Slashdot Mirror


Ubuntu Asks Users To Pay What They Want

New submitter major_lima sends this excerpt from Ars: "When a typical user downloads Ubuntu for free and installs it on a computer with a Windows license that the user did pay for, Canonical gets nothing in the form of payment. There's nothing wrong with that — this is the open source world, after all, and many people contribute to Ubuntu with code rather than money. But starting this week, Canonical is presenting desktop OS downloaders with an optional donation form. ... 'Pay what you think it's worth,' and 'Show Ubuntu some love' are among the messages users will see, and downloaders can direct their donations to specific parts of Ubuntu development. ... Once you donate, the Ubuntu desktop starts downloading. Or, you can just skip the donation and download the OS for free, just as you always could. For some reason, the donation page is not presented to Ubuntu Server users."

280 comments

  1. Amazon ads by Fwipp · · Score: 1

    This doesn't get you out of the Amazon partnership, does it?

    1. Re:Amazon ads by Knuckles · · Score: 4, Informative

      No need to, you can turn it off anyway, in Privacy settings.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    2. Re:Amazon ads by pointyhat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think you got it wrong: "you should be able to turn it on in the privacy settings". Oh no wait, that's not how it works these days - privacy is opt in!

    3. Re:Amazon ads by fredprado · · Score: 1

      Which is basically the same thing, unless "opting in" is made difficult, or hidden in some way, otherwise the discussion about opt in or opt out is pointless.

    4. Re:Amazon ads by MozeeToby · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Personal information is the currency used to buy a lot of products these days. I've never paid Google a dime, but I've gotten many hundreds, if not thousands of dollars worth of value out of their products and services; in exchange I give them an amount of personal data that they use to present me with ads.

    5. Re:Amazon ads by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      It's not released yet, you know.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    6. Re:Amazon ads by pointyhat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The argument is definitely not moot. Opt-in vs Opt-out are completely different as there are opportunities for the opt in situation to occur before you get a chance to opt-out. Asking the user up front is the best approach (even Microsoft do this with Windows 8).

    7. Re:Amazon ads by Fwipp · · Score: 1

      Ah, thanks for the info. :)

    8. Re:Amazon ads by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      It also depends on where the option is coming from. Just by asking somebody if wants to opt in, you are already advertising, so you might as well cut to the chase, and then let him opt out.

    9. Re:Amazon ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So for Ubuntu opt-in and opt-out is the same. Things are slowly but surely falling into place...

    10. Re:Amazon ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but it damn well should.

      You sell something for real money, or you give it away for free with advertising revenue, but never, ever both. Don't turn software into another cable TV.

    11. Re:Amazon ads by SolitaryMan · · Score: 1

      What if you are not even aware of the option? I'd argue that this covers the majority of cases and this is exactly why companies prefer opt-out.

      --
      May Peace Prevail On Earth
    12. Re:Amazon ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The argument is definitely not moot. Opt-in vs Opt-out are completely different as there are opportunities for the opt in situation to occur before you get a chance to opt-out. Asking the user up front is the best approach (even Microsoft do this with Windows 8).

      In Canada, Rogers Communications changed the terms of service back in the early 1990s, if I recall, forcing an explicit opt-out of their channel content changes which garnered the term 'negative billing." It was opt-in by default rather than opt-out. I use Ubuntu Linux (64-bit) desktop edition for almost 6 months and from an end-user perspective it is intuitive, easy-to-use, and recognizes the notebook hardware including peripherals out-of-the-box with one exception...I have to download, compile, and install a driver to support my Bluetooth keyboard and mouse sharing a single USB dongle; yet had I used separate dongles no additional software was necessary. I give Ubuntu Linux 4.5 out of 5 stars. On my servers I remain firmly with Debian GNU/Linux.

    13. Re:Amazon ads by fredprado · · Score: 1
      That is why I said:

      unless it is made difficult, or hidden in some way

    14. Re:Amazon ads by fredprado · · Score: 1

      Sure, if the system starts to send your data before you are able to opt-out you have a point, but that is a problem of implementation, not of some intrinsic difference between both approaches.

    15. Re:Amazon ads by SolitaryMan · · Score: 2

      There is a difference between:

      • I don't know there is an option.
      • I know there is an option, but I can't find it (given up).

      It may be right there, easy to find, but if you are simply unaware of the situation (like with phoning home, for example), then it is still "hidden".

      The only acceptable (yet obtrusive) way to handle this is if when you run it for the first time it will pop up a dialog asking you, are you agree to this or that thing and have the option that favors you selected by default. Still, many people won't read the crap (see EULAs), but now nobody can say you were not given a choice.

      --
      May Peace Prevail On Earth
  2. Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by macromorgan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just a thought... I still wish Cannonical would have put its resources towards helping make Gnome Shell better as opposed to taking its ball and going home.

    1. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Desler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah because the GNOME people are well-known for collaborating with others and being open to criticism. Oh wait... Why should anyone want to work with a project whose team is filled with a bunch of pigheaded people to whom NIH syndrome is a way of life?

    2. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by binarylarry · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I was a unity hater as well. But 12.10's Unity interface is pretty fantastic (I've been running the beta for a little over a week).

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    3. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by MrEricSir · · Score: 1

      What makes you think they didn't try to work with the Gnome folks?

      --
      There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    4. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Merk42 · · Score: 1

      That's exactly how Unity was born. Canonical knew GNOME was planning big things for 3.0, so they wanted to contribute with ideas/code. GNOME wouldn't let them (and/or some ideas were diametrically opposed), so Canonical made Unity.

    5. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by X0563511 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd rather they took BOTH out back and shot them.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    6. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is what you get when you have a system where there's no configurability, and everything has to be hard-coded one way only: if you want to do anything slightly different, you have to fork the whole project.

      If they had just gone with KDE instead, they could have made their own "plasma" variant or had a different set of configuration options (and even added new features selectable in the configuration options), and the KDE team would have been happy to accept these changes for inclusion.

    7. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that's a great idea. Did they include an option to fund that? Because I'd totally be in on funding it.

    8. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by InvisibleClergy · · Score: 1

      Does it still break integration with VirtualBox?

    9. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Could you post about your experience with 12.10 in more detail? What changed that made you go from hating to liking?

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    10. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That argument would have made sense if Ubuntu had switched to another standard system, like KDE, Xfce, or whatever. But they went on making their own. If there's one company who cannot complain to others about NIH syndrome, it's Canonical.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    11. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone were to start a "Ubuntu -Unity +Gnome 2" kickstarter, it would probably raise $1M overnight.

    12. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah... the Unity side-thread. Okay, let's go with it.

      Funny thing, just a little while ago I listened to Shuttleworth's 2006 Google Talks lecture. It's mostly nostalgic easy-listening. But what caught my attention was when he said what he was /really/ interested in is doing research & development on the desktop interface. Just that this would have to wait till the Ubuntu project was well-sorted.

      Yeah. Guess we're there now. And I guess it's really not going to go away.

      But that's okay, because Xubuntu is fabulous.

    13. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given what they did with unity, it's probably better that they left Gnome-shell alone. I ditched Unity for Gnome-shell first chance I got. It completely changed my work flow, and it's all for the better.

    14. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by binarylarry · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'd say the most immediate change was the performance. Unity just performed horrifically for me before and I use fairly high end hardware (Intel i7 series processors, Nvidia GPUs, etc). That was a huge turn off.

      I also found that the older Unity had all kinds of odd usability oddities and problems (sometimes various window management features didn't work, parts of unity would crash and I'd have to logout or reboot, etc).

      So it was essentially a shuddering clusterfuck that actually impeded my work.

      So far the new version is fast, just works and most importantly stays out of my way. Most of the time I don't see much OS UI, just my apps (which is how things should be IMO).

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    15. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by gfxguy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Thanks. It still doesn't seem usable (from my perspective). It wasn't bugs, it was design... I like seeing several apps at once, and I have a large screen to accomodate it... Unitiy just doesn't seem designed for large screens.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    16. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by maxdread · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As a counter point, if they found that Gnome was suddenly going in a direction that didn't serve their or their users needs and the Gnome team refused to work with them it makes sense to switch correct?

      Now, the same problem they ran into with the Gnome team can easily happen with the above projects, they have little say in how they evolve and in which direction they go and it simply leaves them open to being screwed with again the future. It makes a lot of sense to simply run with your own project.

    17. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by bejiitas_wrath · · Score: 1

      There are Virtualbox guest additions available in the Ubuntu 12.10 repositories that allow integration with Virtualbox. But Ubuntu 12.10 with Unity is very slow in Virtualbox compared to Linux Mint 13 or Windows 7/8. Better to run Xubuntu instead.

      --
      liberare massarum ex ignorantia, clausa descendit molestie.
    18. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      I use a dell 30" monitor running at 2560x1600

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    19. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Galestar · · Score: 1

      I thought the point of open source was that anyone can fork it and roll their own. No-one should be beholden to their upstream source. This is what Canonical did, why do they flak for it? It still needs some work (re:customization), but I for one find Unity pretty slick.

      --
      AccountKiller
    20. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, isn't this is why Linux Mint is forking Gnome into their own desktop interface? Isn't it called Cinnamon?

    21. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by gfxguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My work environment has at least three applications open (also on a 30" monitor); they do not even overlap, but fit perfectly together and fill the screen (I am anal retentive that way). Unity simply wouldn't work.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    22. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insightful? LOL. Shills.

    23. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      they are getting flak not for forking or rolling their own but for putting an immature gui on most used linux desktop, they are getting flax for the same thing gnome has as well not listening to users and having a sever case of NIH syndrome.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    24. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They got flack for it largely because of how incompetent the roll out was. They slipped in what was at the time, at best, an alpha UI without warning people they were including alpha code. You couldn't move the bar, so that meant I had to change the primary desktop from my right monitor to my left monitor. Otherwise I couldn't access it when I needed to. Sometimes I would click on an icon and the bar would close and other times it would open.

      The whole thing was a mess. But, the nail in the coffin is that I had 2 monitors at the time. A 24" 1920x1200 and a 22" 1680x1050, and I could afford to waste a few measly pixels.

      Also, Ubuntu had tons of bugs that they were ignoring fixing so they could bring us this unity crap. Personally, I'll stick with Linux Cinnamon or MATE, thank you very much, the developer there at least understands that people need to be able to use their OS.

    25. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by greg1104 · · Score: 1

      Huh, a fork that's "Ubuntu -Unity +Gnome 2"? What a crazy and brand new idea. I bet that would overtake Ubuntu at the top of the distrowatch rankings quite fast too.

    26. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, and this guy gets moderated down.

      Shills, they're everywhere. A fucking invasion. Idiots.

    27. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by neonmonk · · Score: 1

      Or, you know, you could select "Gnome Classic" when logging in?

      http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/classicgnome

    28. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      Actually, I haven't tried with multiple monitors. I just use one big monitor.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    29. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      Well he's asking about pretty obscure configurations (dual video card and 4 monitors) and being a huge douche about it.

      Douche Shill

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    30. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      I haven't noticed anything but my VM usage is pretty light (I occasionally fire up a Windows VM)

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    31. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1

      Why? Mint Linux is available right now. No $1M needed.

    32. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Eythian · · Score: 1

      You could move the windows so that they don't overlap, but instead fit perfectly together and fill the screen in Unity.

