Discussion on:
View:
Show:
Jack you nailed it. I've been following this nonsense since 11.04 and yes Ubuntu is the only Distro pushing itself beyond being another distro. Mark S should be thanked for getting Ubuntu into the world beyond us IT guys.
Sometimes I think Linux users are their own worst enemies. What Ubuntu (and its derivatives) has done is made the Linux desktop as easy as boot CD, next, next, next, reboot. Sorry if that pisses you off, but if I wanted to spend my days on the command line, I would still run DOS.
My children still have no idea what runs their computer. They save as .docx so their teachers can read their homework without a problem. That the spyware that comes with some of their game sites doesn't like the OS in their computer is just a bonus blessing.
My children still have no idea what runs their computer. They save as .docx so their teachers can read their homework without a problem. That the spyware that comes with some of their game sites doesn't like the OS in their computer is just a bonus blessing.
It starts off sounding that the "hate" is from Ubuntu changing interfaces and such. But then moves into a rant about "Hate" because Ubuntu wants to be mainstream.
Can someone clear this up for me?
Can someone clear this up for me?
many Linux advocates claim they hate Ubuntu. Jack's position is that they have done more good than harm.
It's because Ubuntu dropped the ball a few times, so now people have moved to Mint. Which as you know, is Ubuntu with extra polish.
I would even say, it is in the nature of open source projects for people to be overly critical and jealous. Precisely because people are doing it for free, people seek reward in appreciation. When someone dumps their project they feel personally offended. When some other distro is more successful they feel threatened.
And then we have we also have a group of fundamentalists under the lead of Richard M. Stallman who charge at unbelievers or deviants of the holy faith and wish to burn them at the stakes.
I think it is mostly funny.
I can only bring my appreciation to Mark Shuttleworth, Canonical, all the people in the Ubuntu community and all the people in the Linux community for making it happen. No need for quarrel, use the energy rather in a constructive way. Like Mark Shuttleworth writes: do not poison the well you leave behind. I think that is well put. you want to make another project or distro great? Then do just that.
And then we have we also have a group of fundamentalists under the lead of Richard M. Stallman who charge at unbelievers or deviants of the holy faith and wish to burn them at the stakes.
I think it is mostly funny.
I can only bring my appreciation to Mark Shuttleworth, Canonical, all the people in the Ubuntu community and all the people in the Linux community for making it happen. No need for quarrel, use the energy rather in a constructive way. Like Mark Shuttleworth writes: do not poison the well you leave behind. I think that is well put. you want to make another project or distro great? Then do just that.
Whenever there is criticism on Ubuntu, there are people advertising Mint. Coincidence?
As Mint is based on Ubuntu, it should rather thank Ubuntu than criticize it. I installed it and I think it is all right, but I went back to Ubuntu. It is a carefree system. I did however install the Cairo Dock and made the Launcher to hide. This gives me even more buttons, and I get many extra's like a classic app menu, a shortcuts box for favourite folders, a folder menu, a recent activities window, a drop box, a shortcuts box om which you can drop favourite documents and folders. And then you have these great applets like a clock, netspeed meter, workspace changer, weather, that you can also put on the deskop as gadgets. I like that because the screenlets and conki often get messed up.
Just installing Cairo Dock made Mint superfluous for me, because I love the Hud, but I also like a configuralble dock and a classic app menu. As it autohides on fullscreen it works perfectly together with the Launcher. I totally stopped configuring. I just install the the Cairo dock and I feel fine.
There are other distro's based on Ubuntu, I like Elementary OS best. They totally revamped the desktop and made it look pixtel perfect and made it minimalistic in a good way. It is a delight to work with and ideal for people new to Linux. I think it is great the interface now gets a lot of attention. KDE has become pretty good and Gnome3 works fine with all the extensions. There is plenty to choose nowadays.
But other distro's do not draw much new people to Linux, they try to draw them from Ubuntu instead. Ubuntu is drawing people to Linux. Canonical has the right contacts in the industry to get them to preinstall Linux on devices. Ubuntu has brought gaming to the Linux platform. Ubuntu is bringing Linux to phones and tablets. Ubuntu is installed in the cloud. Linux needs this spearhead. Without it the Linux desktop remains a backwater. The industry wants a professional partner. If Ubuntu becomes a huge succes, other distro's can profit from this, both in development as in attracting more users.
As Mint is based on Ubuntu, it should rather thank Ubuntu than criticize it. I installed it and I think it is all right, but I went back to Ubuntu. It is a carefree system. I did however install the Cairo Dock and made the Launcher to hide. This gives me even more buttons, and I get many extra's like a classic app menu, a shortcuts box for favourite folders, a folder menu, a recent activities window, a drop box, a shortcuts box om which you can drop favourite documents and folders. And then you have these great applets like a clock, netspeed meter, workspace changer, weather, that you can also put on the deskop as gadgets. I like that because the screenlets and conki often get messed up.
Just installing Cairo Dock made Mint superfluous for me, because I love the Hud, but I also like a configuralble dock and a classic app menu. As it autohides on fullscreen it works perfectly together with the Launcher. I totally stopped configuring. I just install the the Cairo dock and I feel fine.
