Re:Is Linux kernel 2.6.26 == Linux 2.6.26 ?
on
Linux 2.6.26 Out
·
· Score: 1
And thats why the normal person who dont know technology, is not qualified to speak about technology, if only informatio he has, is marketing speak!
Example, normal user believes that Kubuntu and Ubuntu are two different OS's, why? because their name is different and their Desktop looks different. Now, person who knows anything about KDE and GNOME, tells that those are same OS but with different desktop.
So, now when you use Ubuntu, wich one is more important by you, when you want to change desktop from GNOME to KDE. That your friend tells "you need to change OS" or "You can change desktop"? You say that first one is more important because you are so lousy to understand what you do! And what you do when you have other distribution (I should say different "OS" for you?) where you install different way the KDE or Gnome, what you say then? You cant start then speaking anymore again about desktop enviroments etc, you are just confusing users. Same thing goes for daily purpose, do you say that "You cant open that PDF because your OS does not support it, you need to change that OS or install OS part so it can open PDF files..." or "You need to update your OS, your internet browser is broken and your OS is unsecure now".
It is actually the biggest problem on everything, people does not care what they do and how they do it. They dont care how things works and what technical terms or other stuff means. That's why our language is getting ripped of because you dont care how you should say something, you just want to say it. People always leaves business, what they are responsible, for others, so others are needed to fight the mess what those, who dont care, have build up!
In long run, your attitude just blows away whole humanity... no one cares why something is now something... no one cares history, or the technology. No one normal does not want to understand things, they just want it. Just like on fast foor, you dont want to make food, you just want it taste OK and you get it when you want, not 5min later after prepairing the food.
For normal user the Ubuntu, Fedora and Gentoo are different products what are marketed as OS's. For normal user those are three different OS's, just like on Windows is against Macosx.
Even the Microsoft is wise enough that they dont shoot them self to leg by yelling that Vista home premium is different OS than Ultimate, they speak about editions etc.
And you guys, you are fighint all against others because you are defending the marketing term "OS" because "normal user does not care".
Microsoft advertise the Windows, and all others should advertise the Linux and the distribution name. They shouldn't advertise different distributions as different OS's, because then you play Microsoft pocket!
Microsoft can make studies that Linux is not so secure than Windows, because they can say that all bugs on firefox is the bugs in OS. They can say that all bugs of Apache, is bugs in OS, just because you, lousy and "dont care" people play MS pocket by lying what is OS! You cant proof Microsoft to be wrong by telling that Firefox or Apache bugs are not the OS bugs, because in first place, you has told those are the OS! So nice job by you guys, who dont care!
I dont mean that you first start to teach for normal user that how CPU is utilizied and memory is reserved when user clicks the icon on desktop and where the OS is. But I dont mean either, that you should LIE to normal user. When the normal user plans to start study technology, he turns for techinical books and then it is much harder to learn anything, if the basic things have gone wrong in first place!
It is easy to brake things and go the short road, but it is better way, to take little longer route and preserve the future!
I dont care what you lousy guys, you who "dont care" do, but you just brake the whole world by saying "I dont care"....
Re:Is Linux kernel 2.6.26 == Linux 2.6.26 ?
on
Linux 2.6.26 Out
·
· Score: 1
Operating System != System what you operate.
Operating System is software what allows you to operate your system and hardware;-)
OS is "Host" or "control program" for applications and hardware. It allow you to run your computer and run your applications. And there is differences on micro and monolith kernels. Micro kernel does not run everything what OS is should done, so Micro kernel is not a OS. But monolith kernel can run all OS services for applications and hardware, so it can be the OS.
Check out differences of Monolith and Micro kernels and then look what Windows NT has and then what Linux has.
So do not mistake Operating System to System (complete package what you get when you install Fedora, Vista or Gentoo). OS allows you to operate your system;)
Yes, Linux is the kernel. But it is not just a kernel, it is the OS too. Check the OS definition and check what Linux includes. Then search information about monolith kernel and micro kernel and check what Linux does, then check these informations against OS definition, you find out that Linux is the OS, not just a kernel.