    33. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canonical wanted to change tons of things in retarded ways and they wanted the Gnome developers to do it for free. I'm shocked that the Gnome developers didn't just bend over and take it.

    34. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by gfxguy · · Score: 2

      But then the unified menu doesn't work well because I also like sloppy focus (focus follows mouse). I'm not just bitching - I tried out 11.04 for two months - that's a really fair test, and it just didn't work for me; I tried to conform and just get accustomed to it, and just couldn't. For the same reasons I dislike the Mac UI, too.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    35. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can't run a major desktop environment if you don't have control of it

    36. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but KDE is fugly and cluttered, Ubuntu has said they want something stylish and elegant like the Mac

    37. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Eythian · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, I turned off the unified menu because I use FFM also. The rest of it I quite like.

    38. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Turksarama · · Score: 1

      Has it occurred to you that Ubuntu is the most used linux distro BECAUSE it has an immature GUI? Most users are not power users.

    39. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      sounds like you just want a tiling window manager? That isn't one of unity's goals AFAIK.

      What do you currently use? (I'm asking in earnest).

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    40. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have multiple applications open and concurrently displayed on my 22-inch LCD 1080x768 resolution monitor.

    41. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shill!

    42. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hating on a positive comment? LOL. Shills.

    43. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't switching Ubuntu to either of those desktop environments been redundant since there's already Kubuntu and Xubuntu for folks who want them?

    44. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by maugle · · Score: 1

      I've been using VirtualBox over several versions of Ubuntu (I'm currently using 12.04), and I've never noticed any problems.

    45. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed - if you don't have NIH syndrome then you just fork the last version of Gnome you liked and adapt it. Dropping the whole thing and starting from scratch is a reach at trying to be the next big thing.

        There's noyhing wrong with that.

      But you have to get it right if you're going to make such a leap. I think they gambled wrong. At least of the people I've discussed this with Gnome2 is preferable to both Gnome Shell and Unity. For anyone that spends all day on a desktop computer (graphic designers, audio engineers, software developers, IT administrators, the list goes on) the "universal interface" is a hindrance. A touch-friendly interface doesn't give us the freedom and capabilities the old desktop paradigm did.

      We want our choice. I love Ubuntu but I won't use Unity.

    46. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Canonical biggest mistake was not anything to do with gui's or distribution it was a failure to shift to a franchise collective model and grow the service and support model globally, with the parent focusing distribution maintenance and certification systems, as well as fiscal and marketing management. It should have sought partners to expand Ubuntu and by substantively expending it's contribution base.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    47. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's my thinking. Being sick of the limited usefulness of Gnome Shell and Unity, I finally took the plunge and tried KDE. After a lot of tinkering with the settings, it turns out it's a pretty usable piece of work. Canonical could have taken 1/10th the effort they put into Unity, and put it into KDE, and come out far ahead.

    48. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think all people complaining about tjis should learn to use the keyboard shortcuts, which are dramatically better than in gnome 2. I find I rarely touch the mouse in Unisty, so screen size deosn't matter. HUD rocks for most apps. The only complaint I still have is that stupid global menu. I wish they made an option to only use it for fullscreen apps (where it is usefull because it will save some space).

    49. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      But then the unified menu doesn't work well because I also like sloppy focus

      I got that by installing gnome-tweak-tool.

    50. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Multiple differing video cards worked seamlessly in Windows 98 SE. It's retarded than 13 years later this is considered to be a special feature on Linux. I'm sure you're a dumb fuck taking pride in your OS flexibility but sticking your head in the sand when something is not about filesystems, using an amateur tiling windows manager or writing perl scripts. Using more than one or two screens : who would do that? Right. Under Windows, you check a box, with Linux, you give up and pretend that if it doesn't work it's because you didn't need it.

    51. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Exactly my point. A bunch of whiners are always making stupid complaints like "KDE is ugly" (I don't think so, but whatever), yet it can be configured to look like whatever you want it to look like, without having to fork the whole project. It'd be a whole lot easier to make a new theme for KDE and tweak some behaviors rather than build that Unity shell up from scratch (yes, I realize it uses the Gnome libraries).

    52. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      LOL writing perl scripts

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    53. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Not a surprise actually. While I myself like Unity, it is unfortunately quite resource-hungry.

    54. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it still break integration with VirtualBox?

      For me, Virtualbox and Ubuntu 12.04 works correctly. I use Virtualbox on a daily basis, 8 hours a day.

    55. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use Unsettings http://www.florian-diesch.de/software/unsettings/

      BTW Unity on 12.04 or 12.10 is very differente from Unity on 11.04.

    56. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Here's a link to the talk you are probably talking about (if someone wants to watch it). Google generally holds pretty interesting lectures, so people might wanna check the current AtGoogleTalks channel, too.

    57. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they had just gone with KDE instead, they could have made their own "plasma" variant or had a different set of configuration options (and even added new features selectable in the configuration options), and the KDE team would have been happy to accept these changes for inclusion.

      You do! Kubuntu 12.04 LTS. Great desktop with Ubuntu under the hood. Been using it for years (10.4) and just plain works!

    58. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Kubuntu is pretty well-known as being not well maintained due to lack of developers; basically, someone just slapped the vanilla KDE packages on top of Ubuntu and called it "done". It works, but it's not an official release at all (it is not maintained at all by Canonical, only a volunteer), and could really be a lot better.

      If you want Ubuntu under the hood with KDE, Linux Mint KDE Edition is a better choice.

    59. Re:Can I Fund Unity a Negative Amount? by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Just generic XFCE; I have make shortcuts to place and size windows just right for various work flows, although I'm annoyed at how many programs now ignore geometry requests (web browsers, in particular).

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
  3. I wonder how much of this will go upstream? by pointyhat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder how much of this cash will go to the real heroes i.e. upstream people like Debian? Canonical is just a reseller/ISV as they call them in the market.

    1. Re:I wonder how much of this will go upstream? by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 3, Informative

      I assume most of it goes to someone else, seeing how the bottom option is basically a "give it to Canonical" option. But with their defaults, they appear to want you to give a little to everyone.

    2. Re:I wonder how much of this will go upstream? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you want, you can always donate $$$ directly to Debian and some associated free software like PostgreSQL or FFmpeg. These donations are not used to pay for developer time. They are generally used to reimburse some of the travel costs associated with things like Debconf for the poorer developers, hardware costs for developer machines (something more recent) etc.

      http://www.spi-inc.org/donations/

      Debian is just one of the members of SPI. There are other software that benefits too,

      http://www.spi-inc.org/projects/

      And if you are suspicious that SPI is not associated with Debian, just look at Debian's donations page and be happy.

      http://www.debian.org/donations

      Cheers!
      Anonymous Debian Dev.

      PS. $$$ is not a big problem for Debian (as everything is either sponsored or volunteered), but it is always welcome.

    3. Re:I wonder how much of this will go upstream? by AvitarX · · Score: 2

      I thought they were pretty big on desktop projects. Upstart was pretty popular for a spell with a few distros (though not as much anymore), also the xwindows replacement I believe they are funding.

      additionally unity (love it or hate it) is an ubuntu project, and they contribute to sub sonic.

      linux is more than a kernel, and I would suspect the kernel met their needs 5 years ago, they are contributing upstream and making their own projects in the user space.

      this myth that ubuntu does nothing is annoying and wrong, just as would be true if one said that about fedora (not red hat), slackware, debian, etc.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    4. Re:I wonder how much of this will go upstream? by westlake · · Score: 1

      I wonder how much of this cash will go to the real heroes i.e. upstream people like Debian? Canonical is just a reseller/ISV as they call them in the market.

      But a "reseller" who is serious about OEM partnerships and mass market adoption --- with a distribution that accounts for most of what little market share Linux can plausibly claim as a desktop client OS.

      If an OS is to be more than a purely intellectual exercise, then distribution --- building a critical mass of users --- is essential.

    5. Re:I wonder how much of this will go upstream? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed, if Ubuntu did nothing, I would probably still be using it. It's the annoying incompetent crap that they do that caused me to stop using it.

    6. Re:I wonder how much of this will go upstream? by Yvanhoe · · Score: 2

      Canonical is the missing link, the "last mile" we have been wishing for decades in the linux world. Yes, they "only" pickup the good packages, they "only" make sure that your experience is smooth, and they "only" do some marketing. And these things are the "only" things that linux was lacking to become a success on desktops/laptops

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    7. Re:I wonder how much of this will go upstream? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want, you can always donate $$$ directly to Debian and some associated free software like PostgreSQL or FFmpeg.

      And if you choose not to financially support a particular project you could make a donation to the Free Software Foundation (http://www.fsf.org) or the Electronic Frontier Foundation (http://www.eff.org). If I tallied the cost of equivalent commercial software that I use on a daily basis the price tag would be CAD2500.00 just for the operating system, programming languages, and a select cadre of productivity applications. The application for LaTeX alone is worth approximately CAD475.00 when compared to commercially-available similar applications.

    8. Re:I wonder how much of this will go upstream? by wild_oscar · · Score: 1

      Well, if it helps paying the salary of a canonical developer who commits to upstream, that's a direct benefit right there!

    9. Re:I wonder how much of this will go upstream? by helix2301 · · Score: 1

      I agree this I think is just another way for them to make revenues. Just like Fedora thats red hats way of giving to the open source community but it's basically to pacify cause it's not real red hat.

    10. Re:I wonder how much of this will go upstream? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is exactly why I use Debian and Debian only. I find Ubuntu and it's variants too unstable and squarely for my liking.

    11. Re:I wonder how much of this will go upstream? by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      You don't have to wonder. They have breakdown where you can specify where your $$ go: graphics, desktop UI, gaming, Debian/upstream, *buntu variants, etc.

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
  4. I'm OK with this by helixcode123 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I use it daily for my work and the kid's machine runs it. I'll drop them some $$$ next time.

    --

    In a band? Use WheresTheGig for free.

    1. Re:I'm OK with this by skrite · · Score: 1

      i'm ok with it too. My wife, two teen boys and myself use ubuntu (actually lubuntu) exclusively in our house, and i use ubuntu-server on 4 machines at work. I will drop them some love, so to speak.

    2. Re:I'm OK with this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use it on my old laptop. I too would drop some $$$.

    3. Re:I'm OK with this by mythix · · Score: 1

      I have been running Ubuntu for a couple of years now, and am still happy with it. When they introduced Unity, I tried out some other shells and stuck with KDE, since it had most features, and was not too sluggish on my beast of a company laptop... for these years of happy computing, I was very glad to donate a tenner to the Ubuntu people as soon as I saw the donation was online. I still payed less then 10% of what I would pay for windows... I very much like the system they use, ie: assigning money to parts of the development you would like to see improvement on. I can only hope it will also be invested in the posts I choose, and god help me, not in Unity...

  5. I just hope they don't get discouraged by KingSkippus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I just hope they don't get discouraged at the number of downloads and installations that don't receive donations. I suspect that a lot of people are like me--they don't mind throwing a few bucks their way (or even a few dozen), but we tend to install, reinstall, set up virtual machines, install yet again, and so on across dozens of machines. I might give a one-off donation, but I'm not going to donate every time I install a copy of Ubuntu.

