
I used Windows exclusively until 2000 (the year and the version), it was a pain to use Windows within a few months of dual booting. But I guess I'm just a fanboi too who was too used to a better OS?
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
I just unlocked my phone and installed Ice Cream Sandwich on it. It's beautiful and fast. Pretty much the exact opposite of Unity. Unity is more like... you know when two ducks are fucking, and the mommy duck isn't entirely sure she wants to be involved in what's going on? Unity kind of reminds me of that. Except maybe a bit more awkward.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
...I just wish Nokia had had more of a clue and made more of Maemo open so we could see it running on more devices. It's an awesome system...or at least the Debian bits are. The Nokia bits...less so. So much potential though.....
Boo.
When it comes to Linux, fragmentation is inevitable. If you can't accept that, you are the one with a problem.
Erm...
I think you missed the OP's sarcasm.
"Fragmentation" doesn't describe a perfectly natural and often useful diversity in a single ecosystem. It's used to as a scary buzzword by people who dont understand what it really is to deride platforms they know nothing about. For sample, some people have black hair, others blonde, this would cause some to describe the human race as being "fragmented" when really it's genetic diversity we would be quite worse off without.
And yes, you're right, the same kind of diversity is inherent in Linux and this is a good thing(TM).
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
And even that wasn't the low end. In the "beginning" we used X comfortably on 8MB Sun3s. A 4MB Sun3 was a bit cramped, with the OS (SunOS) and a few applications it would start swapping (i.e. drive whole programs to disk) to the point that you felt the pain. With 8MB it was quite usable however. The CPUs where what, 15-16 MHz?
Stefan Axelsson
already can run python, perl and a few others ... not sure about python because I did not try it, but in Perl you can write android GUI-s, too
http://code.google.com/p/android-scripting/
not yet ready to write apps you can put in the Android market, but it's getting there
Except that using Apple stuff is seen as cool, so everybody think that they must be dumb to not get it. On the other hand, without the heavy marketing around Apple product, Linux/BSD/etc based system are all seen as unsuitable and unusable, even when they offer different advantages.
As you say, people do have hardware problem on windows too, but no one talk about it, because "that's normal". People do have issues because the system is too complex, or because they were not trained or any reasons, but no one complains. On free software, every small issue is seen as the end of the world, not because that's a issue, but because that's a non familiar issue, and because there is no social pressure from everybody to say "this is better" ( ie, not like Apple's product ).
I have seen this as work, the setup of VPN was a nightmare on iphone ( 3 differents passwords needed + problem due to wifi etc ). And yet, people were happy. If we had put just half of the problem on another phone or system, people would have loudly complained.
The most difficult installation was a network printer. I had to do System, Administration, Printing, Add, Network Printer, Find and it found the printer, downloaded the drivers and set it up. There was CD with the drivers for Windows in the box.
I have no great desire to defend Windows, but I'm pretty sure that you can download drivers for Windows as well as Linux for most hardware. The CD would be handy if, for instance, you were trying to set up a wireless network card and you didn't have wired internet access.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
No, the disdain for end users comes from having done tech support. EVERYONE who has done tech support hates the end users. It just is. If you don't know that I envy you for not having to ever do it.
If it wasn't for end users you wouldn't have had a job in the first place. I suppose you're one of those "I'm such a fucking genius that it's beneath me to do tech support" types who can't get a better job because they have no experience, skills, talent or gumption, but do have a degree in IT or something.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Phew, it's fortunate that there's only one version of Windows and people don't have to decide between Windows XP Pro 64 and Windows 8 Home Ultra Pro for ARM.
Windows 8 wasn't an option whehn XP was around, and XP won't be an option by the time Windows 8 is released.
At least for consumers, there is only ever really one version of Windows available.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
And fortunate that people do not have to select between several mobile phone plan who are all a variation of "we are gonna screw you and be expensive", or fortunate there is one only brand of cars, food and stuff like that.
On the other hand, parent is right, most people do not care about choice outside of their area of expertise ( well, until it is too late usually, ie when they are screwed without knowing why ), and since most people grow thinking "computer is hard", they fear computer more due to choice ( "ie, I need to make a decision, but people told me this is hard, omg, OMG OMG !!!!" ).
But that miss the point completely about free software. They are not here to offer choice, nor to save people from commercial company. They are here because people think colleboration work better, because commercialisation of knowledge are bad for humanity in general. Ie, they are here to create a pool of common knowledge under the form of source code.
The rest is a side effect, or a consequence of the aformentioned knowledge. No one say "I am gonna do free software because I will be able to create a great product for people who do not care about it". They more say "Using this, I can have a good product for less money" ( like android ). To this date, making customer pay is the best option to get ressources ( having customer being end users, or being people who pay to show adverisement ). And that's hard to make some of them pay when you do not force them.
Developping for someone requires ressources. Someone has to do the work, and if that's not end users and customer, they have to give something to let you do the job.
For commercial software, that's usually money. Simple, understood by everybody.
For free software, that's contribution, ie people do the work, share libraries, report bugs, etc. That's a different kind of economy. Everybody could have the money needed ( aka time, and knowledge ), but most people do not want. Too bad for them.
I'd love to see this running on a Kindle.
Unless you are a newbie you run Vanille debian on everything (Linux (unless you are the masochistic RPM type)). "Debian is only for nerds..." it is so hard to configure..." whine.. whine.. whine.." Thats all just bullshit. Debian is not significantly harder to configure and use. On the other hand it is a LOT more stable and predictable. and doesn't suffer from "the fad og the month syndrome" like Ubuntu.
I'm typing this on a Dell N-series laptop that came with Ubuntu pre-installed. I bought the most expensive Linux preloaded laptop Dell would sell me, complete with all the options they offered (including things like the insurance), partly to make the point to Dell that not everyone who buys a Linux preloaded machine is aiming to cheap out. I find it interesting that I cannot find numbers from Dell on how much they actually made (on a like-for-like) basis from the Ubuntu preloaded N series laptops as compared to the Windows laptops with the same hardware; I do wonder if they found that there is actually a niche market for them, in which they could make money, but chose to serve the bulk market instead.
I appear to have a blog. Odd.