The only times I boot Windows are to view a retarded website (not often), test a new web page in IE (the responsible thing to do
Why? I love using IE in Wine. Its like driving a demolition derby car- its yours to crash. I'll install it, trash out of thing slike porn pages and then reinstall it. What is embarrasing is the fact that in Wine IE still renders pages faster than Firefox...
Doesn't seem to be any motivation for this. I don't get it. Who benefits from this? News outlets like the weather channel?
I love how now I can get the weather report everyday on my Gnome panel without paying. If the free ride ends (without a Linux client in sight) I guess I'll have to buy a thermometer and look outside (shudder)...
The idea of a fork for Gnome 3 sounds great, but Gnome 2 has problems that won't be fixed in the next release. I use it everyday, and I like it, but I hope that Gnome 2 can become a little more settled before it loses everyone's attention.
First of all, some xcompmgr support would be nice. Gnome has a few BIG problems with using that program, which is unfortunate because using it on my computer speeds up the sluggish Gnome.
Another thing would be better wireless support. Unlike KDE, there is no app that can do what Kismet can. The network app. lets you connect wirelessly, but no part Gnome lets you scan. In this department many good programs have appeared that would fix this problem. I like-
Wifi Radarand this applet
They only need to be incorporated (or packaged with a Gnome distro for the love of diety).
Many people think that Gnome's biggest problem is RAM usage, and they might be right. 256mb feels VERY different than 512mb on the same machine. I personally believe that this problem was made worse in the last release, not made better. I think that 2.12 has intentions on fixing this, so I care more about Gnome 2's interface problems.
That "extremely" integrated Intel GPU" might actually be better than an ATI card. The Luminocity devs use an old Intel GPU to demo their cool wobble effects. If it can do that, it might can do some other cool stuff. Google is your best friend on that one. Something like "xcompmgr" and "Intel."
I hear you, I love me some eye candy. Its quite possible in Ubuntu. Currently in my Ubuntu desktop I have wonderful fading and drop shawdows. The only time I experiance bugs is when I use the logout applet in Gnome or when I try to do things that are opengl (such as screensavers or games). You have to pick one at a time, eye candy or games. I use have two different user accounts- one for games and one for desktop use (eyecandy). Gnome doesn't official support this stuff, but other than the logout thing it works fine. KDE 3.4 is actually very compatible I've heard, but I only use Gnome and XFCE.
Next you must find out if you have the correct hardware. The best case scenario is that you have a newer Nvidia card. Any modern (at least a geforce 2) Nvidia card can do the coolest eyecandy trick ever- fading! Each window fades into whats below it. Its hard to describe, and it cannot be expressed with screenshot or low res movie. Let me say that fading is worth every penny of a new Nvidia 5200fx card I bought just to be able to do it.
If you have a newer Nvidia card (anything more recent than the geforce 4 series), you can add a sweet trick to the fading- drop shadows! I personally believe these are overrated, but many people LOVE them. To get any Nvidia card to do this fun stuff, you must have the driver installed (trivial to do in Ubuntu) and you must get the driver to accerate composite (I give instructions how at the end).
If you don't have an Nvidia card...well...think about buying one. Mesa drivers and ATI's flgrx drivers can do Drop Shadows (it takes a performance hit to do it though), but nothing but an Nvidia card can fade worth a damn. As I said, some people like the drop shadows, so try them out if you want. Anything faster than 1ghz and its almost free eyecandy. But-in the long run- if you want the best eye candy Linux has to offer- you need an Nvidia card. ATI is the devil.
Directions of how to do everything (including how to enable acceration with Nvidia drivers) can be found here. Have fun!! I know I do...
Meanwhile Mac OS X has managed to implement an entire drawing engine, add nice hardware accelleration features (Quartz Extreme), make them useful (Exposé), and add to their usability once again (Dashboard). Windows "Avalon" (if it ever gets done) will add to the mix SVG interface definitions (I wouldn't doubt if Apple doesn't come out first with SVG-window rendering capabilities).
Meanwhile, Apple only puts OSX on very particular hardware (that they sell and know everything about), and therefore it costs them a lot less to do things. Thats why OSX is ahead. Its not developed better, but its closed nature makes it easier to program for. The only fair comparison would be Windows, as it has to suffer from the same "needs to run on a billion different configurations" problem that x86 Linux does.