    That's one of the things that's so damn frustrating about Windows and why Ubuntu (or really, any Linux distribution) is so useful. Windows is an awesome OS and I don't mind paying the license fee to run it, but I don't have a few thousand dollars to install it on each of my hobbyist VMs I use for development and testing stuff. Back in the days when I could just use my product code to install it willy-nilly on a few dozen machines, each of which I probably run for a few days and then reinstall for some new reason, it's not that big a deal. But now that everything phones home and nags the hell out of you and denies you service to what you bought, it's not such an appealing option. Hopefully Microsoft will someday realize that they're actively driving people like me away from Windows, but until then, I'll happily cast my lot with Ubuntu instead.

    1. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Get an MSDN OS subscription.

    2. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      For $700, which only lasts 12 months, and then you have to throw down another $500 every year to keep it up? That's still an absolute shit solution compared to what we could do with Windows XP (and earlier), and can do even easier with the likes of Linux distros such as Ubuntu.

    3. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by mishu2065 · · Score: 1

      ...but we tend to install, reinstall, set up virtual machines, install yet again, and so on across dozens of machines.

      And download the ISO every time?

    4. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's one of the things that's so damn frustrating about Windows and why Ubuntu (or really, any Linux distribution) is so useful. Windows is an awesome OS and I don't mind paying the license fee to run it, but I don't have a few thousand dollars to install it on each of my hobbyist VMs I use for development and testing stuff.

      You don't pay few thousand. You pay few hundred. MSDN OS subscription gets you unlimited installs for development and testing purposes. They just tell you not to activate the OS if you reinstall the images all the time.

      http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/buy.aspx

      $700 gives you ALL supported versions of windows to install and developer and test with in your VMs or real machines all you like. And no, you DO NOT have to pay this amount each year - the software you gain during subscription is forever valid. You don't get access to new software though until you pony up for renewal or new subscription.

      And dev tools are mostly FREE (as in beer) from MS. Windows SDK 7.1 has VS C++ 2010 compilers. Free download.

      PS. I only run Windows under KVM in Debian when necessary to compile software for Windows users. I do pay for that MSDN subscription.

    5. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      you beat me to it...

      MSDN is awesome for devs. Just spun up 4 vm's with server 2008 today. 700 bucks for all the OS's 1000 bucks comes with visual studio.

      MSDN is designed for 'dev and test'. Think it is something like 5 or 10 copies of each OS with keys. You can call them up and get more.

      However, for someone who is just messing around at home, even 700 bucks is a steep price to pay.

      If I could afford it I would get the vs ultimate msdn. That code rewind thing is pretty freeking cool. However it is not 4000 dollars cool... But I dont have the cash so I stick with the 'free' open source stuff.

    6. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Especially for hobbyist developers who won't even make enough to make that first $700 or the cost of 2+ additional licenses worth the money, and yet having those extra VMs might actually be very much so worth it for that hobbyist.

      Sure, not such an issue if you're a business with the money to pay for it, or just have enough coming in to blow on it, but for a hobbyist that doesn't find it worth it to put that money in, it's rape compared to just hoping XP and Linux distros will cover your ass well enough (nevermind if you lose your couple legitimate VMs due to some issue such as hard drive failure and all of the sudden, you can't use your license key that you did legitimately spend money on already...)

    7. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Before you embark on anything, consider this:

      It sounds like you need the Microsoft Partner Action Pack. Just sign up as a basic partner (no entry requirements) then buy the Action Pack here: https://mspartner.microsoft.com/en/uk/Pages/Membership/action-pack-subscriptions.aspx - you know you want to. It makes sense. You even get lots of free training and discounts to sweeten the deal and get embedded further into the ecosystem.

      The moment you start promoting this stuff, people want you to use your new skills to help them. A few years down the line, you've nailed it job-wise thanks to your new skill set and have a deployed SQL 2008 instance for your favourite client which has cost them £32000GBP in licenses per machine (not terrible). They are super-happy as it's saved them a fuck load on Oracle and it requires only one DBA. Then the CIO comes to you and asks about SQL 2012 upgrades so they can use the new failover/replication stuff. You do the research, then realise they fuck you over by changing it from physical CPUs licenses to cores, resulting in your cash efficient 12-core Xeons turning into another order of magnitude of cost: £386,000 per server! You phone your partner rep up they say "use Azure" which is fuck all use if your data volume is in the TiB space, so it's bend over and take it or spend a year rewriting it all (you know because you wrote most of the app in T-SQL because it was promoted as the "best way of doing things").

      This is a cautionary tale as we are as above. Not only that the license audit legal hounds are upon us and are making sure they bleed us dry or at least drag us through the courts to make a few notes even though we're compliant. Guilty until proven innocent.

      Seriously, just use Debian/Ubuntu (and PostgreSQL) and avoid this shit completely.

      Posted anonymously as we'll probably get sued. Stallman was ALWAYS fucking right. Listen to the guy.

    8. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      MSDN is awesome for devs

      Paying $700 for an operating system that does essentially nothing out of the box is the height of ridiculousness. It's monopoly power at its worst.

    9. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by aliquis · · Score: 1

      It do a lot. It's just that there's other alternatives which do a similar thing for free.

      What other software do you run which do more than Windows do? Just for comparision ..

      Also macs cost more than the hardware cost to.

    10. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Really? I only pay 250 a year. Some serious misinformation here. I find tons of these kinds of misrepresentations of the truth when the question of MS vs Linux comes up around here and the vast majority of them are from the Linux fanboi camp.

    11. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where the hell do you get VS Ultimate for $4000? The VS Premium, sure, but not Ultimate. Ultimate is in the $10k range.

      Pro: $500 (used to be more like $700), or $1000 with MSDN.
      Premium: $5000 ($4000 if you shop around), MSDN comes with it no matter what
      Ultimate: $12k ($10k if you shop around), MSDN comes with it no matter what, and it's the "kitchen sink" MSDN with old versions and whatnot.
      (All prices are per-seat. Yes, that's $12k per seat.)

      VS is a really nice IDE. (But don't bother trying to convince the Linux guys of that.) I'm just not sure it's worth what they're charging for it. Most people could use the Express version, except there's no VS Express. It's VC# Express, VB Express, ASP.Net Express, and so on. When you break it into eleventy billion pieces, it ceases to be useful. So to get a useful version, the minimum price is $500, and that's just not going to be worth it to a hobbyist. Especially not with platform lock-in.

      Full disclosure: I work with VS 2010 Premium every day of my working life. I like it, but only if my company pays for it. SQL Server is also good, but the same caveat applies.

    12. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by aliquis · · Score: 0

      I fetched some iso to /dev/null just because some US college kid had tried and failed like three times before and got shitty speeds (from his school?) and was just about to finish.

      He had 15 seconds less so I decided it would be cool to finish before him. Sadly I had to cancel and change the url because he was downloading the CD image rather then the DVD image so I finished later =P

      It felt rather wasteful when I tried whatever a download for me from the US mirror he used would actually fail to find out whatever the trouble was at his end or not (considering that passed the Atlantic to here in Sweden just to also be dumped to /dev/null for just checking whatever it would finish or not. Sunet among others host the images (it was a openSUSE image.)

    13. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/less/left/

    14. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by thegrassyknowl · · Score: 1

      VS is a really nice IDE. (But don't bother trying to convince the Linux guys of that.) I'm just not sure it's worth what they're charging for it. Most people could use the Express version, except there's no VS Express. It's VC# Express, VB Express, ASP.Net Express, and so on. When you break it into eleventy billion pieces, it ceases to be useful. So to get a useful version, the minimum price is $500, and that's just not going to be worth it to a hobbyist. Especially not with platform lock-in.

      VS is a really nice IDE unless you have used /anything/ else, Windows or otherwise. Don't give me that "Linux guys" crap. Everything you like about VS either happens by default in other tools or can be added with scripts.

      VS does, however, include one of the best GUI debuggers I have ever used and that alone is worth money to me.

      --
      I drink to make other people interesting!
    15. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      700 isn't for an OS. The fact of the matter is that people here don't know shit about Microsoft's professional programs. MSDN? For what? If this guy just wants licenses for test VMs and such he can subscribe to MicroSoft Technet and get installs for just about every piece of software that MS makes available. The only one I don't see on the list is VS. Any current desktop OS, server OS, BI suites, Office (including OS X), other tools and apps. Not 700 but 350 for the first year and about half the time MS has a voucher to wave the first year fee to make it the same prices as a renewal. That's 250 dollars for nearly every bit of currently supported software the MS offers.
       
      You guys have no clue what is and is not available. The level of understanding around here betrays the facts behind who is and is not professionals.

    16. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MSDN cost: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/buy.aspx

      MS ActionPack info: https://mspartner.microsoft.com/en/hk/Pages/Membership/action-pack-subscriptions.aspx

      Estimate of costs (about midway down): http://rcpmag.com/articles/2011/03/09/microsoft-partner-network-cost.aspx

    17. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're probably a TechNet subscriber. TechNet is usually $249/year. MSDN is twice as expensive, but my employer pays for may MSDN subscription. Before I had this job, I had TechNet for about four years. Still nothing beats the value/price of free/libre/open source software.

    18. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by El_Oscuro · · Score: 2

      License cost is not just important for someone messing around at home. It can have a profound impact on large corporations too. There it is not so much the cost of the license itself, but the cost of procuring and managing them. With Server 2008, you have to have install and configure "activation servers". WTF? The amount of time spent managing license keys, activation servers, and other bullshit is time you are not working on something productive. Say what you want about Oracle, one thing the get right is they don't have any activation codes or similar crap, yet the last time I checked they still make boatloads of money.

      Should you happen to find a new commercial program you need, expect to wait 6 months for the trolls at procurment to either reject it or simply ignore it. On the other hand, with open source, just download and compile. It also a lot easier to get something new through security, as you can say: "I compiled this from source. I have a few minor custom settings, and all of these, along with the compile scripts are in CM. Much easier (and safer) than trusting a random binary BLOB

      --
      "Be grateful for what you have. You may never know when you may lose it."
    19. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I only pay 250 a year

      Depends on the country. You're the one misrepresenting the truth.

    20. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      lets price out the competetion shall we

      eclipse, netbeans, monodevelope, qt designer, glade gtk guibuilder, emacs, vi, + gcc AND/OR clang $0
      libra (or) open office(org) + thunderbird or evolution +gnote or tomboynotes $0
      apache http/https server $0
      postgress sql server $0
      OS (pick any linux/bsd distro) $0
      ftp, mail, dns, dhcp, xmpp, severs (what ever other you can think of) $0
      virtuabox, vmware player, linux containers, qemu, xen, kvm, kqemu bochs, dosbox, dosemu, $0
      git $0
      gimp $0
      access to source code $0
      can be installed as many times as i want for $0
      how much was msdn or technet access again?

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    21. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Disagree completely. I've used Eclipse, NetBeans, Xcode, Delphi, Visual Studio and AppCode (IDEA) and out of all of them the favourites would have to be Visual Studio and IDEA, closely followed by Delphi. Xcode, NetBeans and Eclipse are steaming piles of shit.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    22. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Easier to get something through security? Don't make me laugh. Open Source tools are some of the hardest tools to get approved for use in the environment, because they still need to go through the procurement process (and if you don't, expect yourself to be going through the disciplinary process) and you don't have an answer to several critical questions, such as "who is the vendor? What is their support policy?".