Re:Is Linux kernel 2.6.26 == Linux 2.6.26 ?
on
Linux 2.6.26 Out
·
· Score: 1
Your next tasks are, 1) find out what are needed before *something* can be called as OS. (check serious OS coding books) 2) find information about monolith kernel and micro kernel and marketing propaganda "hybrid kernel". 3) Look the kernel definitions and what is told about kernel and user space. 4) Then check this kernel information against OS definition and do a conclusion.
You find out, Linux is the OS alone. Then check out dictionary what it says about kernel, operating system, system and marketing. Then check out what distribution means. Check what "Free Software (GPL)" and "Open Source" definitions means. Check these informations against all the information what you have collected, you find out, there is Linux OS what is distributed by multiple participant.
Then you get conclusion, Linux is the OS and always, someone takes the OS (Linux) and bundles with it a applications and roll from it a own product, what is called as OS, because they offer the OS as the main product on their product package.
- Process management? - Memory management? - Hardware management? - Network management? - Filesystem management? - System calls (servers)? - HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer)? - ????
Micro kernels does not include all those itself. Linux does, so is the Linux OS or is it just a kernel?
Micro kernel is located alone in kernel space and OS services on the userland. Monolith kernel is located alone in the kernel space, and no OS services on the userland. So called 'hybrid kernel' is micro kernel what is located with some, if not all, os services on the kernel space, some might be on userland.
So are you saying that Linux is a microkernel and OS services are on the userland? I tought it was a monolith kernel.
Should I say that because the OS is not usefull without a applications, it is just fair to just call all those distributions as Linux/Firefox/GNU/Apache/Samba etc?
Re:Is Linux kernel 2.6.26 == Linux 2.6.26 ?
on
Linux 2.6.26 Out
·
· Score: 1
OS needs a kernel so it can control the hardware and give OS services for applications. Applications needs a OS. OS+Applications generates a system. People buys complete systems where they have lots of applications (or less) and OS is running all the applications and controlling the hardware... so, what is part of OS and what is not?
Re:Is Linux kernel 2.6.26 == Linux 2.6.26 ?
on
Linux 2.6.26 Out
·
· Score: 1
Can someone tell why it is then needed to include ex: I/O, Drivers, Filesystem, Networking, Process management and system calls before something is OS?
Item 1: You're trusting that team. All it takes is one person to slip in a modified binary or batch of code.
It takes one person to try splipping the code, while others do not check it, what is very dificult if not possible!
Item 2: The Debian team gathers and bundles hundreds, if not thousands, of other OSS projects.
What does not mean that on the project end does not have lots of other people already doing the checks too, so when debian does the check, there can be more eye pairs checkin, not just one!
Item 3: All of those projects have their own teams which are also subject to item number 1.
Read the answer for Item 1
Like I said earlier. You're engaged in trust, but there's no way the average user is going to EVER know for sure...
Only thing when you can be sure is not using computer at all! Trust must start always from somewhere and security means that everything is needed to check at least twice, by multiple users!
I think the most common reason are very short power cuts. I have long time be thinking why does my family and friends ADSL+WLAN routers reset them so often without reason. Yesterday, I was using my laptop next my family router and my laptop informed me with two fast beep (both came under a second) that it has lost AC cord and is using battery and then AC cord is connected. Right away I watched the router and it turned off SYS lights but keeped PWR, WLAN, LAN and ADSL lights ON. For two minutes, there was nothing happening, network worked as it should after small 5 secon hickup, but System light didnt turn on. I checked the settings and everything was reseted. I turned router off and back on and checked again, all settings were as they suppose to be.
Small power cut seems to affect so it will reset it's settings but not reset the modem itself, keeping it workin with default settings. This happening told me right away why it was so wieard always to check settings after reset what someone on family did when speaking on phone and hearing that everything was OK, but without reseting, router didn't allow network printing beecause connectin with correct IP's was not happening.
Now I'm planning to buy those 50â UPS to protect the router, nothing else in the power grid in our house, does not affect this kind happenings, not even PVR devices or Computers, only a Router.