First let me say: good post. It brings up a good discussion. I hope to not offend you with my response.
The "middlepinnings" and the "sub-underpinnings" like OpenGL and transparency/image blurring/antialiasing/supersampling in Linux are other examples of screw ups; where everything is implemented as seperate projects, they are all going off in different directions, each leaving each other behind. If there were a central coordinating force, they'd be working together, and getting somewhere.
You mean a central force like Apple or Microsoft. The Linux Desktop is what it is - a pile of OSS projects. Despite tons of calls to "unify" it will never happen. Heck, I'm happy enough that such projects work together AT ALL, let alone act together well. If you can't stand the patchwork nature of the X, your only choice is to pull out a credit card and buy a Mac. Apple seems to do everything you want, but Linux doesn't want to be a crappy version of OSX (linux wants to be linux, it just happens to be a crappy version of OSX).
As for not being responsivene, either you screwed with settings, or you use some partialy supported video card. I have a Radeon 9200, 7000 and an NVidia TNT2. Sadly, the TNT2 proved to be most usable under Linux, but still performed better under Windows. As for ATi, I've yet to get either video card working.
Now I have figured out where your complaints come from- your only modern hardware (the TNT2 is not modern in a graphic card sense) is ATI hardware. ATI LINUX DRIVERS ARE CRAP!!!! this isn't Linux's fault, and nothing drastic needs to be done on the Linux side to force ATI play along. The company with either correct itself, or lose marketshare to Nvidia. I recently traded a 128mb 9600 pro in my Ubuntu box with a 64mb 5200FX. In Windowsland, the 9600 pro is twice as good, but in Ubuntu the 5200FX does everything AT LOT faster. You complaints about X sluggishness is foreign to me, and I use xcompmgr and my desktop is accerated to a point that I never got Windows to achieve (equal to OSX the few times I've used it). I know what you'll say- "Its not practical to tell people that they must buy new hardware in order to not have a sluggish desktop." To that I respond "my $30 Nvidia card was A LOT cheaper than a new (or even used) Mac." One day, ATI might actually have some decent Linux drivers (for 2D) and your sluggishness might go away...
Too little, too late for me. I asked them to do this for me at the begining of the year. I had used their DSL for a year, and I got about 3.0 MB down (400kbs up) for about 80 bucks a month. It would have been 30, except for the fact that the phone service costed the difference. I never used the phone, and I wanted cheaper DSL. When they kept saying it wouldn't happen, I dropped verizon and picked up my local cable company for broadband. I get 4 mb down and.5 mb up for 50 bucks a month, without Verizon's shit.
For example: Remember when GNOME switched Nautilus from tree-based to "spatial", or whatever it is that they call it? I still use GNOME, but I've stopped using Nautilus to browse with. Instead, I use gnome-terminal.
I used gnome-terminal too: to enter a certain line to make Nautilus not suck. Make the Gnome mistake go away:
ATI does not "fail it." While, they do not support the open source community as much as we would like (as, persay, NVidia Corp), they do in fact give us enough support as of right now to be comfortable.
For me, an ATI customer, they do. I'm not comfortable at all with the support I get from ATI. I'm able to install the drivers, but I DO have a problem with the driver's 2D performance. For 2D, you are better off open source drivers then to use Fglrx. Games aren't everything. Hell, to me games are what I play on my Gamecube. I want to have decent performance in a 2D desktop environment considering that 2D acceleration is old hat by now. Now everyone measures a card by its 3D performance (where the flgrx drivers still lag greatly in compared to the windows drivers....)
The only setbacks seen with the fglrx drivers would be that of the mentioned lack of XRandR support as well as a lack of XCompMgr support (for drop shadows/transparency). However, such minor setbacks on 'beauty' shouldn't be a big decision when choosing which drivers to use.
It might not matter to you, because you (like me) have an ATI card and you've never actually seen this stuff at work. The other day I tried it out on my girlfriend's laptop (with a Geforce 420 Go, a card theoretically not half as good as my 9600 pro), and that fading trick when it was properly accelerated was the coolest desktop effect I've ever seen. Makes desktop use a lot easier on the eyes. Also, when xcompmagr is running on hers, the entire desktop feels faster and more responsive then my much faster desktop with the ATI card in it. Since I (like many people) use my computer more for work than games, my ATI card is not acceptable. Thats why I bought a 5200 Nvidia card a few days ago, because I'm sick of fighting with crappy drivers only to have my 2D performance SUFFER!!!! I'll keep the old card around, to remind me not to buy ATI again...