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    23. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody expects you to pay for each installation of Ubuntu Linux. However, if every person donated USD20.00 per download of an ISO, the amount of revenue generated would likely be mind-blowing.

    24. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let us make the point even clearer for people.

      Operating System
      - Ubuntu Linux - USD0.00
      - Microsoft Windows 7 Premium Edition - USD224.95

      Office Suite
      - LibreOffice - USD0.00
      - Microsoft Office Professional - USD469.00

      Virtualization Software
      - Oracle VirtualBox - USD0.00
      - Microsoft VirtualPC - USD0.00

      Software Development Suite
      - GNU gcc, g++, gdb, and vi/vim - USD0.00
      - Microsoft Visual Studio Express C/C++ - USD0.00 (limited features, functionality, and redistribution)

      Version Control System
      - git, svn, cvs, etc. - USD0.00
      - Microsoft Visual Source Safe - USD107.07 (older version)

      You get the idea.

    25. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by exomondo · · Score: 2

      Paying $700 for an operating system that does essentially nothing out of the box is the height of ridiculousness. It's monopoly power at its worst.

      No different to a CPU or graphics card, out of the box they do nothing.

    26. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The fact is it's not just about price, in fact it's mostly *not* about price. The monopolist excuses worked 10 years ago but now that companies like Dell, HP, Asus, Acer, etc... sell/have sold linux systems there is no excuse, end users simply *do not like* Linux on the desktop, it has its place on phones, embedded devices and servers but it's clear that none of the strategies employed by distro makers appeal to end users and it's time they acknowledged that rather than always blaming Microsoft for their failings.

      It took the might of Google to make Linux appeal to smartphone users in that space, it appeals to geeks in the desktop space and to (many) admins in the server space but on the desktop it needs to be *better* than Windows and OSX, it has to offer something *different* to the end user beyond just "it's cheap" because source code doesn't matter to 99.9% of end users.

      Maybe Google will dominate with ChromeOS, maybe Apple will capture an iPhone/iPad-size marketshare with its Macs and maybe Microsoft will win back mindshare and marketshare with its Surface offering but distros like Ubuntu don't stand a chance until they give the end users a *compelling* reason to change, and no, "it's free" (cost and/or freedom) won't work, remember the iPhone is still the most common smartphone model in the world.

    27. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...but we tend to install, reinstall, set up virtual machines, install yet again, and so on across dozens of machines.

      And download the ISO every time?

      Ubuntu user

    28. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by epine · · Score: 1

      Stallman was ALWAYS fucking right. Listen to the guy.

      This immediately reminded me of the story about the equations for relativity working at speeds faster than the speed of light. Since behaviour at the speed of light is undefined, it effectively divides the universe into two speed regimes: the tardospace and the tackyspace.

      Whichever one I'm in myself, I've always figured Stallman was in the other one. Ultimately, eCommunism is parasitic. Now perhaps that isn't actually a show stopper and Stallman is as brilliant as you say he is.

    29. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by FictionPimp · · Score: 1

      I don't think it is that end users don't like linux on the desktop. Rather, there is no compelling reason to try linux on the desktop. I am a huge linux fan. I use linux every single day and I have around 120 linux servers in my environment (compared to 6 windows servers). I ran linux for years on my home equipment. I've even ran LFS for 6 months once. I've used ubuntu, debian, fedora, centos, arch, and gentoo. When I was picking my notebook replacement, I didn't consider the cost of the OS. I considered what would be the smoothest easiest computer I could get out of the box that was compatible with my environment. With the lack of slick, fully supported notebooks that run linux, I personally bought a macbook pro (Due to recent changes in apples direction, I'm not sure I'd make the same decision today).

      I don't want to work on my computer. I want to do work on my computer. I'm not going to install a desktop OS when I can buy a computer with a perfectly good computer with a desktop OS. People want a computer that works with the software their friends use. People want a computer that can play the games their friends play. People want a computer that is easy to get help and support on from their '13 year old kid who is "computer literate". People also want devices that give them social status (like iphones). People want sleek elegant and modern looking computers. Linux isn't advertised as these things, it doesn't have the traction yet as a gaming device, and most people are going to use their work or friends as a buying guide. These are hard, but not insurmountable problems to overcome.

      Honestly, when it's time for my next computer I'll look at linux again, but I need to find a lightweight, powerful notebook that is fully supported by my linux distro of choice out of the box by the notebook vendor. I want the design of the macbook pro (large smooth touchpad, etc) with a fully supported and functional linux distro on top of it. Hell, I can't even find a decent Dell linux laptop on their website. So for now, I'll use linux in my datacenter and OSX on my client PC.

    30. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GIMP? Seriously? I'm not even talking about the fact that's a piece of shit, I'm talking about the fact Microsoft doesn't even have a competing product... oh wait, Paint may be just as good, if not better than it, I retract my statement.

    31. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by malloc · · Score: 1

      Ultimately, eCommunism is parasitic.

      Just look at the software universe with all these individuals and companies using GPL products, contributing back so everyone benefits. If this parasite continues who knows how many hours might get wasted on doing real work instead of reinventing the software wheel, and messing with licensing servers.

      Oh, wait, trying to compare communism to GPL software (which is what Stallman promotes) is like saying "I don't want everyone to share this nice view," since if we had a painting of the view and all tried to posess it simultaneously it wouldn't work. Software isn't a physical good; you can copy it without taking it away from someone else.

      --
      ___________________ I want to be free()!
    32. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by snadrus · · Score: 1

      The laws change so fast that at $BIG_COMPANY I, umm, know of... the disciplinary process was renamed the certification process. Do whatever you want as long as you can explain what you did. We decide on the legality just before ship-time (per milestone delivery).

      --
      Science & open-source build trust from peer review. Learn systems you can trust.
    33. Re:I just hope they don't get discouraged by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      I agree that I want to do work on the computer, not fix the computer. Your points are valid, but I think a time may be coming when Ubuntu will be a viable option:

      >I'm not going to install a desktop OS when I can buy a computer with a perfectly good computer with a desktop OS.
      True that. The answer lies in Ubuntu tie-ups with OEMs for a nice desktop OS for less $$. This may have to occur outside the monopoly US market for traction, and then to the US.

      >People want a computer that works with the software their friends use.
      Well, as their people get familiar with Firefox, Chrome, Thunderbird, and OpenOffice, the comfort level may increase. Also, people usually want to use the same software their customers use, not their friends, because their friends are sending them Excel sheets with macros.

      >People want a computer that can play the games their friends play.
      Valve + Android on Ubuntu?

      >People want a computer that is easy to get help and support on from their '13 year old kid who is "computer literate".
      Unity's not too hard to work with, and it solves the problem of opening up yet another window.

      >People also want devices that give them social status (like iphones). People want sleek elegant and modern looking computers.
      Yeah. Though, I might mention, when I opened up my Lenovo laptop with Unity running, a business partner asked, "Oh, is that Apple?"

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
  6. Pay for Ubuntu? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I would have paid... right up until Unity, when they turned the desktop to utter shite, and I stopped using Ubuntu.

    If they want me to use that fucking abortion, they'll have to pay me.

    1. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by collet · · Score: 0

      Haha, Unity is the reason I moved to Ubuntu in the first place! I'll take any modern interface over silly ol' Gnome 2.

    2. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      enjoy your playskool interface i will stick one that works without hiding everything

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    3. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by bonehead · · Score: 1

      Yeah, Unity blows hard. Even still, I might be willing to use Ubuntu since you can revert to Gnome.

      But, given the fact that the latest release causes my computer to freeze randomly when clicking browser links, my thoughts on donations are running sort of on the low end.

      (Complete freeze, power switch required for reboot. And it happens in any browser. And worst of all, it's a pretty common problem with nobody having found a solution yet.)

    4. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by LurkerXXX · · Score: 5, Informative

      Amen. I'll give to Mint instead. At least they listen to feedback from users.

    5. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by collet · · Score: 2

      Well I like my limited screen space not wasted with useful things in useful corners.

    6. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      I'd rather an interface that allows me to achieve the same end goals as you but with half the training.

      The way you worded it, it sounds like you are saying ubuntu still works despite hiding everything. That would sound like a plus to me (less clutter).

      I think what you really meant is that ubuntu doesn't work for you. And in that case I'd emphasize that the "for you" part is significant, though you may well disagree.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    7. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you running either Cairo-Dock or the intel i915 drivers? The current versions have major memory leaks :(

      The workaround right now is to run another dock and upgrade to the bleeding edge intel graphics PPAs. It's not ideal by a long shot :\

    8. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by Bobakitoo · · Score: 1

      enjoy your playskool interface i will stick one that works without hiding everything

      Nothing is hidden, you can access every part using the gnome terminal. Oh i get it, you need clicky interface with dozen of check box. It turn out that you aren't the 'power user' you thought you were. Enjoy your playskool interface...

    9. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Amen. I'll give to Mint instead. At least they listen to feedback from users.

      Listing to the users is what get you software bloat in first place. User never ask fundamental change, they like what they got but would always like extra meaningless features because they can't be bothered to learn something new. Over time the software do not become better but only grow in complexity. Then, ironically, the very same users complain that the software has become too complex and bloated.

      What are you going to do when Mint become bloatware? Change again? Well then you are only delaying the inevitable. Start to learn your tool instead of jumping ship every time someone change a icon's color.

    10. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wtf, why would you move towards unity ? even on the worst of days. wtf were you thinking? seriously....?

    11. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      I can configure things with a command line and text editor but the entire point of having a gui is so i don't have to.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    12. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by DrStoooopid · · Score: 1

      That's all well and good, but when the company makes a decision that makes their product shit...(see: Windows 8), then the company SHOULD have listened to its user base.

      --
      There are 2 groups of people you can make fun of on the Internet without fear of attack. The illiterate, and the Amish.
    13. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by bonehead · · Score: 1

      Nope, not running intel drivers since I have AMD graphics. Problem occurs with either the free or non-free drivers. Unity or Gnome. Firefox or Chromium.

      A big part of the problem is that there are several similar, but distinct, lockup issues with the latest Ubuntu. So you get people posting one problem, and the discussion is flooded with people offering solutions to a different one. For instance people with AMD or nVidia graphics being told that the solution is to use different i915 drivers. Or being told to ctrl-alt-F1 to a console and restart X, when the machine is completely frozen and it's not possible to switch to a console.

      And just for extra fun, the freeze is so immediate that there's not even clues written into the logs.

    14. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by jmcvetta · · Score: 1

      Some Ubuntu users strongly prefer Unity. :)

    15. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by collet · · Score: 1

      Initially? Ooh, shiny.
      Then: Hey, this is actually way better than windows XP

      Then: Gnome Shell, Ooh, shiny.

    16. Re:Pay for Ubuntu? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can configure things with a command line and text editor but the entire point of having a gui is so i don't have to.

      I can configure things with a command line and text editor but the entire point of having a playskool interface is so i don't have to.

