Unity 8 And Snaps Are Conquering The Ubuntu Desktop After Ubuntu 16.10 (softpedia.com)
prisoninmate writes: Today is the last day of the Ubuntu Online Summit 2016, and the Ubuntu developers discussed the future of the Ubuntu Desktop for Ubuntu 16.10 (Yakkety Yak) and beyond. It looks like Snaps (Snappy) and Unity 8 with Mir are slowly conquering the Ubuntu Desktop, at least according to Canonical's Will Cooke, Ubuntu Desktop Manager. Work has already begun on pushing these new and modern technologies to the Ubuntu Desktop, as Ubuntu 16.04 LTS has just received support for installing Snaps from the Ubuntu Snappy Store. Canonical's Will Cooke has mentioned the fact that the Unity 7 desktop enters its twilight years, which means that it gets fewer features and it's being reduced to only critical and OEM work. This is because Unity 8 desktop is getting all the attention now, and it will become the default desktop session somewhere after Ubuntu 16.10 (Yakkety Yak).
why did this rush this LTS release? What a mess.
Does anybody actually still believe
Torvalds.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
I'm on Linux now for more than 15 years. Never looked back.
Does anybody actually still believe Linux is a viable desktop platform any more?
My customers and family love Kubuntu, so yes. Even Steve Ballmer admitted that Windows is so bad that it would have died a long time ago if Microsoft hadn't suckered the world's developers into programming directly to the Windows API.
... They mean " being forced on users. Classic canonical.
"It's been 25 years. I can do this for another 25. I'll wear them down." He'll wear them down? That kind of attitude is why they've failed thus far. You don't need to wear anyone down, you simply need to make a better desktop. I'm sure I will now be inundated with replies saying various Linux distros/window managers are, in fact, better than Windows and OS X. Guess what? Millions (billions?) of users disagree. And the prevalence of the idea that Linux is somehow Good Enough, despite all evidence to the contrary, is precisely why I have little faith it will ever get there.
hi
of Xubuntu. Centos with XFCE is ok too. Really, the only thing that XFCE is missing for me (and probably others) is a set of pre-canned layouts to select from in order to prevent more of the esoteric configuration.
I'm all for adding new types of applications in new and novel ways until the cows come home, but the way I launch applications hasn't changed since '95. Call me old fashioned, but it fcking works and I love it.
Bye!
In response to anyone who questions whether Linux is a viable desktop, I have this to say:
My father's first and only computer, at the age of 86, was Linux Ubuntu. He did just fine with it for 4 years.
Windows was not even a consideration for my efforts to bring computers to him. Ubuntu simply worked for him with minimal support from me. If you prefer Windows or Mac that is fine. Just skip criticizing Linux for what it is.
Millions (billions?) of users disagree.
I think this is a misinterpretation. Yes, millions are using Windows. This is not an active vote for Windows over Linux. The fact is that millions of computers are shipped with Windows pre-installed, and most buyers go with the flow and use what's in front of them. They're not going to install a different OS and probably aren't any more capable of doing so than they would have been with installing Windows if it hadn't already been done for them.
Whether Linux is "ready" or "as good as" Windows is an entirely different question. Quite a few people think it is. But I won't get into that argument here. But Windows' high market share doesn't prove very much.
the Unity desktop is so terrible they should just call it Overunity because that's a name that matches the level of ridicule it deserves.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Does anybody actually still believe Linux is a viable desktop platform any more?
Well I am writing this comment from Chrome which is running under Fedora 23 which in turn is running on the latest Skylake Core i7 chip-set which took me a time consuming 30 minutes to install without any issues. I also have Android, Mint and SteamOS virtual machines. Does that count?
I have looked for MS Windows but my green parrot gets sick at the mere mention of it.
There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
I run MATE over UBUNTU. Auto-update & *synaptic package manager* do 95% of chandler chores; *apt-get* or PPA snatch odd-apps. That's sufficient for my three Linux boxes.
What a minute you can't say that since we all know that modern computer users will get a brain aneurysm at the mere mention of the words "command line" ... Woops.
You should have mentioned the GUI application that allows people to maintain the software on their computer. We have probably lost a few modern computer users here .... Oh well. :-)
There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
... according to Canonical's Will Cooke, Ubuntu Desktop Manager.
apt-get remove ubuntu-desktop-manager
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Interesting, how about cause and effect ...:
Car makers with 90% market share are better than those with 2% market share, same with newspapers, builders, tyres or even sunglasses. Better involves a cost value assessment and when an option is free
An App Store. With all the drawbacks that come with it, such as giving up your privacy:
Please note that to install and remove snaps, you'll need an Ubuntu One account.
Exactly this attitude stopped me from buying a Jolla Phone as a successor to an old Maemo phone.
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
With xfce, for common apps, the procedure:
1. Think of what key combination is most obvious
2. If it is not used, bind the app to that key combo
3. If it is used, add a modifier key, else choose next most obvious
Super-T for terminal, Super-B for browser, Super-E for file manager (inherited from Win95), Super-hash for virt-manager or x2goclient, and so on.