There are other distro's based on Ubuntu, I like Elementary OS best. They totally revamped the desktop and made it look pixtel perfect and made it minimalistic in a good way. It is a delight to work with and ideal for people new to Linux. I think it is great the interface now gets a lot of attention. KDE has become pretty good and Gnome3 works fine with all the extensions. There is plenty to choose nowadays.
But other distro's do not draw much new people to Linux, they try to draw them from Ubuntu instead. Ubuntu is drawing people to Linux. Canonical has the right contacts in the industry to get them to preinstall Linux on devices. Ubuntu has brought gaming to the Linux platform. Ubuntu is bringing Linux to phones and tablets. Ubuntu is installed in the cloud. Linux needs this spearhead. Without it the Linux desktop remains a backwater. The industry wants a professional partner. If Ubuntu becomes a huge succes, other distro's can profit from this, both in development as in attracting more users.
I can't give examples using Linux, but I can use Internet explorer. My parents still can't find the home button, the history button, the favorites button.
Thats why I gave them Avant, and set it up with text icons and the biggest buttons possible, they love it, minimalist sucks.
I know someone is going to yell at me for only using one example. But outside the geekend blog, reading comprehension is pretty low here so why bother.
Thats why I gave them Avant, and set it up with text icons and the biggest buttons possible, they love it, minimalist sucks.
I know someone is going to yell at me for only using one example. But outside the geekend blog, reading comprehension is pretty low here so why bother.
I feel the same way about Chrome and IE. They may be slicker than greased snot, but I need the visual cues.
Those arguing against Ubuntu (or anything else that imposes a single standard) seem always to miss the point that the mass market does not want choice. They don't want to be able to choose a desktop, window manager, one of fifteen office suites and so on. My employers offer a B2B product that is immensely configurable and flexible. You wouldn't believe the number of potential customers who have recoiled in fright at that power - "it's too complicated, we don't want to have to make decisions, rather than have something that can be made to do exactly what we want we'd rather have something that we can't change and we'll get used to it." I'm not joking.
If Canonical with Ubuntu offers a single consistent user experience across devices and thus a convincing alternative to The Other OS, and thus gains wide acceptance for GNU/Linux I wish them well. And praise be to Debian, which makes it possible. The geeks amongst us can still fiddle and tweak with it, if we want.
If Canonical with Ubuntu offers a single consistent user experience across devices and thus a convincing alternative to The Other OS, and thus gains wide acceptance for GNU/Linux I wish them well. And praise be to Debian, which makes it possible. The geeks amongst us can still fiddle and tweak with it, if we want.
The success of Apple is ample proof the the masses (sheep) don't want choice. They want to play without having to think. I was on another site and a user was wailing about the lack of "instant gratification" at movie theaters.
If you give users a fixed environment, you must make it "neutral". This is what Microsoft is seriously doing wrong with Windows 8 (witness yet another half-billion fine from the EU for Bing-ing), and it's what Cannonical is starting to do wrong with Ubuntu One and the Ubuntu Software Center.
It's just not for me.
It's squarely and to be fair accurately aimed at appliance users.
I'm not one of them...
It's squarely and to be fair accurately aimed at appliance users.
I'm not one of them...
What everyone conveniently forgets, is Ubuntu is itself based on Debian, and no one ever seems to give it credit for anything.
There's plenty of banter about Mint (and others) being based on Ubuntu, but that's only part of the story.
There's plenty of banter about Mint (and others) being based on Ubuntu, but that's only part of the story.
I installed Ubuntu 10.04 on my VM which is on a laptop. The resolution for the laptop is 1600X900, but there is no choice for this under Ubuntu. A search online found a very complicated work around which I decided was too complicated for me to follow. No simple installation program is available, and the great programmers for Ubuntu do not care or have time to resolve this problem even though many laptops have this resolution. Ubuntu only offers 4:3 resolution ratios.
I use Ubuntu on a Dell D630 with a 1440x900 resolution. That is clearly not 4:3, but 16:10.
However, I also use Oracle Virtualbox on the same laptop and also have issues in setting the desired resolution for new Ubuntu versions and ChromeOS.
Why use it in a VM?? If you don't want to change your harddrive, use a live-CD. That gets much closer to the real experience.
I use a dual-boot installation since I have applications that are not available for Ubuntu (or any Linux flavor for that matter) and also do not run in WINE.
However, I also use Oracle Virtualbox on the same laptop and also have issues in setting the desired resolution for new Ubuntu versions and ChromeOS.
Why use it in a VM?? If you don't want to change your harddrive, use a live-CD. That gets much closer to the real experience.
I use a dual-boot installation since I have applications that are not available for Ubuntu (or any Linux flavor for that matter) and also do not run in WINE.
or workstation.
I've been using both on my laptop (1600x900) and after instyalling vmware tools, it doesn't matter which size I make the vm, the guest os (ubuntu, mint, xp, 7, 8 ...) adapt seamlessly to these settings, including full screen
I've been using both on my laptop (1600x900) and after instyalling vmware tools, it doesn't matter which size I make the vm, the guest os (ubuntu, mint, xp, 7, 8 ...) adapt seamlessly to these settings, including full screen
I had a similar problem. This has nothing to with Ubuntu not supporting this resolution. It may happen because people install Nvidia drivers. To use these drivers you must install the Linux headerfiles.
sudo apt-get install linux-headers-generic
look here: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2088244&page=2&p=12523148#post12523148
sudo apt-get install linux-headers-generic
look here: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2088244&page=2&p=12523148#post12523148
I agree with most of your points, but please, a "takeaway" is a substandard comestible purchased for speed over quality. Unless that is why you used the term, of course, would you please not?. "Abstract" or "Summary" seem perfectly adequate.