      FTFY

  7. Unity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I promise to donate when they remove Unity.

    1. Re:Unity by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

      THIS!! I love Ubuntu, have been using it since 7.04, but I'm in the "Detest Unity" group here.. I recently upgraded my laptop and desktop from 10.04 to 12.04 and figured I'd give Unity an honest try vs listening to all the pissing/moaning about what a piece of shite it is... After a week of nearly tearing my already thinning hair out, I decided to get with the program and installed Cinnamon. Except for a couple of red "kaboom" icons right after installing, I feel like I'm back on 10.04 with Gnone2.. As far as I'm concerned I agree 100% with the crowd who says Unity is shite...

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    2. Re:Unity by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      you mean like Xubuntu, kubuntu, lubuntu, soon to be gnombuntu, and (whatever the enlightenment desktop variant is called).

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    3. Re:Unity by uncle+slacky · · Score: 1

      Bodhi would be the (unofficial) Enlightenment variant - I use it myself and in terms of looks and memory/CPU usage beats all the major DEs handily.

      http://www.bodhilinux.com/

      --
      Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it.
  8. good apps, fewer assumptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apps like: DigiKam, Konsole, Kdiff3, Krusader (Directory Opus would be even better), and Chrome.

    Also stop assuming you know how I should be using my system better than I do.

  9. This just in by SuperMooCow · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ubuntu users unite to have Unity removed from Ubuntu because of bad usability.

    1. Re:This just in by Gordonjcp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What's actually wrong with Unity? Is there something you can point to, instead of just "ZOMG it's new I don't like it?"

    2. Re:This just in by SuperMooCow · · Score: 1

      I see a lot of comments about people not liking Unity.

    3. Re:This just in by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      The question is entirely irrelevant.

      I should be able to use what I was using before. The "new hotness" does not require ripping out what was there before. This is why Unity gets grief. It really has nothing to do with "being different".

      Canonical pulled a Microsoft.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    4. Re:This just in by Desler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because Unity is the epitome of cargo cult programming. This is an old comment by Matthew Paul Thomas but it summarizes quite well the usability problems with Unity caused by the cargo cult:

      In the April usability test, eight of ten people discovered
      the hidden menus. But seven of them discovered the menus by
      hovering over the maximized window controls, which in 11.04 were visible all the
      time. In 11.10, even those window controls will be hidden by default. So I look forward to seeing whether in 11.10, the fraction of people who learn how to access menus is even smaller, or even slower, or both.

      But I don’t think that’s even the primary issue. You write as if learnability (or more specifically, discoverability)
      and aesthetics are the only two aspects of usability. They are
      important, but so is efficiency.

      In the same usability test, whenever one of those seven people needed to use the menus a second time, they didn’t aim directly for the relevant menu. They again moused over the window controls to reveal the menus, and then scooted along to the right. This was, of course, grossly inefficient — especially compared with the speed that a top-of-screen menu bar exists to provide in the first place. In 11.10 the window controls will be hidden too, but the basic efficiency problem will remain: at the moment you’re aiming for the target, you can’t see it.

      Every so often, some Ubuntu contributor asks why most of the Unity designers use Mac OS X. The reason, of course, is that those designers are experienced with Photoshop, Flash, Illustrator, and other applications that don’t work (or if they do work in Wine, work much less pleasantly) on Ubuntu. And it is precisely those kinds of applications, with their deep feature sets, that use menus most heavily. Anyone who points to Web browsers or mobile OSes as harbingers of a menu-less world is, I think, misguided about what kinds of things people will still use non-mobile OSes for in ten years. It is a small irony that hiding menus by default makes it even less likely that anything like those applications will ever work well on Ubuntu.

    5. Re:This just in by ks9208661 · · Score: 1

      Always avoid alliteration.

    6. Re:This just in by Gordonjcp · · Score: 3, Informative

      So, use it. Oh wait, you can't because Gnome 2 has been dropped. Maybe you could try maintaining that?

      There are Gnome 2-like desktop environments available in Ubuntu if you want them - just like when Windows 95 came out, if the new "Start" menu thing was too confusing and new, you could fall back to PROGMAN.EXE and have it work just like Windows 3. Some people even did that, too.

    7. Re:This just in by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      The adjacent close and start buttons are frustrating.

      Additionally, close is in the sweet spot, with start being a target that can over-shoot to close.

      the fact that this is a design decision (that has become worse with versions, early unity had start in the true corner) sums up the issue I have with unity (poorly, if not actively wrongly designed) .

      I have other opinions, but that is the shining example of objectively wrong ui design, that is made worse as revisions are made.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    8. Re:This just in by lennier · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What's actually wrong with Unity? Is there something you can point to, instead of just "ZOMG it's new I don't like it?"

      Ok, here goes. A (possibly the) major problem with Unity - and the entire "app-centric" GUI ecosystem from the iDevice and tablet world which it and Windows 8 are aping - is that its focus on applications comes at the expense of documents. This reverses the trend from the 1980s onwards where GUIs were becoming increasingly about the user manipulating rich documents, and puts us right back in the old world of "your data is hard-coded into applications". But that simply isn't the case. Documents transcend applications; the application is just a means to an end.

      Why? Two reasons. One, because applications churn faster than data does. For example: my music is a collection of .MP3 and .OGG files. It's over a decade old, and it's not going anywhere. My music player application, however, could be any of Rhythmbox, Banshee, Songbird, VLC. My photograph collection is a bunch of .JPG files. It's also not going to change. The default "photo manager" application (which I'm not sure there's even a need for) in Ubuntu, however, has switched from F-Spot to Shotwell, and then there's the GNOME Viewer if I just want to view them.

      Second, there are multiple actions you might want to take with documents, and those different actions may require different applications. If I have a JPG, I *might* want to view it, or I might want to edit it. In that case I'm going to want to open it in GIMP, not Shotwell or Viewer. There's no way the OS can know in advance how I want to work with my data, so it shouldn't attempt to presume that it knows best.

      The primary way this broken "applications first" mindset manifests in Unity is with the dock, and the way it groups windows by application rather than document. For instance, if I have two PDF files open, they're two completely separate documents; I want them to appear as two different icons. But no. Dock shows them as one instance of the PDF Viewer, and only once I click on them does it ask me which one I want. That's not at all what the user requires; it's an objective regression in usability (from the document-centric perspective) from even Windows 95's interface. But it's not a bug, it's a design decision, and it's come from inhaling uncritically the iDevice approach of "the app is everything".

      I hope this app-focus is just a passing fad in the industry, because it reverses more than thirty years of user interface progress. It's been good news to app developers, as it assures them a privileged industry position and a revenue stream. But it's not good news to the user who wants the ability to sculpt their own document-centric workflow.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    9. Re:This just in by LVSlushdat · · Score: 2

      The question is entirely irrelevant.

      I should be able to use what I was using before. The "new hotness" does not require ripping out what was there before. This is why Unity gets grief. It really has nothing to do with "being different".

      Canonical pulled a Microsoft.

      If Canonical really believes that Unity is the new "hot thing", it would have been trivial to add a choice during install... New (Unity) or Classic (Gnome2), and let the user-base decide, but nooooooooooo, they know whats best for EVERYONE... I tried Unity for a week, I really did.. With all the new weird shite it does, and stuff that I was used to with Gnome2 that no longer is there/works the same way, I started tearing my hair out by the roots. Since, God Help Me, I still love Ubuntu, I installed Cinnamon, which brought me back to familiar territory... I've also tried Windows 8, and parent is absolutely right.. Talk about different.. Windows 7 vs Windows 8.. Trying to run a tablet OS on a dual screen desktop is enough to drive you batty...

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    10. Re:This just in by SuperMooCow · · Score: 1

      Progman... sounds like a boss name for the next Mega Man game!

    11. Re:This just in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It massively wastes screen real estate. There's no prompting on most of the screen to find functionality. It's all guess. There is no reasonable on-line help. It's all unsystematic and hard-to-find web pages.

      It's dynamic. Every delay or movement in an interface is a race condition. That is, a moving interface will always be too fast or two slow for the user. Different users and mice move at different speeds. I'm unusually fast and the changing interface caused me to "stutter" (similar to how speakers can stutter if their words are echoed back to them).

      It's quite buggy. Creating shortcuts is a crap shoot that sometimes works and sometime doesn't. It is extremely badly behaved if a disk gets full. It's inconsistent - I was running it on several laptops and would see different behaviors for what were supposed to be absolutely identical installations.

      It's incompatible. It doesn't play nicely with other software systems including software that was simply not in the catalog.

      I tried to like it, I really did, but after using it full time for a month I gave up on it. There was no significant improvement in functionality and lots of disadvantages.

    12. Re:This just in by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 2

      it hides programs i don't use everyday in a sea of apps, rather than giving me a simple hierarchical menu that I can get to it in under 5 seconds, any files i have not previously opened are ignored by the search in the hud, files on external media are ignored by the hud file searchs, there that just the first few i could think of in less than two minutes

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    13. Re:This just in by IANAAC · · Score: 1

      What's actually wrong with Unity? Is there something you can point to, instead of just "ZOMG it's new I don't like it?"

      It relies on Compiz for 3D. I'd be a Unity fan if it weren't for Compiz.

    14. Re:This just in by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      If Canonical really believes that Unity is the new "hot thing", it would have been trivial to add a choice during install... New (Unity) or Classic (Gnome2), and let the user-base decide, but nooooooooooo, they know whats best for EVERYONE...

      you mean a choice like when you downloaded it to get unbutu(unity) kubuntu(kde) xubuntu(xfce) lubuntu(lxde) and so on? or like after the install when you simply apt-get {de of choice}

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    15. Re:This just in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Exactly, but on Windows 7 you can't separate documents from applications either. (Or turn off that hover pop-up on the task-bar.) Even when selecting "never combine" (taskbar buttons) and "Windows Classic" in the Control Panel.

    16. Re:This just in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So just ONE issue? Grouping of icons?

    17. Re:This just in by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1

      The HUGE unnecessary amount of mouse travel needed for exactly zero reason other than 'it looks good on tablets'.

    18. Re:This just in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Canonical really believes that Unity is the new "hot thing", it would have been trivial to add a choice during install... New (Unity) or Classic (Gnome2), and let the user-base decide, but nooooooooooo, they know whats best for EVERYONE...

      You mean the way Debian GNU/Linux pushes GNOME over KDE for a graphical desktop installation? Sometimes people should keep their mouth closed instead of looking the fool. I hated GNOME from way back and have used KDE exclusively until I installed Ubuntu Linux 12.04 LTS. I am happy with the desktop environment provided by Ubuntu Linux. On the server, I prefer command-line but on a notebook computer I enjoy a rich GUI experience.

    19. Re:This just in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can search for documents easily within the Ubuntu Linux 12.04 LTS 'Dash Home' which I presume is at the core of your complaint. Oh, in the dock you want to see multiple documents instead of the application used to open those documents. Okay, I understand. That makes sense from a usability point of view. It would seem relatively easy to configure Unity to display documents alongside applications or have a second dock. The amount of clutter, however, might make your document-centric dock unwieldy. Until we can simulate a physical office desk, filing cabinets and waste paper basket including the way we interact with documents and file folders in the real world we are left waiting for a "Minority Report"esque UI.

    20. Re:This just in by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      Unity is broken because it offers less freedom, less choices, as a result of perceiving the user as a consumer.

      It takes away the sense of empowerment otherwise pervasive in *nix, adding restraints. This feeling of dynamic obstacles is worse in Unity.