John_Chalisque
I only use Windows for running Windows only software, like VSTs and DAWs; only use my mac for running music software. All else I use Linux. Having to use the mouse to launch my main apps, rather than a two-key combo is a real annoyance when going back to them. Likewise, not being able to write short scripts with ease is again an annoyance. Not being able to install to a USB stick, taking it from machine to machine without activation problems is another annoyance.
John_Chalisque
I don't know anyone who's used Unity longer than I have and I've just switched to Xubuntu/XFCE and Lubuntu/LXDE because I couldn't bear compiz slowing my system Quad-Core 2,5 Ghz + 18GB RAM + 256GB SSD System + NVidia Quadro GFX to a grinding halt.
Fix compiz and Unity rendering and all will be fine.
Until then, my patience with default Ubuntu Desktop finally is up.
Clean design, bold new concept, convergence planed in - all fine and dandy - but Unity is broken and simply still not ready for primetime / real-world everyday usage. That's a simple fact. (I've been using Ubuntu since v.9 btw.)
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Cinnamon and Mint are the future of the Linux Desktop.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
Canonical is aware that sometimes even the best informal* testing procedures miss things, and defects get included in the install image of an LTS version. So usually in July or August or thereabouts, they fix the defects and put out another install image numbered 16.04.1 or thereabouts. That's also when the LTS is offered to users of the previous LTS as an in-place upgrade.
* Formal verification is generally considered cost-prohibitive for a consumer product that is not safety-critical.
How does a half-assed establishment manage to be 100% ass?
If it's U.S.-based, by running articles that support the Democratic Party.
Jide publishes Remix OS, a distribution of Android/Linux (as opposed to GNU/Linux) customized for use on desktop and traditional laptop computers.
Windows is also "free", in the sense that you have already paid for it (and cannot avoid it) if you buy a computer.
It's very possible to end up buying a PC without a properly licensed copy of Windows: buy a Mac.
It's also possible even without Apple. A few months ago, I bought a used ThinkPad laptop on eBay for $101 shipped, and the copy of Windows 10 that shipped on it turned out not to be activated because it couldn't reach the LAN with the volume license server. I looked at the bottom and the COA had been peeled off. I guessed that it was part of a corporate fleet, and the Windows license was valid only within that corporation. I contacted the seller about it, and the seller recommended that I either buy an OS license or return it. It now runs Debian 8.
Interesting, how about cause and effect ...:
Car makers with 90% market share are better than those with 2% market share, same with newspapers, builders, tyres or even sunglasses. Better involves a cost value assessment and when an option is free
The critical difference is that Windows is not being chosen; it comes pre-installed on the overwhelming majority of PCs. When you buy a car you make a choice. A car isn't delivered to you as part of a larger, more expensive bundle. So your analogy doesn't work.
The AC above who said
"Until some flavor of Linux can be preloaded on OEM systems and sold at mass market retail "
was right but didn't take it far enough. Linux would have to be preloaded on an overwhelming majority of (non-Apple) systems sold. That's how Windows won the battle. Whether you think Windows is great or terrible, it didn't win through quality. It won through enforced marketing, by being delivered and ready-to-go on the computer you bought.
It is being chosen to be preloaded, by multiple companies, companies with a strong vested interest in selling a lot and profiting a lot.
I'm not weighting into the which is better argument, in saying cause and affect are a data point of strong value
I use it, quite happily and successfully, as my desktop OS. On the other hand, I'm not one of the crazy zealots that thinks everyone should use it. I don't care if there's a year of the Linux desktop. I don't care what OS you use. I never have. I use what works best for me and fills my needs the best. I have things I want to accomplish. My OS is a tool to let me do that. The tool that gives me the greatest ease, choice, and function is the desktop I will use.
If that is Windows, then I'll use Windows. If that's OS X, I'll get a Mac. No, I get what I need to get done with Linux and I do so in a manner that suits my needs and tastes. I'm quite happy and my system operates without any bugs that I'm aware of. As in, none - there are no bugs that I know of in my system. Now, there are (surely) bugs. I am just not aware of them because they're in things that don't impact me.
I've never been one to care what you use. I just hope that you made a choice that fits your needs and lets you get your work done. I think the OS should just do what I tell it to do and then get out of the way and let me do it. I don't want to see the OS. I don't want to have to tweak the OS - but I want to be able to if I decide to. I don't constantly fiddle with it. Hell, half the time the physical computer I'm using isn't even booted to an OS that I'm using. Yup, about half the time I'm just using a Live USB. I don't even use persistent storage. I click a couple of things and I'm good to go. I then just don't shut it down until I need to.
Basically, I am in Florida. I use VNC (or SSH) into my home computers, my home network, and my home servers - and I'm good to go. The device in front of me is a bit more than a dumb terminal but everything I do on it, locally, gets replicated to the home - and further replication from there in the form of backups but that's a story for another day.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
This is the excuse Linux evangelists always give. But guess what? It doesn't hold water. Look at Apple. No, they don't have a massive desktop market share, but they have a significant and influential corner of that market precisely because they produced an OS that many people felt was superior to Windows. And they were able to convert users to their platform despite it only being available on their hardware, which required paying a hefty premium over Microsoft's OEMs. The simple fact of the matter is that more people would be using Linux if it were good enough. They aren't because it isn't.
hi
By "short scripts" do you mean in sh or Python? Both are available on OS X, PowerShell is included on Windows, and Python can be installed on Windows.