This article by Matt Baxter-Reynolds on TechRepublic pretty much said it simply enough for me to understand.
MB-R writes for ZDNet, not TR. Plus, he jumped to conclusions that cannot
be supported by the percentages he referenced. He has a history of dissing
anything Microsoft, which is fine, but when you erroneously use some arbitrary
percentage to support your thesis, you set yourself up for failure...and he did!
By the by, I am not only a moderator here, but also at ZDNet. Suffice it to say
that MB-R is one of a handful of bloggers there that only post click-bait
garbage just to fan the flames of all the shills, fanboys/fangirls and trolls.
Also, please try to stay on topic.
Wizard57M
TR Moderator
ZDNet Moderator
be supported by the percentages he referenced. He has a history of dissing
anything Microsoft, which is fine, but when you erroneously use some arbitrary
percentage to support your thesis, you set yourself up for failure...and he did!
By the by, I am not only a moderator here, but also at ZDNet. Suffice it to say
that MB-R is one of a handful of bloggers there that only post click-bait
garbage just to fan the flames of all the shills, fanboys/fangirls and trolls.
Also, please try to stay on topic.
Wizard57M
TR Moderator
ZDNet Moderator
What article? This discussion is about an article by Jack Wallen regarding the Ubuntu distribution of Linux. Neither Matt nor W8 are referred to. Did you intend to include a (way, way, WAY off-topic) link or are you working on your Master's in Non-Sequiturs?
Personnally, I think most of you underestimate the hacker mentality. Many feel angry about Mir, which is the latest thing, because Mir is solving the same problem as Wayland. Don't believe me? Read: http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html#believe2. What's worse, Ubuntu already has a reputation for not contributing back upstream, and now they circumvent outright what was perceived as upstream in Wayland.
The attitude of Canonical is therefore seen as a lack of interest towards the larger Linux community. There is, I believe, a view by which Canonical is building it's success on the Linux community's effort like a parasite. I don't agree, but that is what I perceive. It seems there are some unwritten rules where the software is free/libre but just as long as the social construct's boat isn't rocked too much...
That being said, Wayland isn't doing it for me. That's because Wayland isn't on my system, in fact Wayland isn't really anywhere to be found except for a few rare exceptions. So, since Mir is opensource, and Wayland is useless right now, I'm rather glad for the competition. Let the better project win!
The attitude of Canonical is therefore seen as a lack of interest towards the larger Linux community. There is, I believe, a view by which Canonical is building it's success on the Linux community's effort like a parasite. I don't agree, but that is what I perceive. It seems there are some unwritten rules where the software is free/libre but just as long as the social construct's boat isn't rocked too much...
That being said, Wayland isn't doing it for me. That's because Wayland isn't on my system, in fact Wayland isn't really anywhere to be found except for a few rare exceptions. So, since Mir is opensource, and Wayland is useless right now, I'm rather glad for the competition. Let the better project win!
. . . for many have pictured republics and principalities which in fact have never been known or seen, because how one lives is so far distant from how one ought to live, that he who neglects what is done for what ought to be done, sooner effects his ruin than his preservation; for a man who wishes to act entirely up to his professions of virtue soon meets with what destroys him among so much that is evil.
Getting into the mainstream means adapting to human nature. And human nature isn't always nice.
Personal position: I ditched Ubuntu years ago because MySql Workbench ceased to work after an upgrade. That was later corrected, but at that point I've already switched to KDE/OpenSUSE. I never returned to Ubuntu because I don't like Unity, but I still think it's a very nice distro to begin with.
Getting into the mainstream means adapting to human nature. And human nature isn't always nice.
Personal position: I ditched Ubuntu years ago because MySql Workbench ceased to work after an upgrade. That was later corrected, but at that point I've already switched to KDE/OpenSUSE. I never returned to Ubuntu because I don't like Unity, but I still think it's a very nice distro to begin with.
The Machiavelli quote is right on...I'd add a little Shakespeare: When Brutus breates Cassius for cutting shady deals to get the army paid, the latter replies, in so many words, that he doesn't have time to be 'pure,' as he has a job to do.
I started fooling around w/Linux in 1998 and Ubuntu was the first distro that worked well enough for me, as a semi-geek (at best) to use daily. Yellow Dog, Fedora, et al al, all failed to deliver what Ubuntu does. (Honorable mention: Knoppix off live CD.) Moving beyond the linux community means sacrificing some purity, but as long as it does not engender becoming like 'them,' it is what success in the larger world requires. That I could buy a new Dell with Ubuntu installed instead of Windows is testament to their success in doing so. Thanks to them and their predecessors in Debian, etc., for the benefits that i and others now enjoy.
I started fooling around w/Linux in 1998 and Ubuntu was the first distro that worked well enough for me, as a semi-geek (at best) to use daily. Yellow Dog, Fedora, et al al, all failed to deliver what Ubuntu does. (Honorable mention: Knoppix off live CD.) Moving beyond the linux community means sacrificing some purity, but as long as it does not engender becoming like 'them,' it is what success in the larger world requires. That I could buy a new Dell with Ubuntu installed instead of Windows is testament to their success in doing so. Thanks to them and their predecessors in Debian, etc., for the benefits that i and others now enjoy.