      I am using Gnome on FC17 atm, and am always frustrated at not doing stuff in a "correct" way, but _having to do it in a correct way.

      I'm exchanging flirty glances with Slackware 14.

    21. Re:This just in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They didnt have to maintain Gnome2, they just had to keep it in their repos so that people who want Gnome2 can keep using Gnome2.

      But they didnt.

      They removed it from their repos with the sole intent to make it impossible for users to use it, so that they are forced to deal with Unity, because they knew that nobody would voluntarily deal with Unity. The "motivation" to deal Unity was artificially created by removing Gnome2 from the repos.

    22. Re:This just in by mythix · · Score: 1

      lol? appart from being buggy as hell the first year or so, it is absolutely impossible to work on it a whole day when you need to multitask and use many windows... ssh terminals, chat windows, email, IDE, browsers, file managers.... I have tried it with every new stable Ubuntu release, but could never handle it for more then a workweek... and don't try to tell me I'm using it wrong... if alt-tabbing doest work properly, it's a piece of crap...

    23. Re:This just in by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      Funny, I manage to cope with multiple applications and multiple windows just fine. One key thing is that like many of the more intelligent mammals (cats, dogs, most primates) I can cope with the idea of something being "behind" something else - if I can't see it because it's obscured, I still know it's there. I can then use alt-tab to bring it back, or put it away. Or, I could just have lots of messy overlapping windows, which is the way I tend to work.

      If you can't deal with Unity, it might well be because you have less spatial awareness than a rhesus monkey.

    24. Re:This just in by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      Gnome 2 itself is no longer developed. Canonical dropped it from Ubuntu because they didn't want to take on supporting that particular dead horse.

    25. Re:This just in by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      Well, one thing that categorizing by app does is it allows you to find your window.

      Otherwise, you wouldn't have about 10 or so icons. You'd have one icon, and when you clicked on it you'd get 40 or so documents in big jumbled list. Would that be better?

      Not only that, but sometimes, stuff is about apps. E.g., I don't want to edit a PDF, it's for viewing. It wouldn't make sense to include all "documents" in a list, mixing readonly PDFs and write/read OpenOffice files.

      It doesn't make any sense at all to include VirtualBox VMs in the big list of documents.

      Finally, the app-centric model works because I may be doing different stuff with the same kind of documents in different programs. For example, I may have a drawing open in Gimp for bitmap editing, in Inkscape for vector editing, and in Eye of Gnome for viewing.

      Also, isn't the right-click menu in Nautilus (Open with default app, Open with Gimp, Open with Inkscape, etc.) document-centric enough?

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    26. Re:This just in by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      Well, that certainly differentiates you from the others calling for Ubuntu 10.04-style functionality, because that used Gnome2 with Compiz.

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    27. Re:This just in by mythix · · Score: 1

      again, If alt -tabbing does not work, it's a piece of crap...
      this is what it did when I tested it:
      have 2 terminal windows open, and one other random application
      alt tab between the 3... you could only alt-tab between the "terminal app" and the other one... only allowing you to select the last terminal window you focused on... ie alt-tabbing only works between apps, and not windows... which is crap...

      they may have fixed this by now, but that is how they first shipped it, and how it still worked when I tried out 11.10....
      do I need to use more dots or are we on the same level...

  10. Pay What you think it's worth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, here goes:

    For Ubuntu 10.10, I'd "donate" about half the cost of a windows license.

    For Ubuntu 11.10-12.X, you would have to pay me to use it.

    Still using 10.10, with a custom kernel, and ports of updated packages.

    Thank you Canonical for ruining Ubuntu.

  11. Aha. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Amazon ads, Window decorations on the wrong side that the users voted agains (but "it's not a democracy, we don't vote on design decisions"), "Unity"... seems to me you want to annoy the users back to microsoft... I'd pay for a distribution that LISTENS, not for one like Shuttlebuntu, who seems more concerned to establish himself as "same asshole as in cuppertino, different continent"...

  12. Server by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They offer lucrative support contracts to their server customers so show them this would be a little disingenuous

  13. I donated... by osmosys · · Score: 4, Informative

    twenty bucks to Mint! :-D

    1. Re:I donated... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And I donate bandwidth to them all - debian, mint, ubuntu, slackware ... any time I see a new version release notice (usually here on /.) I ssh to my hosted server, start up screen, and start torrenting. Depending on when in the month it is (I get 200gb/mo xfer) and what I've used (typically nothing), I'll seed for 25-50gb upload or until upload from my box is close to nothing.

      I can't code well enough to donate that, I don't have any extra $ to donate, so this is how I contribute (and how just about anyone can).

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  14. They should offer a network installation bootstrap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The iso should only have on it what is needed to get a network install going. In fact, all the live distros should cooperate and create a single bootstrap iso that presents you with a menu of what distro and what version you want to network install.

  15. More of this and less Amazon ads by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

    A company with employees has to make money at some point. I don't blame them for looking for ways to monetise Ubuntu. They should do that because it's better to have stronger alternatives to Windows and as much as some people hate it, you can't make the best product for no money at all.

    Perhaps Ubuntu is doomed to fail for targeting the desktop more than the server. But someone has to do it. They have made some mistake recently but it's nice someone is trying to do something different rather than just making Linux into Windows.

    I'm on Ubuntu now and there is a good chance I'll move to Mint or Debian next but they have given a lot of years of good use so I will probably throw some money their way.

  16. will they accept negative numbers? by Jedi1USA · · Score: 1

    As long as they keep the unity interface they'd have to pay me to use it...and I'm still not sure it would be worth it.

    --
    My old sig was REALLY stoopid.
  17. disenchanted by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 1

    I like Ubuntu but I've become disenchanted with Unity so I'm going to give Linux Mint with Ginger a shot when it comes out in November. I hear it uses the Ubuntu repositories anyway. I just need to compile a list of questions I need answered by seasoned users before I make the switch.

    1. Re:disenchanted by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      why not just install gnome or mate if you're unhappy with unity?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:disenchanted by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

      why not just install gnome or mate if you're unhappy with unity?

      OR Cinnamon.. I'm of the "Unity-haters", and am using Cinnamon on Ubuntu 12.04.. If you liked/were used to Gnome2, Cinnamon is there.. It seems to have a few burps/hiccups occasionally, but I suspect thats because its under heavy development by the Mint-devs...

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    3. Re:disenchanted by couchslug · · Score: 1

      Just install in a VM first. Virtualbox works nicely.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    4. Re:disenchanted by robi5 · · Score: 1

      > why not just install gnome or mate if you're unhappy with unity?

      because XFCE looks better and is at least as good?

    5. Re:disenchanted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i tried mating - it's quite errrmm messy isn't it?

    6. Re:disenchanted by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 1

      I don't like Gnome 3...Its almost as bad as Unity. Gnome 2 (forked as Mate) was simple but I never liked having both a top AND bottom bar. The Ginger shell looks and sounds nice and simple. As an added bonus, Mint repositories hold more than open source software so, I'm assuming I can install Oracle Java straight from the Mint repository rather than go through all the setup when downloading the tar.gzip straight from Oracle. Yes, I need Oracle Java specifically...not openjdk.

    7. Re:disenchanted by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I meant Cinnamon...I keep calling it ginger :P

    8. Re:disenchanted by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 1

      I have Ubuntu 12.04 but I did not see Cinnamon in the repositories. I'm always reluctant to install from a 3rd party repos. Where is it?

    9. Re:disenchanted by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 1

      Just install in a VM first. Virtualbox works nicely.

      VirtualBox is my favorite

    10. Re:disenchanted by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 1

      because XFCE looks better and is at least as good?

      I'm also considering that and LXDE. The laptop is brand new though, so I don't really need a desktop environment designed in mind for older machines.

    11. Re:disenchanted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My xfce runs on a quad core sandy bridge with 28GB memory and a Quadro card.

    12. Re:disenchanted by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 1

      Not to be offtopic but whoa!...what do you need 28GB of memory for?

  18. Mint Yes -- Ubuntu No by Penurious+Penguin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Although Mint is ubu-based, they seem to listen to their users, seemingly unlike post-LucidLynx Ubuntu. To me, Mint is what Ubuntu was before it went Authoritarian Bubble Rubbish -- a pretty fantastic, if not amazing distro. Back in Lucid, I'd not have thought twice about clicking the donation link. However, to pay what I think "it's worth" would probably be unreasonable, since a functional, stable distro is nearly invaluable to me. One could easily think that putting a billionaire behind Linux would be a wonderful thing, but I am not so sure. I also wonder if bubble-people are the sorts that would donate; they might find the process too complex and give up. Maybe Ubu should have an app glued by myriad dependencies that activates upon network-connection and solicits the user with a guided bubble-journey to their bank* account. Maybe they could deprecate Bash for a squeak interface, where users can squeak audible commands to execute various applications; "If you'd like to make a donation, please emit a higher, rather than lower-pitched squeak now.", etc.

    Yes, I am slightly bitter; because I remember Ubuntu as something almost inconceivably excellent. The idea of having the freedom of Linux along with out-of-the-box functionality seems almost too good to be true. Thankfully there's Mint for that.

    --
    Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
  19. Best Linux Donation? by Talennor · · Score: 1

    Let's say I want to donate to the best organization for Linux today, which if I don't see the desktop as the priority surely wouldn't be Canonical. Who would that be then?

    --

    //TODO: signature
    1. Re:Best Linux Donation? by afgam28 · · Score: 2

      I'd probably say RedHat. Unfortunately their desktop isn't quite as nice as Ubuntu's. They do things like run SELinux by default, exclude certain drivers/codecs, and have really ugly fonts!

      But they do a solid server distribution, and (unlike Canonical) have a good reputation of pushing their changes back upstream. They employ a lot of developers to work on open source projects such as the kernel, and generally speaking they are a good open source community member.

    2. Re:Best Linux Donation? by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

      While that title is inviting flames, I'd suggust Fedora for its numerous contributions to upstream projects. while not soely responsible, It is very responsible for the joy that is Linux today. I'd also suggust Suse, but the whole MS cross license deal when it was owned by novell turned me off.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    3. Re:Best Linux Donation? by eric_herm · · Score: 1

      But RH do not get donation ( likely for taxe purpose, and because that's too tedious to manage right if you are a business ). You can try to give the to various SPI managed entity, to gnome, to kde. Or you can try the Linux fundation, the FSF, or a local LUG. I think Opensuse is now a fundation, that could be a option, Suse also has a good record of upstream contribution, even if smaller than RH.

    4. Re:Best Linux Donation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Debian, Slackware, or the kernel guys themselves, IMO.

    5. Re:Best Linux Donation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RedHat contributes far, far more than either Debian or Slackware and a lot of the "kernel guys" are paid by RedHat.

    6. Re:Best Linux Donation? by ixidor · · Score: 1

      you do realize that fedora is seesntially red-hat's unstable / dev / testing branch? red-hat is stable and slower, the do their testing on the faster paced fedora.

    7. Re:Best Linux Donation? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Distroworld currently has Mint @ #1 and Mageia @ #2. So if one wants a distro that supports .deb, go w/ Mint, and if one wants one that supports .rpm, go w/ Mageia. PCLinuxOS is fine as well.