But honestly, I'd like to hear what you would replace iTunes with that is so great.
In Windows I use Ephpod for feeding the iPod MP3s and Media Player Classic to play the files on the computer. In Linux, I use GTKPod to feed the iPod and Muine to listen to music.
I personally believe iTunes is the devil. The first time it autosynced my iPod without asking and took away a few songs a friend gave me, I uninstalled it and swore to never use it again...
Slap me if I'm ignorant, but what exactly are the major pitfalls to declaring Ubuntu an official Debian fork?
Some Ubuntu lovers' feelings will get hurt and some Debianites will get really mad (because Ubuntu takes their glory away).
To bad because its true.
The Ubuntu community could seperate itself from the Debian-based apt-get network, possibly rename it, and manage their own Ubuntu-exclusive repository, just as Yellowdog did with yum.
From the begining Ubuntu has had its own Repository. Its Debian Sid's with some sanity.
Those people would be in a position to seriously change Debian from within even with some traction from other maintainers, I guess.
Why waste the time doing that though? Why should Canonical spend its resources on Debian politics when they can just fork the project and hand back bug fixes as they want to?
Why deal with the red tape and bullshit of Debian if you don't have to? Instead of wasting time on that crap, Ubuntu has: brought in Xorg, improved Gnome, done wonders with the installer, and set up a system where releases come at stable 6 month time frames. If Ubuntu would have instead tried to do this within Debian, the project might have nothing to show for it. Just like Userlinux...
kind of a bummer.:-\ i'm sure it's fixable, but it's still a bummer. i guess its screwed up because i had to add a certain repository to add one package, but that repository uses different versions of whatever libs than the repository mplayer is on.
i had hoped/expected that apt could solve these issues... i suppose this hassle is something i'll just have to deal with if i want support for proprietary formats.:-\
I know exactly what your problem is. You have added the Marillat, and it has a new version of Mplayer that Hoary doesn't have current enough libs for. What you need to do is either:
A. Disable that Repo. and try again with the multiverse added. For Hoary, a compatible Mplayer was added to the multiverse. Using the marillat repo for anything for than grabbing the w32codecs and the dvd codecs is a sure way to cause problems.
B. Don't use Mplayer. I personally like Gxine a LOT more. Try it, it installs in Ubuntu easily.+
This is the worst troll in the thread so far. Very non factual.
Ubuntu is a betrayal of Debian.
Canonical has hired a number of critical packagers and maintainers of infrastructure of Debian and paid them to do priority work for Ubuntu instead of work on Debian.
Oh my god!!! Canonical had the nerve to PROVIDE A MEANS TO LIVE for Debian developers, and give them an opportunity to make a distro based on Debian and gives bugfixes back to Debian. What assholes.
Ubuntu, keeping in mind, depends on masses of packagers and developers who have chosen to package and quality-check for Debian. Canonical, in turn, depends on providing paid support for Ubuntu.
Actually Ubuntu currently depends on a certain South African that loved Debian and wanted to make a new distro based on it. He has admited to/. that he hopes that the paid support thing work out, but he doesn't mind if Ubuntu turns into charity if it doesn't.
A start-up for-profit commercial entity cannot hope to duplicate this success, is unable to do so as so many others have done in a relationship that can be described as mutualism or commensalism, and instead satisfies itself with being a blood-sucking parasite that will end only in its own destruction along with that of the host.
HOW THE F*CK IS UBUNTU A PARASITE!!!!. It gives back bug fixes. It has developed things that Debian will need in the future (Xorg). It has built up a vibrant community, and gets the word Debian and release in the same sentence together (even if it is only "Ubuntu, the debian based distro, released today.") Even if Ubuntu didn't give back bug fixes, Debian's license allows this to happen. Yet the Ubuntu devs do upstream their work. Troll
And you wankers who want the latest and best but cannot see past the inconsequential metric of a release date of a "stable" set of packages, are selling your souls and that of the best distro of Linux to ensure it will happen.
And all you wankers that can't figure it out- Ubuntu is a good thing for Debian. The progect is hurting bad and it needs a shot in the arm, Ubuntu is that show in the arm...
Many of the people who maintain packages that would be outside the distro in universe would most likely not want to put a ton of work into a distro that does not consider them part of the official distribution.