I think Unity was pretty bad when first implemented, so, as far as the community was able to see, something they liked was being forceably replaced by something that didn't work well. I was not able to see into the future that the next release of Ubuntu would have a Unity that worked better.
My fear about the MIR stuff is that it will break many applications that weren't specifically written to run on ubuntu. the Generic Linux apps of the world. But I haven't played with it yet, so I don't really have any idea.
My fear about the MIR stuff is that it will break many applications that weren't specifically written to run on ubuntu. the Generic Linux apps of the world. But I haven't played with it yet, so I don't really have any idea.
I have a very short time experience with Ubuntu, started with 12.10. I thought the live CD, pendrive approach was exactly what I needed to try out Linux on a laptop and then a desktop.
Since the laptop was ANCIENT it really didn't have the necessary horsepower to handle Unity ... so the nice thing was there were CHOICES! Seems to me that Debian, Ubuntu, and Mint have promoted Linux somewhat into the mainstream (or at least positioned it to get there).
Since the laptop was ANCIENT it really didn't have the necessary horsepower to handle Unity ... so the nice thing was there were CHOICES! Seems to me that Debian, Ubuntu, and Mint have promoted Linux somewhat into the mainstream (or at least positioned it to get there).
Ubuntu have alot to be thanked for so far. I appreciate they have an opinion on the way the Linux world (and smartphone world) should look like, but they still offer choices. For example a more recent release of Ubuntu allowed different desktops other than Unity to be used. Also Canonical allow Ubuntu to be used as a basis for other distros (I prefer Mint myself). Thus they continue to allow choices rather than go down the monopolistic route like Microsoft. Thus the current status quo is ok IMHO.
I agree, lets het LINUX everywhere ... once we have linux on every desktop, device and every user wanting it, then the distributions can start their fights, first lets unite!!!
I was a big Canonical/Ubuntu Fan (I still use Mint - KDE) but they've started the same arrogant "Take what's put in front of you!" cr*p as Microsoft and Apple.
One of the primary benefits of Linux adoption is the ability to jump ship to another distribution if a supplier starts screwing you around. So I did.
One of the primary benefits of Linux adoption is the ability to jump ship to another distribution if a supplier starts screwing you around. So I did.
Agree Jack. Shuttleworth attempted a difficult balancing act with Canonical, but recall his original intention! I recall years ago, he realized there were still a market of 5 billion people who had not yet even entered the computing tent as yet (in developing nations). I like that he wasn't even concerned with the already established markets (Mac/Win) and focused on those who weren't even in the conversation yet. For that, he will always have my respect. All this down in the weeds with Mir/Wayland/Unity/GNOME is such low-level white noise which, in 6 months or a year, won't be worth talking about again.
Between Linus, the Kernel community, the LF and others, it's so clear that no one commercial entity will ever 'control' GNU/Linux. Let Canonical do whatever it is they want to do. I too think, that whatever Canoncial does, they certainly 'do no harm' to the larger GNU/FOSS/Linux ecosphere.
It took me all of 5 minutes to realize how much Unity was a game changer and it's value over other interfaces to date (yes, a couple rough patches at first, like all good FOSS) - and this is from a person who uses i3 as their main WM. Love or hate, Unity does stand on it's own as a valid design concept and interface.
Between Linus, the Kernel community, the LF and others, it's so clear that no one commercial entity will ever 'control' GNU/Linux. Let Canonical do whatever it is they want to do. I too think, that whatever Canoncial does, they certainly 'do no harm' to the larger GNU/FOSS/Linux ecosphere.
It took me all of 5 minutes to realize how much Unity was a game changer and it's value over other interfaces to date (yes, a couple rough patches at first, like all good FOSS) - and this is from a person who uses i3 as their main WM. Love or hate, Unity does stand on it's own as a valid design concept and interface.
I have used Unix, Xenix, Mandrake, Scientific Linux, SUSE and a few others and, until Ubuntu got going, Linux was for coders and code hackers. Ubuntu, initially looked down on as "Linux for beginners", was the first flavour that I could actually put on my children's computers without them shrieking in horror. Early nightmares with wireless wrappers are gone. Ubuntu gets more solid by the month even though the wrinkles are still there somewhat. The whole point IS that you don't need a PhD in particle physics to use it!
Purists can just go to SL6 or Debian. No probs. Nothing wrong with that.
But I cannot understand why people get so annoyed. If you don't like Unity, switch to something else (that's still Ubuntu). Isn't that the whole point? (I use Xubuntu -- it's wonderful.)
Thank you Canonical (and thank you Google for backing Android). Everyday more Windoze users are becoming more aware that there IS a choice. There is a decent OS out there and it doesn't hurt to use it (except, I suppose, if you try and install it on a W8 machine).
Purists can just go to SL6 or Debian. No probs. Nothing wrong with that.
But I cannot understand why people get so annoyed. If you don't like Unity, switch to something else (that's still Ubuntu). Isn't that the whole point? (I use Xubuntu -- it's wonderful.)