Yes, it is dificult to draw line what is "ready". Thumb rule might be that 1.0 or 2.0 version numbers is given when application has features what were planned for it in first place. But on small projects, it is easy to just start doing application from 0.1 version and go up and up. So truth is, version numbering is just a version numbering, telling that 0.5 is older version than 0.7, and it should not be used as metering "finished product".
Vista had terrible problems because it should be released in state what is now with SP1. I tested all RC versions and I have used Windows so long that I know to wait at least SP1 before taking their new OS version to use, because something in system can be totally wrong. I didn't complain about the quality of Vista. But I laugh that world biggest software company, who controls markets with ~80 share, cant build such products what will work from start. Windows is huge and it has dificulties, so I dont mind, especially because I dont use Windows Vista for anything!;)
KDE developers told so many times in their blogs that 4.0.x is for developers, it is not finished, it is just a start. But so many user did not hear what dev's were saying. And now they complain only about what they think the version numbering should say, what is that 4.0 is twice so feature rich/polished product as 2.0 was. And it is just a version numbering. I'm waiting 4.2 or even 4.3 until I start even thinkin, did KDE release what were "promised" (planned, showed as ideas) when KDE was on 3.5.0 state.
I dont think that Beta would help so much, because now when you installed it on OpenSuse 11.0 or other distributions, you got warnings that it is not for production, it is just a testing purpose. And still people whine about it. That's why Kubuntu did not get LTS and there was ENOUGH information that current state is not ready. If people cant read it, they are just lousy or stupid to read them.
Mandrake worked on 8.x > 10.0 then 10.x versions it got somekind problems but on 2005 LE it started work again well. Now it is smoot, polished and works out of the box right away, what exm, Ubuntu cant do!
Fedora is nice too and I like to test it but I have not learned to work with it's package management. It's other nice bleeding edge Linux distro!
Actually, you have that problem with desktop icons on KDE 4.0.x but on KDE 4.1.x there comes containers. If you want, you can set one container as fullscreen and place it to show ~/Desktop and you can do all things what you can on KDE3.
Do not blame KDE4 what early versions for developers , lacks... You need to tell that you dont like KDE's X.Y.z versions!
Distrowatch just tells how much what distro is being checked out, not installed or used.
Ubuntu has got lots of press in few years but I think it is still behind other distros like Mandriva or Debian. Mandriva had weak points when it was about to get closed but it survived and it's now getting again more users.
Distrowatch graphs shouldn't be watched as truth, but as just what is intresting people.
Like if Debian had 5 million users when Ubuntu released, in few years Ubuntu gets 3 million users and Debian only 1 million, Debian is still leading in user count. Same thing goes to Mandriva, OpenSuse etc, they had big user base before ubuntu and they still gets lots of new users.
What makes this very dificult, is marketing. If all press speaks only about Ubuntu, almost everyperson tought that ubuntu is most popular, even that it wouldn't have none new user.
And we cant calculate the user moves what happens when people starts trying Ubuntu, does not satified with it and moves to OpenSuse or Mandriva. Distrowatch does not calculate this kind things so easily, because most other distro suggestions can come on distro's forum, IRC or by friend.
Actually only way to calculate popularity, is get every distro to ping distro's servers, but there is LOTS of problems to solve that could be trusted. Actually, it should be one server where all distros ping and send HW information what is used to calculate the user amount. It would calculate them even you would use multiple distros on machines, because it should inform the server on every update. And then think about privacy, no way we would like that!
I dont know than few (4) Ubuntu users in Finland or sweden, but I know Mandriva users about 30 and about 15 OpenSuse users. Most users has started with Ubuntu but moved to these two, even that Ubuntu is on magazines and others almost all the time. How do I know these? Because I'm the person who installs and maintain Linux on their machine. Just avarage joes, age ranging from 12 to 70.
One reason why I like Mandriva is it's openess on development!
Anytime when I want, I can add cooker repositories for urpmi and I get development version of distribution. I dont need to wait alpha or beta versions. And it is easy to stay on cooker until new stable version has released and then just disable cooker repositories and continue using new stable one.