Untrue. There already is a volunteer group that maintains the Universe, and they are more than appreciated, they have their own title- The Masters of the Universe.
Attempting to package everything the user wants is sinking Debian, and it'll sink Ubuntu too unless they change the philosophy instead of just doing minor tweaks. Ubuntu universe includes Coq, a theorem prover whos own authors estimate that it has only 100 regular users, yet does not include gaim-vv, which adds webcam support to Gaim. What is wrong here?
Ubuntu doesn't package the Universe. The Universe is a snapshot of Sid that a volunteer group, the Masters of The Universe, work on. The main Ubuntu devs do not waste any time packaging things in the Universe. If something isn't there, its because Sid didn't have it last time the Universe was synced.
Fairly good comment, but needs a small correction:
The end result is Ubuntu - a fork. Unfortunately Ubuntu doesn't really tackle the packaging problem seriously: it improves on Debian by only stabilising a small base system, but this means you get to choose between (a) an out of date and small but stable repository (main) or (b) a large and up to date but often broken repository (universe). And I still haven't figured out WTF the "metaverse" is yet.
Actually, I've never had a problem with anything in the Universe, and I've never heard of anybody that did (and it wasn't some third party repo's fault). And I hang out on the forum a bunch.
The other part is the multiverse, non free packages such as the adobe acrobat reader.
Unfortunately the Ubuntu developers only go so far - they still believe it's possible for Ubuntu to package everything end users will ever need, even though at least in Warty, universe wasn't even enabled by default. I don't see any way for Ubuntu to stabilise universe without getting bogged down in the same mud that Debian did.
Its easy. The pay developers work on the main, release every six months and support a small base for their occupations. The universe is controlled by volunteers called the Masters of the Universe. This way the universe still gets support, but the main devs don't have to do it.
But Ian Murdoch, Debian's founding father, does not believe Ubuntu's popularity bodes well for Debian-based distros.
"If anything, Ubuntu's popularity is a net negative for Debian," Murdoch told internetnews.com. "It's diverged so far from Sarge that packages built for Ubuntu often don't work on Sarge. And given the momentum behind Ubuntu, more and more packages are being built like this. The result is a potential compatibility nightmare."
How could it?-
A. Sarge isn't released
B. Ubuntu is based on Sid.
Murdoch argues that if Ubuntu were truly compatible with Debian, all of the energy going into it could be directed at Sarge and toward getting it released, which is what would really benefit the Debian developer ecosystem as a whole.
Yep. Thats what Userlinux tried to do. Look how that went. Debian is too uncentralized to ever be more than a server distro (where slow is good).
"I understand what the Ubuntu folks are trying to do, and they're doing lots of good work that will eventually find its way into Debian," Murdoch said. "But what we really need right now as a community is for Sarge to be released.
There. He admits that Ubuntu is now more about helping out Etch (the release after Sarge) then helping out Sarge. But Warty should have helped Sarge a bunch, and Sarge has problems even millionaire Mark can't fix quickly.
"In that respect, Ubuntu's popularity is more harmful than helpful."
How is it harmful that Etch is going to kick ass because of Ubuntu's work?
I'll tell you how- each Ubuntu release is an embaressment to the Debian people. Two Ubuntus have been released before a Sarge. And if they don't watch out, it will be three. Businesses don't like that many upgrades usually, so a slow Sarge is good many say. But from the words of of Debian's founder is obvious that Sarge not being released it is turning into a bit of a joke...not good for Debian's image.
Slashdot Mirror
Why? I love using IE in Wine. Its like driving a demolition derby car- its yours to crash. I'll install it, trash out of thing slike porn pages and then reinstall it. What is embarrasing is the fact that in Wine IE still renders pages faster than Firefox...
I love how now I can get the weather report everyday on my Gnome panel without paying. If the free ride ends (without a Linux client in sight) I guess I'll have to buy a thermometer and look outside (shudder)...
First of all, some xcompmgr support would be nice. Gnome has a few BIG problems with using that program, which is unfortunate because using it on my computer speeds up the sluggish Gnome.
Another thing would be better wireless support. Unlike KDE, there is no app that can do what Kismet can. The network app. lets you connect wirelessly, but no part Gnome lets you scan. In this department many good programs have appeared that would fix this problem. I like- Wifi Radarand this applet
They only need to be incorporated (or packaged with a Gnome distro for the love of diety).