Thank you Canonical (and thank you Google for backing Android). Everyday more Windoze users are becoming more aware that there IS a choice. There is a decent OS out there and it doesn't hurt to use it (except, I suppose, if you try and install it on a W8 machine).
My sentiments exactly. I do not really like Unity, but Ubuntu can be used by anyone and it is installed wthin the hour on a slow system. If I install XP it takes me 1 hour to get just the os installed, then the rest of the day to get the updates. And that is without any form of extra software like office.
Hail to Ubuntu
Hail to Ubuntu
I haven't tried to install Ubuntu on a machine that came with Windows 8, but I do know that Kubuntu and Windows 8 can coexist happily on the same machine. I have a machine that originally came with Vista. I took advantage of the free Win7 upgrade offered (despite Best Buy telling me that it did not qualify) and installed Kubuntu as a dual boot. I recently upgraded the Win7 partition to Win8 to take advantage of the $49.95 upgrade so I have at least one machine to learn about 8 on. I have experienced no issues. Apparently the problems are related to the way Secure Boot (?) is implemented in the BIOS of some machines. I'm in the market for a new machine so if I get one I'll have the opportunity to learn first hand. I have already contacted Asus on one of their laptops and they assure me the two can live happily on the same machine. We'll see. I began using Ubuntu in June of '06 and have explored many of the Linux Distros since. I have pretty much settled on Kubuntu with Puppy installed on a few very old low power machines. It's too bad that there has to be so much animosity between OSes. There are really enough users out there for everyone. I use Linux most of the time, but have a few things that, like other users have stated, will only work with Windows and won't run under Wine. Hopefully one day the OS wars will end or at least declare a cease fire. I'm not holding my breath, though.
thanks for the comment. as a LONG time windows user, I am a Linux beginner and I do not understand the mindset that for some reason that is bad and I should not use Linux. Ubunto has made it easier (not completely easy as yet) to get away from windows without going to Apple. I do not, however, understand why it is so difficult to install an application outside of the software center app. I know that the Linux coders love the terminal, but really, a lot of us use our computers a tool to accomplish tasks outside of computer science. It seems to me that a computer operating system should assist both points of view. I applaud and support all the Linux coders and hackers who get great joy out of working with Linux, but other users should not be vilified or find it hard to use as a result. Thank you Ubuntu.
Using the terminal prevents the easy install of virusses so rampant on Windows. By the way, it is not difficult at all, just different. You simply copy the lines in the terminal by selecting them on internet page and pasting them by clicking the scroll button. Like here: http://www.webupd8.org/2010/03/gthumb-finally-gets-flickr-support.html
They require your password the first time. To all questions you simply reply with hitting the Enter-key. It is much easier and safer than going through the setup-programs in Windows, in which easily add-ware is installed if you are not a pro-user and not attentive.
Normal users should preferably use the software centre, that way they stay safe. Linux-distro's like Ubuntu are easier than Windows nowadays. But a new system will always seem more difficult at first than the one you already know.
But that does not deter people if they get the chance to use it. Selling PC with Ubuntu is the only way to get it to the people.
I used a number of distro's like Mint, but I always come back to Ubuntu. Why? Because it is the only system that simply works after an install, like we have become used to with Windows. And if there are slight issues, next version often solves them.
Ubuntu took a bold move to start a whole new interface. I did not like it at first, it was unfinished, so I moved away. But 12.04 was rock solid, and 12.10 too. Neither is it the system hog people say. I installed it on my subnotebook (AMD Brazo) and it runs just fine. But Ubuntu is not meant to run you 10 year old laptop. Canonical wants to be on the new laptops, not the old ones. Linux is not conquering the desktop by recycling old hardware. In fact those old machines give the most problems and are lousy promotion.
But on new machines, Ubuntu rocks. I am only into Ubuntu for three years, but I have seen huge progress in the short period. Three years ago internet pages and other texts looked like **** with fuzzy fonts that made your eyes tear. Youtube was so slow you want to flee Linux the same day. The dialog screens had so many styles it look like a garbage collection. Step by step Canonical solved issue after issue and now I feel more at home in Ubuntu than in Windows7.
Difficult, yes because it is new. It helps to read a starters guide:
http://www.ubuntupocketguide.com/index_main.html
http://ubuntu-manual.org/?lang=en_US
http://www.ubuntugeek.com/free-ubuntu-e-books
They require your password the first time. To all questions you simply reply with hitting the Enter-key. It is much easier and safer than going through the setup-programs in Windows, in which easily add-ware is installed if you are not a pro-user and not attentive.
Normal users should preferably use the software centre, that way they stay safe. Linux-distro's like Ubuntu are easier than Windows nowadays. But a new system will always seem more difficult at first than the one you already know.
But that does not deter people if they get the chance to use it. Selling PC with Ubuntu is the only way to get it to the people.
I used a number of distro's like Mint, but I always come back to Ubuntu. Why? Because it is the only system that simply works after an install, like we have become used to with Windows. And if there are slight issues, next version often solves them.
Ubuntu took a bold move to start a whole new interface. I did not like it at first, it was unfinished, so I moved away. But 12.04 was rock solid, and 12.10 too. Neither is it the system hog people say. I installed it on my subnotebook (AMD Brazo) and it runs just fine. But Ubuntu is not meant to run you 10 year old laptop. Canonical wants to be on the new laptops, not the old ones. Linux is not conquering the desktop by recycling old hardware. In fact those old machines give the most problems and are lousy promotion.