On OpenSuse or Ubuntu, it is not so easy, I need to add testing or other sources but in some way, in Mandriva, it is just much easier.
I'm going to give alpha 2 a shot for testing and then I report what I found wrong, even that I'm not a coder... but Mandriva does it easy to report new ideas and bugs, while using others, I find it dificult.
That's why I like bugs.kde.org (BKO) because I can so easily add wishes and bug reports. Same thing with Mandriva. I have tried to do this with Ubuntu's brainstorm service where you can vote but there is so much wrong ideas in wrong place, normal users thinking that Ubuntu owns the GNOME, actually that GNOME is Ubuntu's own desktop what no one other distribution/OS have.
Ubuntu has got the spotlight because it does few things better than others.
1) Nice slogan "Ubuntu means humanity to others" 2) Few applications on menus (was then, now everyone has only best ones on menus!) 3) Came right time out when Linux got good HW support and GNOME got good versions out so it was looking good for Windows XP user!
And that's it. Now it has great package support (thanks to Debian!) and big support from magazines etc, who dont know anything else than Ubuntu and thinks that Ubuntu is someway different OS what just use Linux as kernel, than other distributions.
So Ubuntu actually rides only with its fame. If you place Ubuntu, Mandriva, OpenSuse, Fedora and PCLinuxOS for normal user and you ask them to do different task, like configuring computer, installing applications etc, Mandriva (+PCLinuxOS) and OpenSuse comes first ones, depending what is taste of tester. Ubuntu and Fedora stays behind.
I install Linux for normal users who like to get new OS and are tired for Windows. I give them a demo about all three distributions and give them try them and if they want, they can testrun them few weeks on their machine before choosing and it's always Mandriva or OpenSUSE, sometimes PCLinuxOS but Ubuntu stays behind, even by those who have heard only about it!
I'm currently using OpenSuse 11.0 and MDV 2008 Spring on two machines. What I like is one-click repository management on OpenSUSE, but I more like the "easy urpmi" site what is needed to run once. On OpenSuse I run all place the web to find where is packages etc. Samething goes sometimes with Mandriva when Ubuntu has most of packages but I just get newest usually for MDV what I need. There is few packages what I would like but I get them more easily with SVN;-)
MCC and Yast just rocks. Altought I like more MCC because it is cleander and more simpler to do with easy-to-use wizards.
I'm hoping that someday, there would come Qt version of MCC so GTK+ could be forget, because sometimes I run to that point when I run MCC, it gets nonkind theme from GTK+ and it is ugly. But it is small price about the tools.
I hope that MCC could be ported to other distributions too because it would bring GNU/Linux even wider area, currently all other (excluding *suse and MDV based distributions) distributions lacks such intuitive and easy-to-use tools:-)
Ubuntu lacks good OS and System configuration tools.
All tools what Ubuntu offeres, are mostly from GNOME. Mandriva has own great tools what are used on other distributions too, example a PCLinuxOS. Other great distribution offering good tools is OpenSuse (Suse).
That's why I dont recomend ubuntu for novice user because almost all littlebit advanced configuration needs commandline, sudo this and sudo that and sudo gedit this and that.
If Ubuntu would get MCC/Yast, it would be good distribution for novice, not it's just for those who are happy what ever they get or real experts who knows how to "code" what is needed.
Then EU companies should start selling those devices to US, because here devices does not run any common OS. Every software is checked very carefully that there ain't anykind problems. It is expensive but you need to trust the device what keeps living person a live and does not kill him because malfunction!
Slashdot Mirror
And thats why the normal person who dont know technology, is not qualified to speak about technology, if only informatio he has, is marketing speak!
Example, normal user believes that Kubuntu and Ubuntu are two different OS's, why? because their name is different and their Desktop looks different. Now, person who knows anything about KDE and GNOME, tells that those are same OS but with different desktop.