Many people think that Gnome's biggest problem is RAM usage, and they might be right. 256mb feels VERY different than 512mb on the same machine. I personally believe that this problem was made worse in the last release, not made better. I think that 2.12 has intentions on fixing this, so I care more about Gnome 2's interface problems.
That "extremely" integrated Intel GPU" might actually be better than an ATI card. The Luminocity devs use an old Intel GPU to demo their cool wobble effects. If it can do that, it might can do some other cool stuff. Google is your best friend on that one. Something like "xcompmgr" and "Intel."
Next you must find out if you have the correct hardware. The best case scenario is that you have a newer Nvidia card. Any modern (at least a geforce 2) Nvidia card can do the coolest eyecandy trick ever- fading! Each window fades into whats below it. Its hard to describe, and it cannot be expressed with screenshot or low res movie. Let me say that fading is worth every penny of a new Nvidia 5200fx card I bought just to be able to do it.
If you have a newer Nvidia card (anything more recent than the geforce 4 series), you can add a sweet trick to the fading- drop shadows! I personally believe these are overrated, but many people LOVE them. To get any Nvidia card to do this fun stuff, you must have the driver installed (trivial to do in Ubuntu) and you must get the driver to accerate composite (I give instructions how at the end).
If you don't have an Nvidia card...well...think about buying one. Mesa drivers and ATI's flgrx drivers can do Drop Shadows (it takes a performance hit to do it though), but nothing but an Nvidia card can fade worth a damn. As I said, some people like the drop shadows, so try them out if you want. Anything faster than 1ghz and its almost free eyecandy. But-in the long run- if you want the best eye candy Linux has to offer- you need an Nvidia card. ATI is the devil.
Directions of how to do everything (including how to enable acceration with Nvidia drivers) can be found here. Have fun!! I know I do...
Meanwhile, Apple only puts OSX on very particular hardware (that they sell and know everything about), and therefore it costs them a lot less to do things. Thats why OSX is ahead. Its not developed better, but its closed nature makes it easier to program for. The only fair comparison would be Windows, as it has to suffer from the same "needs to run on a billion different configurations" problem that x86 Linux does.
The "middlepinnings" and the "sub-underpinnings" like OpenGL and transparency/image blurring/antialiasing/supersampling in Linux are other examples of screw ups; where everything is implemented as seperate projects, they are all going off in different directions, each leaving each other behind. If there were a central coordinating force, they'd be working together, and getting somewhere.
You mean a central force like Apple or Microsoft. The Linux Desktop is what it is - a pile of OSS projects. Despite tons of calls to "unify" it will never happen. Heck, I'm happy enough that such projects work together AT ALL, let alone act together well. If you can't stand the patchwork nature of the X, your only choice is to pull out a credit card and buy a Mac. Apple seems to do everything you want, but Linux doesn't want to be a crappy version of OSX (linux wants to be linux, it just happens to be a crappy version of OSX).
As for not being responsivene, either you screwed with settings, or you use some partialy supported video card. I have a Radeon 9200, 7000 and an NVidia TNT2. Sadly, the TNT2 proved to be most usable under Linux, but still performed better under Windows. As for ATi, I've yet to get either video card working.
Now I have figured out where your complaints come from- your only modern hardware (the TNT2 is not modern in a graphic card sense) is ATI hardware. ATI LINUX DRIVERS ARE CRAP!!!! this isn't Linux's fault, and nothing drastic needs to be done on the Linux side to force ATI play along. The company with either correct itself, or lose marketshare to Nvidia. I recently traded a 128mb 9600 pro in my Ubuntu box with a 64mb 5200FX. In Windowsland, the 9600 pro is twice as good, but in Ubuntu the 5200FX does everything AT LOT faster. You complaints about X sluggishness is foreign to me, and I use xcompmgr and my desktop is accerated to a point that I never got Windows to achieve (equal to OSX the few times I've used it). I know what you'll say- "Its not practical to tell people that they must buy new hardware in order to not have a sluggish desktop." To that I respond "my $30 Nvidia card was A LOT cheaper than a new (or even used) Mac." One day, ATI might actually have some decent Linux drivers (for 2D) and your sluggishness might go away...