But on new machines, Ubuntu rocks. I am only into Ubuntu for three years, but I have seen huge progress in the short period. Three years ago internet pages and other texts looked like **** with fuzzy fonts that made your eyes tear. Youtube was so slow you want to flee Linux the same day. The dialog screens had so many styles it look like a garbage collection. Step by step Canonical solved issue after issue and now I feel more at home in Ubuntu than in Windows7.
Difficult, yes because it is new. It helps to read a starters guide:
http://www.ubuntupocketguide.com/index_main.html
http://ubuntu-manual.org/?lang=en_US
http://www.ubuntugeek.com/free-ubuntu-e-books
I agree with most everything you are saying here except for the reasons around the hate as you put it. I do agree that Unity was a big milestone in changing the popularity of this flavor of Linux but not because it switched from Gnome to Unity. More because the first release of unity was frankly horrible. I personally tried about 3 other flavors of Linux settling on Mint for a time and then finally switched back to Ubuntu after a lot of the issues with Unity had been worked out. Had Unity been better on the first release you would not have seen the backlash. You would then have it down to the people that prefer Gnome over Unity.
The other issue here for Ubuntu is that they are changing to adapt to the future in a way that other Linux flavors are not. People dont like change. What Ubuntu is doing is opening up Linux to a new audience. So it stands to reason that some of the old audience may not follow.
Im excited about the changes and looking forward to seeing just how far they can penetrate other markets. I truly believe that they are heading in the right direction.
The other issue here for Ubuntu is that they are changing to adapt to the future in a way that other Linux flavors are not. People dont like change. What Ubuntu is doing is opening up Linux to a new audience. So it stands to reason that some of the old audience may not follow.
Im excited about the changes and looking forward to seeing just how far they can penetrate other markets. I truly believe that they are heading in the right direction.
Being in my 70's and having my first experience with UNIX at AT&T ESS1 in the early 1960. I have always felt the best world is the open systems. Having work in all forms of UNIX for many years, and retired at Kennedy Space Center, with a massive SUN sitting on my desk next to my gatesware PC (my Email machine), I have always thought the open systems is the best answer, even the in-fighting is better than the money-base world, the final outcome is more user friendly in the long run, and I can pick and choose which OS I can run and change anytime. I am running three OS's in my home or several different systems, wife must have gatesware, Apple is going to change most of that with there program to give away as many tablets as possible to schools, and libraries. That is making a big dent in Microsoft's world. Keep up the great work hope to live long enough to see a real UNIX/Linux base computer for sale at Walmart or "I wish to purchase a non-OS laptop"?
If MIR is what it takes to perk up unity, then
so be it.
I like the snappiness of XFCE, and
like the touch capability of Unity.
I want both.
So, if MIR can deliver XFCE speed and multi device campatibility,
lets do it and soon!
so be it.
I like the snappiness of XFCE, and
like the touch capability of Unity.
I want both.
So, if MIR can deliver XFCE speed and multi device campatibility,
lets do it and soon!
About a year ago, I tried several major distros, Fedora, Mint, Debian, CentOS, Scientific Linux,
Ubuntu was the only one that worked with out issue, ie found all the drivers, had no errors etc on initial install for my laptop a 2010 Dell XPS running an i7 chip. Normally I double and triple boot my machines. The laptop has win7 and Ubuntu on it now, but I almost never use the windows because, well why?
Have also installed the AMP stack, gcc, samba and did a 5 disk raid 5 server that boots from a 6th disk with Ubuntu. Also ran/owned a windows computer repair shop as a primary source of income for 5 years. Ubuntu IMHO is a very good OS. It lags in keeping up with the latest releases of some of the programs I use, MySQL, PHP, etc and I have swithced to CentOS for my local intranet web server. That said, to run the latest version of Joomla on that server requred the Fedora extended repository. Fedora seems to be in a bit of a stall right now and Scientific Linux is just another RH clone. I am personally more creeped out by the fact that Scienfitc Linux rips off RH but is essentailly a government project. In addition even at this time, to my knowelege, I could be wrong as I have not tested everyting in a while, Ubuntu is the only one using the 3.x kernal. Also Fedora, and CentOS at the moment do not have sperate server install distros. Even if they are still good OS es if you have a need for what they do best.
The bottom line is that you could make an argument for Mac, a BSD variant, but if price means anything Ubuntu has to be rated as one of the top operating systems available today. And yes it has graphic programs and a video editing program. I use GIMP, INK, and Font Forge and yes I have windows machines where I run Adobe CSSx and Corel Draw X, MS Office and more when I need them. Guess what? One size doesn't fit all. I have a subcompact car and a pickup truck. I don't go to the movies in the pickup and I dont haul trash to the dump in my gas saver. Does anyone flip out over that?
Ubuntu was the only one that worked with out issue, ie found all the drivers, had no errors etc on initial install for my laptop a 2010 Dell XPS running an i7 chip. Normally I double and triple boot my machines. The laptop has win7 and Ubuntu on it now, but I almost never use the windows because, well why?