So, now when you use Ubuntu, wich one is more important by you, when you want to change desktop from GNOME to KDE. That your friend tells "you need to change OS" or "You can change desktop"? You say that first one is more important because you are so lousy to understand what you do! And what you do when you have other distribution (I should say different "OS" for you?) where you install different way the KDE or Gnome, what you say then? You cant start then speaking anymore again about desktop enviroments etc, you are just confusing users.
Same thing goes for daily purpose, do you say that "You cant open that PDF because your OS does not support it, you need to change that OS or install OS part so it can open PDF files..." or "You need to update your OS, your internet browser is broken and your OS is unsecure now".
It is actually the biggest problem on everything, people does not care what they do and how they do it. They dont care how things works and what technical terms or other stuff means. That's why our language is getting ripped of because you dont care how you should say something, you just want to say it. People always leaves business, what they are responsible, for others, so others are needed to fight the mess what those, who dont care, have build up!
In long run, your attitude just blows away whole humanity... no one cares why something is now something... no one cares history, or the technology. No one normal does not want to understand things, they just want it. Just like on fast foor, you dont want to make food, you just want it taste OK and you get it when you want, not 5min later after prepairing the food.
For normal user the Ubuntu, Fedora and Gentoo are different products what are marketed as OS's. For normal user those are three different OS's, just like on Windows is against Macosx.
Even the Microsoft is wise enough that they dont shoot them self to leg by yelling that Vista home premium is different OS than Ultimate, they speak about editions etc.
And you guys, you are fighint all against others because you are defending the marketing term "OS" because "normal user does not care".
Microsoft advertise the Windows, and all others should advertise the Linux and the distribution name. They shouldn't advertise different distributions as different OS's, because then you play Microsoft pocket!
Microsoft can make studies that Linux is not so secure than Windows, because they can say that all bugs on firefox is the bugs in OS. They can say that all bugs of Apache, is bugs in OS, just because you, lousy and "dont care" people play MS pocket by lying what is OS! You cant proof Microsoft to be wrong by telling that Firefox or Apache bugs are not the OS bugs, because in first place, you has told those are the OS!
So nice job by you guys, who dont care!
I dont mean that you first start to teach for normal user that how CPU is utilizied and memory is reserved when user clicks the icon on desktop and where the OS is. But I dont mean either, that you should LIE to normal user.
When the normal user plans to start study technology, he turns for techinical books and then it is much harder to learn anything, if the basic things have gone wrong in first place!
It is easy to brake things and go the short road, but it is better way, to take little longer route and preserve the future!
I dont care what you lousy guys, you who "dont care" do, but you just brake the whole world by saying "I dont care"....
Operating System != System what you operate.
Operating System is software what allows you to operate your system and hardware ;-)
OS is "Host" or "control program" for applications and hardware. It allow you to run your computer and run your applications. And there is differences on micro and monolith kernels. Micro kernel does not run everything what OS is should done, so Micro kernel is not a OS. But monolith kernel can run all OS services for applications and hardware, so it can be the OS.
Check out differences of Monolith and Micro kernels and then look what Windows NT has and then what Linux has.
So do not mistake Operating System to System (complete package what you get when you install Fedora, Vista or Gentoo). OS allows you to operate your system ;)
Yes, Linux is the kernel. But it is not just a kernel, it is the OS too. Check the OS definition and check what Linux includes.
Then search information about monolith kernel and micro kernel and check what Linux does, then check these informations against OS definition, you find out that Linux is the OS, not just a kernel.
GNOME is part of GNU....
But http://www.topology.org/linux/lingl.html
Check the OS definition!
How about http://www.getgnulinux.org/
But seriously, check the OS definition and you see that Linux is alone the OS!
http://www.topology.org/linux/lingl.html
Then this one is good for you, because you are saturated with marketing propaganda!
http://www.topology.org/linux/lingl.html
Your next tasks are,
1) find out what are needed before *something* can be called as OS. (check serious OS coding books)
2) find information about monolith kernel and micro kernel and marketing propaganda "hybrid kernel".
3) Look the kernel definitions and what is told about kernel and user space.
4) Then check this kernel information against OS definition and do a conclusion.