      But if one is not dead set on Linux itself, another good option would be PC-BSD 9.1, which has been getting better all the time. Previously, it was KDE only, but now, it supports a variety of Window managers. I myself like the idea of putting on a Qt centric environment - either KDE or Razor-qt, and on top of that, having the KDE suite of applications, like Calligra and Konqueror

    8. Re:Best Linux Donation? by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

      What Fedora is related to RedHat!?!? Scandal! Scandal, I Say! Who would have ever thought that both hat named Linux distributions would be related somehow?

      There is a balancing act between bleeding edge and stable but old. Everyone has to find where they fit on the spectrum. I've found Fedora fits me the best.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    9. Re:Best Linux Donation? by illtud · · Score: 1

      I'd probably say RedHat. Unfortunately their desktop isn't quite as nice as Ubuntu's. They do things like run SELinux by default, exclude certain drivers/codecs, and have really ugly fonts!

      You say those as if they're bad things (yes, ugly fonts are, but personally I don't see that problem). The drivers/codecs thing are a Free issue, and is religious/principled - I'm sure pure debian exclude them for the same reasons - they're easy to add with extra non-free repos. SELinux is a one-command forever disable if you want to do that. I recommend that you take the half an hour that it takes to understand it and why it's a Good Thing and how to create policies for the non-packaged applications you install that have disallowed actions. When you've got a rooted box or otherwise compromised systems which wouldn't have happened with SELinux set to 'enforcing' (seen it many a time) then that half an hour seems well worth it.

  20. Re:They should offer a network installation bootst by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

    The iso should only have on it what is needed to get a network install going. In fact, all the live distros should cooperate and create a single bootstrap iso that presents you with a menu of what distro and what version you want to network install.

    If you mean, "In addition to the standard all-in-one ISO," I wholeheartedly agree.

    If you mean, "Instead of the standard all-in-one ISO," you're an idiot - not every computer in the universe has a network connection, and some of them, for damn good reason.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  21. What an odd coincedence by GameboyRMH · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'd recently decided to switch my laptop to Mint.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    1. Re:What an odd coincedence by LQ · · Score: 1

      I'd recently decided to switch my laptop to Mint.

      So are you going to donate to them?

    2. Re:What an odd coincedence by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      Interesting. After reading your post, I got curious since I'd not heard of mint before. So, I downloaded it and started installing it in a VM.

      It appears to me to be nearly identical to Ubuntu, with the exception of some different installer graphics and color schemes, and they put the gnome menus on the bottom instead of the top. Outside of that, I don't see much of a difference. I realize they are both based on Debian, so maybe that's just the familiarity I am seeing, but it's not immediately clear to me how Mint is "better" than Ubuntu.

      Is it just a user interface tweaking thing, or is there some more substantial piece to it?

    3. Re:What an odd coincedence by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      It comes with a better desktop manager (MATE) and a more sensible set of applications. You could modify Ubuntu to be the same but it's less work to start with Mint, which is why I'm switching.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    4. Re:What an odd coincedence by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Maybe I will.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  22. let me know when it works by jsepeta · · Score: 1

    I've attempted to install Ubuntu 12.04 on my Mac Pro, both straight onto a hard drive and through a VirtualBox virtual machine, and it fails both installations. So I'd be willing to pay for it when it freaking works.

    --
    Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
  23. Re:ubunutu is for noobs and lamers by sgrover · · Score: 1

    noobs and lamers, sure. But also businesses, non-profits, and other organizations looking for a low cost solution to their computing needs - including the maintenance side of the equation.

    Go back a year or two, and anyone who wanted a low maintenance system was considering Ubuntu, if not outright installing/using it. Now-a-days though, that "low maintenance" target is slowly disappearing. KDE/Gnome do wonders for the low maintenance thing (maybe not Gnome so much these days), but the underlying system is starting to need more effort than I'd care to spend. My day job is to write code - not maintain systems. So the less time I can spend doing system maintenance, or learning yet another distro in the hopes of finding the low maintenance nirvana, the more time I have to actually be making money for the work I get paid for (i.e. writing code). In that context Ubuntu is still a valid option. But only considering that I immediately ditch unity and install Kubuntu desktop environment (mixed luck installing Kubuntu directly over the years) and have semi-scripted setting up my dev environment. But with the push for cash - amazon and now the "show us some love/cash" efforts, I'm fairly certain that I'm looking at Red Hat/Fedora for my next install. Or maybe Debian, though it seems to need more effort to set up right...)

  24. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really? They apparently stopped listening to our feedback, and now they want money from us?

    To say I really hate the new interface would be an understatement. Perhaps this will bump the annoyance factor of continuing with Ubuntu past the point of switching to some other distribution.

  25. The Beginning by Stan92057 · · Score: 0

    The Beginning of the End is near.

    --
    Jack of all trades,master of none
  26. Re:Entry for "Canonical owes me $[xxxx]" ? by Scragglykat · · Score: 2

    Dependency hell? You sure you aren't thinking of Redhat/Fedora? I've never had any dependency issues with Ubuntu that I didn't have with Debian, which is to say, I've never run into any... still... if you aren't into the GUI and you don't want to use their daemons or additional features, I can't see why you would pick them over Debian anyway. Oh, that's right. Paid developers which allows for packages to make it into the stable builds sooner so you don't wait 3 years for the version of Apache from 3 years ago to be added to your latest release. I forgot about that.

  27. I hope 90% of the money... by stox · · Score: 4, Insightful

    goes to Debian, where 90% of the work comes from.

    --
    "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
    1. Re:I hope 90% of the money... by wisnoskij · · Score: 5, Funny

      The people who do the most work, should get the most money?
      Sounds like communist propaganda to me.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    2. Re:I hope 90% of the money... by Penurious+Penguin · · Score: 1

      Might not be a bad element of the Reds to borrow on occasion. However, "should" & "hope" are very different. One is an axiom while the other is a perfectly reasonable preference. I aint no commie, but it's always amazed me that some prick in a wool suit can while sitting on his arse, press a button (forex, etc.) and profit what a laborer might struggle a lifetime to make 0.1 percent of. 'Tis the way no doubt, but it isn't always pretty, nor is it exclusively preferable. I'm not look for a revolution, but I kind of hope too, that certain efforts are rewarded more or less than others. Anyway,
      Hope == Central Planning = False

      --
      Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
    3. Re:I hope 90% of the money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In that case, shouldn't Debian turn 90% of its donations over to upstream projects, you know, where the work is done?

    4. Re:I hope 90% of the money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol it not easy to create something simple and easy to install, which Ubuntu has done. If Debian did do 90% of the work they should have had 90% of the users Ubuntu has, before Ubuntu arrived on the scene.

    5. Re:I hope 90% of the money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is Ubuntu making money? or do you want them to emplot people for free? Debian is carried by volunteers mostly.

    6. Re:I hope 90% of the money... by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      Well, then you can allocate your dollars to Debian in the allocation chooser they have.

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
  28. Re:Entry for "Canonical owes me $[xxxx]" ? by ilikenwf · · Score: 1

    At least for LAMP stacks and other packages, that doesn't matter if you use the dotdeb repos.

  29. Mr. Shuttleworth's car needs a new set of wheels by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 2

    That's what this is all about.

  30. A united fund is what we really need by davide+marney · · Score: 1

    I'd be more than happy to contribute to a united fund that pools tax-deductible donations to OSS projects, like United Way does for its charitable causes. The key here is to make the donations recurring and automatic. It used to be that payroll deductions were the only way to achieve that, but now there may be more options. I don't want to give to just one organization, I'd like to spread the love around. And, I only want to be asked once a year, not every time I download something.

    --
    "We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
    1. Re:A united fund is what we really need by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      How would it be allocated? Lines of Code?

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
  31. Re:Entry for "Canonical owes me $[xxxx]" ? by kbahey · · Score: 1

    Mod the parent up.

    Been using Kubuntu on the desktop, and in all servers I managed, be they in house or for clients, since 2006. Never had a dependency problem, nor a daemon problem.

    Sent from a Kubuntu 12.04 laptop ...

  32. Re:Entry for "Canonical owes me $[xxxx]" ? by afgam28 · · Score: 5, Funny

    You remind me of the Comic Book Guy:

    Comic Book Guy: Last night's Itchy & Scratchy was, without a doubt, the worst episode ever. Rest assured I was on the Internet within minutes registering my disgust throughout the world.
    Bart: Hey, I know it wasn’t great, but what right do you have to complain?
    Comic Book Guy: As a loyal viewer, I feel they owe me.
    Bart: For what? They’re giving you thousands of hours of entertainment for free. What could they possibly owe you? If anything, you owe them.
    Comic Book Guy: Worst episode ever.

  33. Tackling the wrong problem. by green1 · · Score: 1

    The summary complains that:

    When a typical user downloads Ubuntu for free and installs it on a computer with a Windows license that the user did pay for, Canonical gets nothing in the form of payment.

    but their solution isn't to try to get manufacturers to offer OS choice on machines, instead it's to ask users to pay twice to use only one operating system.

    How about a method to get some of the major manufacturers to allow you to direct your Microsoft tax to Ubuntu instead when you don't plan to ever run Windows...

  34. Re:Entry for "Canonical owes me $[xxxx]" ? by pointyhat · · Score: 0

    What about the fact mysql-server was just completely fucked in 10.04 LTS. We switched to Debian.

  35. Re:Entry for "Canonical owes me $[xxxx]" ? by kbahey · · Score: 1

    Maybe it was breezy in 2005 even ...

  36. Re:ubunutu is for noobs and lamers by eric_herm · · Score: 2

    If you want something supported for a long time, I would say Centos or Debian are the way to go. And if you wish to sustain developpers, you can either donate to Debian with SPI, or pay for a RHEL subscription, and that benefit to Centos, Scientific Linux, or even OEL, who are all clones of RHEL, and pay for jobs of many upstream developers ( http://www.redhat.com/promo/os-community/projects.html ).

  37. Re:ubunutu is for noobs and lamers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah. noobs and lamers who don't know how to write "ubuntu"

  38. Re:Mr. Shuttleworth's car needs a new set of wheel by agoliveira · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Believe or not, Mark Shuttle worth does not have a car. He bikes to work. When in London he usually either bikes, takes the tube or, in case of something urgent, a taxi.

    --
    Scientia est Potentia
  39. Give me a usable GUI, I will do that by __aawzag621 · · Score: 1

    Unity is still a buggy PITA. That was stuffed down my throat. IF they want loyalty, they have to ask.

  40. Cannot even handle RAID install without manual inp by dirtaddshp · · Score: 1

    Until i can install Ubuntu on my RAID array without dealing with manual grub entries, its not ready to be paid for IMO.

  41. Yes, I was a big fan by __aawzag621 · · Score: 2

    I thought Ubuntu was wonderful under KDE and Gnome both. Would have been pleased to donate, never saw a web page that asked me to do so. Then they shoved Unity down my throat, far before it was ready, and I didn't upgrade for 2 releases. 10.10, I believe, finally broke via upgrades that didn't work (3rd team must have been assigned to that), and I finally had to use Unity on 12.04. I couldn't make the old gnome work for some reason. PITA. I wasted a lot of time and lost a lot of loyalty in that mess. Now they ask for donations. There is something very wrong in their thinking. So I will make a donation for past services, but I am looking for a new distribution.