Have also installed the AMP stack, gcc, samba and did a 5 disk raid 5 server that boots from a 6th disk with Ubuntu. Also ran/owned a windows computer repair shop as a primary source of income for 5 years. Ubuntu IMHO is a very good OS. It lags in keeping up with the latest releases of some of the programs I use, MySQL, PHP, etc and I have swithced to CentOS for my local intranet web server. That said, to run the latest version of Joomla on that server requred the Fedora extended repository. Fedora seems to be in a bit of a stall right now and Scientific Linux is just another RH clone. I am personally more creeped out by the fact that Scienfitc Linux rips off RH but is essentailly a government project. In addition even at this time, to my knowelege, I could be wrong as I have not tested everyting in a while, Ubuntu is the only one using the 3.x kernal. Also Fedora, and CentOS at the moment do not have sperate server install distros. Even if they are still good OS es if you have a need for what they do best.
The bottom line is that you could make an argument for Mac, a BSD variant, but if price means anything Ubuntu has to be rated as one of the top operating systems available today. And yes it has graphic programs and a video editing program. I use GIMP, INK, and Font Forge and yes I have windows machines where I run Adobe CSSx and Corel Draw X, MS Office and more when I need them. Guess what? One size doesn't fit all. I have a subcompact car and a pickup truck. I don't go to the movies in the pickup and I dont haul trash to the dump in my gas saver. Does anyone flip out over that?
I am not a Linux GURU. I have been an MS Pro since the early '80's (Dos 2.1).
Just as sure (not IF, but WHEN) as California is going to slide into the Pacific Ocean, so will MS.
With UBUNTU, I have the ability to set up a separate partition or drive on any of my MS Units with UBUNTU. (Exception - MS has sabotaged this possibility with Win 8 - still can be done, but only with sophisticated work-arounds - not recommended for the less-than- highly proficient)
When MS eventually fails (or I become totally just fed up with it), I just boot on my UBUNTU partition and continue working.
Remember, the Internet ultimately runs on UNIX, not MS. Linux (UBUNTU) can be described as a form of UNIX and thus very compatible.
UBUNTU can read your MS partitions and all of the files therein (not vice-versa)
UBUNTU comes complete with equivalents of most programs generally used on MS units. This includes an Office Suite (Libre Office), a browser (Firefox) and numerous other programs. All are regularly updated as required.
The only cost associated with this is your time to set it up ( I'm sure that donations will be graciously accepted - be generous - think about what MS has done to you over the years)
----------------------------------
OK, this is what UBUNTU has done for me. I am not sophisticated enough in this area to intelligently evaluate this against other Linux based systems. Obviously, their targeted purpose group may also be different than my priorities. But for me, at this time, Thank You, UBUNTU!
Just as sure (not IF, but WHEN) as California is going to slide into the Pacific Ocean, so will MS.
With UBUNTU, I have the ability to set up a separate partition or drive on any of my MS Units with UBUNTU. (Exception - MS has sabotaged this possibility with Win 8 - still can be done, but only with sophisticated work-arounds - not recommended for the less-than- highly proficient)
When MS eventually fails (or I become totally just fed up with it), I just boot on my UBUNTU partition and continue working.
Remember, the Internet ultimately runs on UNIX, not MS. Linux (UBUNTU) can be described as a form of UNIX and thus very compatible.
UBUNTU can read your MS partitions and all of the files therein (not vice-versa)
UBUNTU comes complete with equivalents of most programs generally used on MS units. This includes an Office Suite (Libre Office), a browser (Firefox) and numerous other programs. All are regularly updated as required.
The only cost associated with this is your time to set it up ( I'm sure that donations will be graciously accepted - be generous - think about what MS has done to you over the years)
----------------------------------
OK, this is what UBUNTU has done for me. I am not sophisticated enough in this area to intelligently evaluate this against other Linux based systems. Obviously, their targeted purpose group may also be different than my priorities. But for me, at this time, Thank You, UBUNTU!
If we don't make significant steps forward, what's the point?
However, after trying Unity for some time, I've decided I don't like the menus at the top of the screen. My work style is lots of windows, all over my two- or three-screen setups. Whilst it's a small win to have a full row of menu items when the app window is small, there are two issues:
1. There's often a lot of mouse moving to be done. (This is much improved by good context menus; maybe this is about apps not having caught up with the needs of the new paradigm)
2. It's easy to click on a menu for the wrong app, if you forget to shift focus to the correct window. Selecting the window is now an "extra" action you have to perform... you can't just go to the right window and start using its menus.
The other thing I dislike about Unity is the Launcher bar. It's never big enough for me, mainly because of the confusion between "apps I might like to use often" and "apps I'm using right now". I'd love to see a "Favourites" icon with a fly-out containing all the pinned apps, leaving the main app bar clear for the stuff I'm using right now. (putting them on the top or left of the Dash Home would work, for example). Some dynamic sizing of icons (like the apple version, if that's not patented to hell and gone) would help too. Even just letting me squash the icons below 32 pixels would be a big win!
Mostly these are small gripes, which I'm sure will get honed over the next few years. The menu bar in the wrong place is a biggie though.
However, after trying Unity for some time, I've decided I don't like the menus at the top of the screen. My work style is lots of windows, all over my two- or three-screen setups. Whilst it's a small win to have a full row of menu items when the app window is small, there are two issues:
1. There's often a lot of mouse moving to be done. (This is much improved by good context menus; maybe this is about apps not having caught up with the needs of the new paradigm)
2. It's easy to click on a menu for the wrong app, if you forget to shift focus to the correct window. Selecting the window is now an "extra" action you have to perform... you can't just go to the right window and start using its menus.