You find out, Linux is the OS alone.
Then check out dictionary what it says about kernel, operating system, system and marketing. Then check out what distribution means.
Check what "Free Software (GPL)" and "Open Source" definitions means. Check these informations against all the information what you have collected, you find out, there is Linux OS what is distributed by multiple participant.
Then you get conclusion, Linux is the OS and always, someone takes the OS (Linux) and bundles with it a applications and roll from it a own product, what is called as OS, because they offer the OS as the main product on their product package.
What is in the OS definition list?
- Process management?
- Memory management?
- Hardware management?
- Network management?
- Filesystem management?
- System calls (servers)?
- HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer)?
- ????
Micro kernels does not include all those itself. Linux does, so is the Linux OS or is it just a kernel?
Micro kernel is located alone in kernel space and OS services on the userland.
Monolith kernel is located alone in the kernel space, and no OS services on the userland.
So called 'hybrid kernel' is micro kernel what is located with some, if not all, os services on the kernel space, some might be on userland.
So are you saying that Linux is a microkernel and OS services are on the userland? I tought it was a monolith kernel.
http://www.topology.org/linux/lingl.html
But what if all the services what OS is need to give for application, has included in kernel, isn't the kernel then a OS?
Micro kernel vs Monolith kernel (and then very wierd joined "Hybrid kernel").
http://www.topology.org/linux/lingl.html
Should I say that because the OS is not usefull without a applications, it is just fair to just call all those distributions as Linux/Firefox/GNU/Apache/Samba etc?
OS needs a kernel so it can control the hardware and give OS services for applications. Applications needs a OS. OS+Applications generates a system. People buys complete systems where they have lots of applications (or less) and OS is running all the applications and controlling the hardware... so, what is part of OS and what is not?
http://www.topology.org/linux/lingl.html
Those ain't complete operating systems, only a full featured systems. Operating System != System.
Can you please give me technical requirements that software is needed to support ODF, PDF, IM, Email, HTTP etc, until it can be called as OS?
Technically, Linux is a kernel AND the OS, but it is refered incorrectly only as a kernel, on market purpose or by RMS styled.
http://www.topology.org/linux/lingl.html
Can someone tell why it is then needed to include ex: I/O, Drivers, Filesystem, Networking, Process management and system calls before something is OS?
Item 1: You're trusting that team. All it takes is one person to slip in a modified binary or batch of code.
It takes one person to try splipping the code, while others do not check it, what is very dificult if not possible!
Item 2: The Debian team gathers and bundles hundreds, if not thousands, of other OSS projects.
What does not mean that on the project end does not have lots of other people already doing the checks too, so when debian does the check, there can be more eye pairs checkin, not just one!
Item 3: All of those projects have their own teams which are also subject to item number 1.
Read the answer for Item 1
Like I said earlier. You're engaged in trust, but there's no way the average user is going to EVER know for sure...
Only thing when you can be sure is not using computer at all! Trust must start always from somewhere and security means that everything is needed to check at least twice, by multiple users!
I think the most common reason are very short power cuts. I have long time be thinking why does my family and friends ADSL+WLAN routers reset them so often without reason. Yesterday, I was using my laptop next my family router and my laptop informed me with two fast beep (both came under a second) that it has lost AC cord and is using battery and then AC cord is connected. Right away I watched the router and it turned off SYS lights but keeped PWR, WLAN, LAN and ADSL lights ON. For two minutes, there was nothing happening, network worked as it should after small 5 secon hickup, but System light didnt turn on. I checked the settings and everything was reseted. I turned router off and back on and checked again, all settings were as they suppose to be.
Small power cut seems to affect so it will reset it's settings but not reset the modem itself, keeping it workin with default settings. This happening told me right away why it was so wieard always to check settings after reset what someone on family did when speaking on phone and hearing that everything was OK, but without reseting, router didn't allow network printing beecause connectin with correct IP's was not happening.
Now I'm planning to buy those 50â UPS to protect the router, nothing else in the power grid in our house, does not affect this kind happenings, not even PVR devices or Computers, only a Router.