Too little, too late for me. I asked them to do this for me at the begining of the year. I had used their DSL for a year, and I got about 3.0 MB down (400kbs up) for about 80 bucks a month. It would have been 30, except for the fact that the phone service costed the difference. I never used the phone, and I wanted cheaper DSL. When they kept saying it wouldn't happen, I dropped verizon and picked up my local cable company for broadband. I get 4 mb down and .5 mb up for 50 bucks a month, without Verizon's shit.
iTunes. Personally I think its the ugliest program ever.
Till GTKPod or Ephpod does it, I don't get it......
Xorg (I bought an NVIDIA card just to use its new features). Fading and transparacy is awesome.
Much better art.
Community
Newer version of GTKPod.
I used gnome-terminal too: to enter a certain line to make Nautilus not suck. Make the Gnome mistake go away:
gconftool-2 --type bool --set /apps/nautilus/preferences/always_use_browser true
For me, an ATI customer, they do. I'm not comfortable at all with the support I get from ATI. I'm able to install the drivers, but I DO have a problem with the driver's 2D performance. For 2D, you are better off open source drivers then to use Fglrx. Games aren't everything. Hell, to me games are what I play on my Gamecube. I want to have decent performance in a 2D desktop environment considering that 2D acceleration is old hat by now. Now everyone measures a card by its 3D performance (where the flgrx drivers still lag greatly in compared to the windows drivers....)
The only setbacks seen with the fglrx drivers would be that of the mentioned lack of XRandR support as well as a lack of XCompMgr support (for drop shadows/transparency). However, such minor setbacks on 'beauty' shouldn't be a big decision when choosing which drivers to use.
It might not matter to you, because you (like me) have an ATI card and you've never actually seen this stuff at work. The other day I tried it out on my girlfriend's laptop (with a Geforce 420 Go, a card theoretically not half as good as my 9600 pro), and that fading trick when it was properly accelerated was the coolest desktop effect I've ever seen. Makes desktop use a lot easier on the eyes. Also, when xcompmagr is running on hers, the entire desktop feels faster and more responsive then my much faster desktop with the ATI card in it. Since I (like many people) use my computer more for work than games, my ATI card is not acceptable. Thats why I bought a 5200 Nvidia card a few days ago, because I'm sick of fighting with crappy drivers only to have my 2D performance SUFFER!!!! I'll keep the old card around, to remind me not to buy ATI again...
In Windows I use Ephpod for feeding the iPod MP3s and Media Player Classic to play the files on the computer. In Linux, I use GTKPod to feed the iPod and Muine to listen to music.
I personally believe iTunes is the devil. The first time it autosynced my iPod without asking and took away a few songs a friend gave me, I uninstalled it and swore to never use it again...
The amount of money and manpower involved....
Your powerbook can run Tiger. Just wait a week till someone hacks it out...
Some Ubuntu lovers' feelings will get hurt and some Debianites will get really mad (because Ubuntu takes their glory away).
To bad because its true.
The Ubuntu community could seperate itself from the Debian-based apt-get network, possibly rename it, and manage their own Ubuntu-exclusive repository, just as Yellowdog did with yum.
From the begining Ubuntu has had its own Repository. Its Debian Sid's with some sanity.
Where is H with a question mark and a Z with profit?
Why waste the time doing that though? Why should Canonical spend its resources on Debian politics when they can just fork the project and hand back bug fixes as they want to?
Why deal with the red tape and bullshit of Debian if you don't have to? Instead of wasting time on that crap, Ubuntu has: brought in Xorg, improved Gnome, done wonders with the installer, and set up a system where releases come at stable 6 month time frames. If Ubuntu would have instead tried to do this within Debian, the project might have nothing to show for it. Just like Userlinux...
In business schools around the country it is called smart marketing.
I know exactly what your problem is. You have added the Marillat, and it has a new version of Mplayer that Hoary doesn't have current enough libs for. What you need to do is either:
A. Disable that Repo. and try again with the multiverse added. For Hoary, a compatible Mplayer was added to the multiverse. Using the marillat repo for anything for than grabbing the w32codecs and the dvd codecs is a sure way to cause problems.
B. Don't use Mplayer. I personally like Gxine a LOT more. Try it, it installs in Ubuntu easily.+
Ubuntu is a betrayal of Debian.
Canonical has hired a number of critical packagers and maintainers of infrastructure of Debian and paid them to do priority work for Ubuntu instead of work on Debian.