    1. Re:Yes, I was a big fan by Penurious+Penguin · · Score: 2

      ..but I am looking for a new distribution.

      IMO, Arch, Archbang, or Mint may be worth your consideration. If you were unaware, Mate is a very fine fork of Gnome and is very usable. Mint's Cinnamon is coming along too, and I suspect it will eventually be very nice. I remember being very content with Lucid but dreading 2013 when it would no longer receive support. I nearly kept waiting, but seeing the direction Ubu was taking, I got anxious, made backups and re-formatted for Mint. I tried Cinnamon first, then xfce, and finally settled on Mate. It was a difficult choice between xfce and Mate, but Mate offered a few little things that I'd come to rely on. If you are considering donations, there are probably others which could also use the extra cash. It may seem dick to say, but I'm leaving the Ubu donations to B'naire Rex Shuttlesoft.

      If you do try Mint, be sure to consider an upgrade to kernel 3.4.6 or higher -- there have been some nasty bugs which freeze the entire system, requiring hard reboots, frequently.
      http://www.upubuntu.com/2012/07/install-linux-kernel-346-on-ubuntu.html

      --
      Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
  42. Remember when Ubuntu was useful? by BLToday · · Score: 1

    I think that was between 2006-2010. That was my go to distribution for beginners and myself on older machines.

  43. Hopefully not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If I want to donate to Debian, I can donate directly to Debian. If I choose to donate to Canonical instead of Debian, I sure as hell hope my donation goes to Canonical instead of Debian.

  44. How about no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Canonical had not infected Ubuntu with Zeitgeist and Unity and Amazon-ads I'd totally donate.

  45. Re:ubunutu is for noobs and lamers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you want something supported for a long time Debian is most definitely not the way to go. They drop support in a heartbeat.

    Ubuntu is actually useful for the 3year/5year support for desktop/server editions. Debian only evet kept support up for 3-5year old installations because they would only release a new version each time an ice age occurred in hell. They seem to have fixed that issue now though.

    CentOS/RHEL of course will give you crazy long support windows.

  46. That's the wrong direction by Wee · · Score: 2

    No need to, you can turn it off anyway, in Privacy settings.

    Users should have to turn that sort of half-baked, privacy-leaking shit on, not off.

    -B

    --

    Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.

    1. Re:That's the wrong direction by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      1. It is not yet released
      2. Every browser these days leaks your search terms if you type them into the URL bar (not the "search" box". I did not see an outcry.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
  47. Here's what I want to pay ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... for that steaming pile of horse manure. A big fat zero, that's what.

  48. Mozilla should do this by scdeimos · · Score: 2

    If users could donate to Mozilla and direct funding to particular components of Firefox and Thunderbird, perhaps we'd see some of the five-year-old+ bugs get fixed and Thunderbird would get an Exchange Web Services connector for mail/contacts/notes.

    1. Re:Mozilla should do this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mozilla has shitloads of cash. They're a non-profit, read what they have to publish of their finances.

  49. Re:Mr. Shuttleworth's car needs a new set of wheel by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

    Nah, he just wants to visit the ISS again.

  50. Does that mean by fisted · · Score: 1

    ubuntu server is worthless?

  51. wtf by 101percent · · Score: 1

    They don't contribute to GNOME. They don't contribute to the kernel. They didn't create any of the apps they ship with, like libre office, firefox, rhythmbox. They don't give shit to the FSF. Why should I donate to them? So they can use the money campaigning towards getting more binary drivers and proprietary apps on their store?

  52. Yes .. payfor long overdue by noshellswill · · Score: 0

    I paid RedHat $60 for RH_6 support ... and got perfect performance until RedHat shitcanned the whole idea and refunded my money. I dropped RedHat. They had created a success and wanted $200/yr. Now Ubuntu has its chance. Give me what I wish: Open Office 3.6 and GNOME_2.xxx , leave my lucked-out and hard-learned GUI and installed drivers ( for an Epson scanner among others ) alone and I will pay Cannonical a well_deserved $60. An oxen is worthy of its oatbag. But .... at the successful end of a long slow painful learning curve try to shove squintsville Unity up-my-*zzwhole, scramble my scanner and upgrades, baffle my vidcard and in general treat me like a snot.nosed i.punk and I will return the favor by paying you nothing. Yes Cannonical you are responsible for everything! Why didn't you ask me one year ago instead of acting like a feckin-A suicidal prick ?

  53. sounds like a beggar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spare some change, laddy?

    No, get a job Ubuntu!

  54. Re:Mr. Shuttleworth's car needs a new set of wheel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't really understand the hate directed towards Shuttleworth. He's rich, so he's an easy target, but what has he actually done to upset people?

    He's put heaps of money into developing GPL software. Sure he plans to profit from it, but that doesn't change the fact that the software is Free (as in freedom).

    At worst, he's had a neutral impact. If you absolutely hate everything about Ubuntu, how does it stop you from going off and installing Debian or Arch? Or buying a Mac for that matter. He hasn't made those distros worse.

  55. I wish more software was funded like this by Liluakip · · Score: 2

    Advertisers and venture capitalists pollute people's motivations and in the worst cases lead to user experience being compromised to satisfy other agendas. Kickstarter projects, app.net and Sublime Text (just from my personal experience) seem like excellent steps in the right direction: marketing directly to end users without all the nonsense and corporate financial trickery wedged in between. There are cases where this can't work, of course. I think Wikipedia and Google should be essential public services but in the absence of an effective world government (or indeed particularly effective national ones) it doesn't seem like there's anyone who can take responsibility for them.

  56. Pango, pango by Graspee_Leemoor · · Score: 1

    I think it would be nice if Canonical gave some proportion of the proceeds to a charity that helps conserve the animal of the current release. It's a shame though that if they did so it would come too late to help bankroll "Efforts for the Saverization of the Pangolin".

  57. Re:ubunutu is for noobs and lamers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since installing Ubuntu Linux 12.04 LTS in July 2012 the only maintenance tasks have been to click on the update applet in the Unity dock whenever software updates await. Oh, that is so much maintenance, and in fact I could configure automatic non-prompting updates if I wanted to be extra lazy. Ubuntu Linux is the best of Debian GNU/Linux maintenance with the user-friendliness most desktop / notebook computer users enjoy and the hallmark of Ubuntu Linux.

  58. Re:Mr. Shuttleworth's car needs a new set of wheel by pointyhat · · Score: 1

    He should get a car. Taxis in London are very expensive - moreso than parking.

  59. Canonical should be paying me ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After the total farce of Unity Canonical should be paying me. Having helped a lot of people install Ubuntu as an alternative to spyware infested XP machines it was all going great... until the idiots made Unity the default desktop.

    After this I spent the next month fielding calls from irate users telling me it was my fault their computer was broken and how can I get this rubbish off their machine ?

    So after much swearing their desktops are now mostly back to XP and I've washed my hands with desktop Linux. I still use Debian/XFCE myself but I'm not prepared to deal with software that fundamentally changes a users GUI on the whim of some idiot who thinks treating a desktop as a tablet PC is a good idea.

    Can you imagine being a carpenter and coming in to work in the morning to find someone has come in overnight and redesigned your saw, your hammer etc. so they were no longer the same size or shape ?

    You'd kick their heads in.

    Ubuntu is not getting a penny from me and I'm no longer using it. The Shark has been well and truly jumped.

  60. Re:Mr. Shuttleworth's car needs a new set of wheel by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    He should get a car. Taxis in London are very expensive - moreso than parking.

    Have you ever seen London?

    You're basically missing two fundemental problems with driving which is (a) getting there through the vast quantity of traffic and (b) finding one of those parking spaces once you're where you want to be.

    Neither of the London Mayors even drove in London. Both prefered to take the tube, walk (Ken), bike (Boris) train or bus.

    Even cabinet ministers often go by bike (and then accuse policemen of being plebs if they don't open the vehicle gate for them).

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  61. I already do pay what I want to.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    $0

  62. Re:Entry for "Canonical owes me $[xxxx]" ? by FictionPimp · · Score: 1

    How so? We have a pretty large mysql install still that has gone from 8.04 to 10.04 an now is 12.04 without any issues.

  63. $0 is an amount right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For the amount of after the fact puttering I have to do in order to get my Ubuntu boxen to work right, Canonical should be thankful I'm not sending them an invoice for my time.

    Canonical is a company whose primary motivation is profit. Not a Project (like Debian or Gentoo) who has volunteers that donate their time to fixing things. The two tiered development process ("Can do no wrong" Canonical Developers/ "Unwashed" Plebians) shows what features get into the "significant" releases and which ones get marked as "not ready" when clearly they're more worthy of being in the release than some of the features that Canonical has delivered to us (PulseAudio and Unity).

    Coupled with the fact that if you want to do something different (i.e. choose a different desktop environment) it becomes a unmitigated nightmare to remove the ubuntu-defaults without running the significant risk of toasting your machine.

    Gentoo for configurability/options
    Debian for straight out "It Works"
    Ubuntu for "My First Linux"

  64. Dear Ubuntu by halfkoreanamerican · · Score: 1

    ...and I'll be skipping that step. I've been looking for a good reason to switch for a while--I just don't want to stay up all night reconfiguring my work machine.

  65. Re:Mr. Shuttleworth's car needs a new set of wheel by pointyhat · · Score: 1

    I live and work in London so yes. I drive in as well and park in E1 (Citroen C3 which is congestion charge exempt). It's not hard or stressful if you know what you are doing

  66. Re:Entry for "Canonical owes me $[xxxx]" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once they offer a descent terminal like the Mac's iTerm, I'd be willing to pay for that.

  67. Re: communist propaganda ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The people who do the most work, should get the most money?
    Sounds like communist propaganda to me.

    it's FROM each, according to his ability, TO each according to his needs.
    THAT'S why it fails - YOU have to work harder to meet MY expanding needs

    what you got, YOU work harder to make YOURSELF better off, is basic entrepreneurial capitalism

    have a nice day

  68. sic transit ubuntu ? by KingBenny · · Score: 1

    i already gave up on it because i couldnt get around unity after trying for a year. Mint works way better for me now.
    is this the beginning of the end for ubuntu ? adnags and opt-out please give money forms ?

    --
    Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
  69. Re:ubunutu is for noobs and lamers by Compaqt · · Score: 1

    Umm, if you don't want to spend time maintaining your system, Fedora would hardly be choice #1. After all, it's not a polished release, it's explicitly just a testing vehicle for RHEL.

    --
    I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
  70. Re:ubunutu is for noobs and lamers by petermgreen · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't call debian "supported for a long time". They only provide 1 year of overlap.

    IIRC recently ubuntu extended their LTS policy to 5 years for the desktop (which with their standard release cycle gives three years of overlap) as well as the server. Though you do have to watch out if you plan to keep a ubuntu system for a long time without upgrading. In particular if you use anything from universe/multiverse then you will have to manage security updates for it yourself or live without security updates for it.

    --
    note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  71. Re:Mr. Shuttleworth's car needs a new set of wheel by petermgreen · · Score: 1

    Taxi's in the UK have the special privilage of being able to use bus lanes. So if you want to get arround quickly in a major city center it's hard to beat them (helicopters move quicker but finding a place to land them may be complicated).

    --
    note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register