Yes, it is dificult to draw line what is "ready". Thumb rule might be that 1.0 or 2.0 version numbers is given when application has features what were planned for it in first place. But on small projects, it is easy to just start doing application from 0.1 version and go up and up.
So truth is, version numbering is just a version numbering, telling that 0.5 is older version than 0.7, and it should not be used as metering "finished product".
Vista had terrible problems because it should be released in state what is now with SP1. I tested all RC versions and I have used Windows so long that I know to wait at least SP1 before taking their new OS version to use, because something in system can be totally wrong. I didn't complain about the quality of Vista. But I laugh that world biggest software company, who controls markets with ~80 share, cant build such products what will work from start. Windows is huge and it has dificulties, so I dont mind, especially because I dont use Windows Vista for anything! ;)
KDE developers told so many times in their blogs that 4.0.x is for developers, it is not finished, it is just a start. But so many user did not hear what dev's were saying. And now they complain only about what they think the version numbering should say, what is that 4.0 is twice so feature rich/polished product as 2.0 was. And it is just a version numbering. I'm waiting 4.2 or even 4.3 until I start even thinkin, did KDE release what were "promised" (planned, showed as ideas) when KDE was on 3.5.0 state.
I dont think that Beta would help so much, because now when you installed it on OpenSuse 11.0 or other distributions, you got warnings that it is not for production, it is just a testing purpose. And still people whine about it. That's why Kubuntu did not get LTS and there was ENOUGH information that current state is not ready. If people cant read it, they are just lousy or stupid to read them.
Isn't that the precise definition of BETA software?
No, it is definition of version numbering!
KDE 3 > New idea of KDE4 > Alpha > Beta > 4.0.x > 4.1.x > 4.2.x
1.0 (or 4.0) does not mean it is finished or ready. Then we woudn't have any other version numbers than alpha > beta > 1.0.
What is 1.1 or 1.0.0.1 then if not better software?
Mandrake worked on 8.x > 10.0 then 10.x versions it got somekind problems but on 2005 LE it started work again well. Now it is smoot, polished and works out of the box right away, what exm, Ubuntu cant do!
Fedora is nice too and I like to test it but I have not learned to work with it's package management. It's other nice bleeding edge Linux distro!
Actually, you have that problem with desktop icons on KDE 4.0.x but on KDE 4.1.x there comes containers. If you want, you can set one container as fullscreen and place it to show ~/Desktop and you can do all things what you can on KDE3.
Do not blame KDE4 what early versions for developers , lacks... You need to tell that you dont like KDE's X.Y.z versions!
Distrowatch just tells how much what distro is being checked out, not installed or used.
Ubuntu has got lots of press in few years but I think it is still behind other distros like Mandriva or Debian. Mandriva had weak points when it was about to get closed but it survived and it's now getting again more users.
Distrowatch graphs shouldn't be watched as truth, but as just what is intresting people.
Like if Debian had 5 million users when Ubuntu released, in few years Ubuntu gets 3 million users and Debian only 1 million, Debian is still leading in user count. Same thing goes to Mandriva, OpenSuse etc, they had big user base before ubuntu and they still gets lots of new users.
What makes this very dificult, is marketing. If all press speaks only about Ubuntu, almost everyperson tought that ubuntu is most popular, even that it wouldn't have none new user.
And we cant calculate the user moves what happens when people starts trying Ubuntu, does not satified with it and moves to OpenSuse or Mandriva. Distrowatch does not calculate this kind things so easily, because most other distro suggestions can come on distro's forum, IRC or by friend.
Actually only way to calculate popularity, is get every distro to ping distro's servers, but there is LOTS of problems to solve that could be trusted. Actually, it should be one server where all distros ping and send HW information what is used to calculate the user amount. It would calculate them even you would use multiple distros on machines, because it should inform the server on every update. And then think about privacy, no way we would like that!