Oh my god!!! Canonical had the nerve to PROVIDE A MEANS TO LIVE for Debian developers, and give them an opportunity to make a distro based on Debian and gives bugfixes back to Debian. What assholes.
Ubuntu, keeping in mind, depends on masses of packagers and developers who have chosen to package and quality-check for Debian. Canonical, in turn, depends on providing paid support for Ubuntu.
Actually Ubuntu currently depends on a certain South African that loved Debian and wanted to make a new distro based on it. He has admited to /. that he hopes that the paid support thing work out, but he doesn't mind if Ubuntu turns into charity if it doesn't.
A start-up for-profit commercial entity cannot hope to duplicate this success, is unable to do so as so many others have done in a relationship that can be described as mutualism or commensalism, and instead satisfies itself with being a blood-sucking parasite that will end only in its own destruction along with that of the host.
HOW THE F*CK IS UBUNTU A PARASITE!!!!. It gives back bug fixes. It has developed things that Debian will need in the future (Xorg). It has built up a vibrant community, and gets the word Debian and release in the same sentence together (even if it is only "Ubuntu, the debian based distro, released today.") Even if Ubuntu didn't give back bug fixes, Debian's license allows this to happen. Yet the Ubuntu devs do upstream their work. Troll
And you wankers who want the latest and best but cannot see past the inconsequential metric of a release date of a "stable" set of packages, are selling your souls and that of the best distro of Linux to ensure it will happen.
And all you wankers that can't figure it out- Ubuntu is a good thing for Debian. The progect is hurting bad and it needs a shot in the arm, Ubuntu is that show in the arm...
Untrue. There already is a volunteer group that maintains the Universe, and they are more than appreciated, they have their own title- The Masters of the Universe.
Ubuntu doesn't package the Universe. The Universe is a snapshot of Sid that a volunteer group, the Masters of The Universe, work on. The main Ubuntu devs do not waste any time packaging things in the Universe. If something isn't there, its because Sid didn't have it last time the Universe was synced.
The end result is Ubuntu - a fork. Unfortunately Ubuntu doesn't really tackle the packaging problem seriously: it improves on Debian by only stabilising a small base system, but this means you get to choose between (a) an out of date and small but stable repository (main) or (b) a large and up to date but often broken repository (universe). And I still haven't figured out WTF the "metaverse" is yet.
Actually, I've never had a problem with anything in the Universe, and I've never heard of anybody that did (and it wasn't some third party repo's fault). And I hang out on the forum a bunch.
The other part is the multiverse, non free packages such as the adobe acrobat reader.
Unfortunately the Ubuntu developers only go so far - they still believe it's possible for Ubuntu to package everything end users will ever need, even though at least in Warty, universe wasn't even enabled by default. I don't see any way for Ubuntu to stabilise universe without getting bogged down in the same mud that Debian did.
Its easy. The pay developers work on the main, release every six months and support a small base for their occupations. The universe is controlled by volunteers called the Masters of the Universe. This way the universe still gets support, but the main devs don't have to do it.
How could it?-
A. Sarge isn't released
B. Ubuntu is based on Sid.
Murdoch argues that if Ubuntu were truly compatible with Debian, all of the energy going into it could be directed at Sarge and toward getting it released, which is what would really benefit the Debian developer ecosystem as a whole.
Yep. Thats what Userlinux tried to do. Look how that went. Debian is too uncentralized to ever be more than a server distro (where slow is good).
"I understand what the Ubuntu folks are trying to do, and they're doing lots of good work that will eventually find its way into Debian," Murdoch said. "But what we really need right now as a community is for Sarge to be released.
There. He admits that Ubuntu is now more about helping out Etch (the release after Sarge) then helping out Sarge. But Warty should have helped Sarge a bunch, and Sarge has problems even millionaire Mark can't fix quickly.
"In that respect, Ubuntu's popularity is more harmful than helpful."
How is it harmful that Etch is going to kick ass because of Ubuntu's work?
I'll tell you how- each Ubuntu release is an embaressment to the Debian people. Two Ubuntus have been released before a Sarge. And if they don't watch out, it will be three. Businesses don't like that many upgrades usually, so a slow Sarge is good many say. But from the words of of Debian's founder is obvious that Sarge not being released it is turning into a bit of a joke...not good for Debian's image.
Thats the only way Ubuntu hurts Debian.