I dont know than few (4) Ubuntu users in Finland or sweden, but I know Mandriva users about 30 and about 15 OpenSuse users. Most users has started with Ubuntu but moved to these two, even that Ubuntu is on magazines and others almost all the time. How do I know these? Because I'm the person who installs and maintain Linux on their machine. Just avarage joes, age ranging from 12 to 70.
One reason why I like Mandriva is it's openess on development!
Anytime when I want, I can add cooker repositories for urpmi and I get development version of distribution. I dont need to wait alpha or beta versions. And it is easy to stay on cooker until new stable version has released and then just disable cooker repositories and continue using new stable one.
On OpenSuse or Ubuntu, it is not so easy, I need to add testing or other sources but in some way, in Mandriva, it is just much easier.
I'm going to give alpha 2 a shot for testing and then I report what I found wrong, even that I'm not a coder... but Mandriva does it easy to report new ideas and bugs, while using others, I find it dificult.
That's why I like bugs.kde.org (BKO) because I can so easily add wishes and bug reports. Same thing with Mandriva. I have tried to do this with Ubuntu's brainstorm service where you can vote but there is so much wrong ideas in wrong place, normal users thinking that Ubuntu owns the GNOME, actually that GNOME is Ubuntu's own desktop what no one other distribution/OS have.
Ubuntu has got the spotlight because it does few things better than others.
1) Nice slogan "Ubuntu means humanity to others"
2) Few applications on menus (was then, now everyone has only best ones on menus!)
3) Came right time out when Linux got good HW support and GNOME got good versions out so it was looking good for Windows XP user!
And that's it. Now it has great package support (thanks to Debian!) and big support from magazines etc, who dont know anything else than Ubuntu and thinks that Ubuntu is someway different OS what just use Linux as kernel, than other distributions.
So Ubuntu actually rides only with its fame.
If you place Ubuntu, Mandriva, OpenSuse, Fedora and PCLinuxOS for normal user and you ask them to do different task, like configuring computer, installing applications etc, Mandriva (+PCLinuxOS) and OpenSuse comes first ones, depending what is taste of tester. Ubuntu and Fedora stays behind.
I install Linux for normal users who like to get new OS and are tired for Windows. I give them a demo about all three distributions and give them try them and if they want, they can testrun them few weeks on their machine before choosing and it's always Mandriva or OpenSUSE, sometimes PCLinuxOS but Ubuntu stays behind, even by those who have heard only about it!
I'm currently using OpenSuse 11.0 and MDV 2008 Spring on two machines. What I like is one-click repository management on OpenSUSE, but I more like the "easy urpmi" site what is needed to run once. On OpenSuse I run all place the web to find where is packages etc. Samething goes sometimes with Mandriva when Ubuntu has most of packages but I just get newest usually for MDV what I need. There is few packages what I would like but I get them more easily with SVN ;-)
I like OpenSuse but MDV just has my heart.
MCC and Yast just rocks. Altought I like more MCC because it is cleander and more simpler to do with easy-to-use wizards.
I'm hoping that someday, there would come Qt version of MCC so GTK+ could be forget, because sometimes I run to that point when I run MCC, it gets nonkind theme from GTK+ and it is ugly. But it is small price about the tools.
I hope that MCC could be ported to other distributions too because it would bring GNU/Linux even wider area, currently all other (excluding *suse and MDV based distributions) distributions lacks such intuitive and easy-to-use tools :-)
Ubuntu lacks good OS and System configuration tools.
All tools what Ubuntu offeres, are mostly from GNOME. Mandriva has own great tools what are used on other distributions too, example a PCLinuxOS. Other great distribution offering good tools is OpenSuse (Suse).
That's why I dont recomend ubuntu for novice user because almost all littlebit advanced configuration needs commandline, sudo this and sudo that and sudo gedit this and that.
If Ubuntu would get MCC/Yast, it would be good distribution for novice, not it's just for those who are happy what ever they get or real experts who knows how to "code" what is needed.
Then EU companies should start selling those devices to US, because here devices does not run any common OS. Every software is checked very carefully that there ain't anykind problems. It is expensive but you need to trust the device what keeps living person a live and does not kill him because malfunction!