The other thing I dislike about Unity is the Launcher bar. It's never big enough for me, mainly because of the confusion between "apps I might like to use often" and "apps I'm using right now". I'd love to see a "Favourites" icon with a fly-out containing all the pinned apps, leaving the main app bar clear for the stuff I'm using right now. (putting them on the top or left of the Dash Home would work, for example). Some dynamic sizing of icons (like the apple version, if that's not patented to hell and gone) would help too. Even just letting me squash the icons below 32 pixels would be a big win!
Mostly these are small gripes, which I'm sure will get honed over the next few years. The menu bar in the wrong place is a biggie though.
"The other thing I dislike about Unity is the Launcher bar. It's never big enough for me, mainly because of the confusion between "apps I might like to use often" and "apps I'm using right now"."
I have had the same complaint regarding the TaskBar in Windows since Vista. It's also one of the (many) reasons I dislike W8; at least in previous versions I could still use the Start Menu. It's depressing to realize bad design isn't limited to one team.
I have had the same complaint regarding the TaskBar in Windows since Vista. It's also one of the (many) reasons I dislike W8; at least in previous versions I could still use the Start Menu. It's depressing to realize bad design isn't limited to one team.
Several times I have tried to go to Linux from Windows and each time it was too much trouble to become an expert in something I did not truly care about. I put Ubuntu on an old Asus netbook to replace Vista. It has been a great experience. Faster and easy to use. And it cost NOTHING! I am sorry that all the Liunux fanboys feel that their world is not special to just them anymore. But I am glad to have a usable alternative to Windows. Scott
Without Ubuntu, I would not know what Samba, KDE, GIMP, Gwenview, DIA, XFCE, and others even were. Ubuntu was my gateway drug to learning so much more. 15 years. I heard try Linux. Use Arch, Use Puppy, Use fav distro x. Nothing sucked me in like Ubuntu did 2 years ago. Now I can't get enough. Maybe I'm the dumb user the 1337 wanted to keep away, but here I am. Desktops, Servers, samba shares, router builds, different DE's, love them all. Live CD opened the door and Ubuntu invited me in. Thanks!
Ubuntu has made Linux accessible for millions, and by that, I mean usable. When Sheldon Cooper makes a point of mentioning Ubuntu in an episode of "The Big Bang Theory," it's fair to conclude that Linux is finally arriving. Of course, he has his detractors as well as Ubuntu does.
Time will tell surely enough how this all plays out. Unity isn't as bad as I thought, though I must admit I still run Gnome Classic on my 12.04 installation about 99% of the time, if for no other reason than because familiarity breeds content. Of course, it is also said that familiarity breeds contempt, and with the changes made to certain items underlying Gnome Classic that I can no longer access without hacking my way around (and even that is no guarantee that I can even find what I'm looking for [so far]), things just aren't the same, even though it is "Gnome Classic." There are equivalents, fortunately, but their approaches are rather a bit different, such as with adding application launcher icons into the top bar on the screen. There is now an additional step in adding them that was not intuitively obvious at first, though I eventually figured it out.
Still, Ubuntu is probably the most hardware-friendly of the distros I've worked with thus far, and as such, I expect to continue running it as my main distro, with Fedora as my #2.
Time will tell surely enough how this all plays out. Unity isn't as bad as I thought, though I must admit I still run Gnome Classic on my 12.04 installation about 99% of the time, if for no other reason than because familiarity breeds content. Of course, it is also said that familiarity breeds contempt, and with the changes made to certain items underlying Gnome Classic that I can no longer access without hacking my way around (and even that is no guarantee that I can even find what I'm looking for [so far]), things just aren't the same, even though it is "Gnome Classic." There are equivalents, fortunately, but their approaches are rather a bit different, such as with adding application launcher icons into the top bar on the screen. There is now an additional step in adding them that was not intuitively obvious at first, though I eventually figured it out.
Still, Ubuntu is probably the most hardware-friendly of the distros I've worked with thus far, and as such, I expect to continue running it as my main distro, with Fedora as my #2.
Whenever anything gains popularity and grows beyond the indie and hobbyist user it is open to criticism. Popularity breeds contempt. it is the price of your own success. I just prefer to use tools fit for the job. Macbook for iphone app, php/zend app development, linux (opensuse 12.2) for other tools with a windows VM for Visual Studio when I take on bill paying corporate work. Though these days Xamarin studio with iphone and android (mono) development is better supported on the mac. I spend more time using it than linux. Opensuse was a matter of which distro supported mono tools best and allowed me to plug in to AD based corporate networks with as little fuss as possible. Being Novell it was a simple choice.
I used ubuntu since the warthog oinked out and only swapped over from Ubuntu when it became a pain to use on client sites, plus I didn't like the Unity interface and the compromise between feature/bug fixing and meeting release cycles let it down for me.
Each to their own, there's plenty to choose from and my advice to anyone looking at trying linux is to start with Ubuntu (or derivative thereof) then have a look around to see which suits you best, if you do wish to change.
No matter how much people berate or complain about Ubuntu it has done a lot in promoting and raising the awareness of Linux. The Raspberry PI is doing the same thing, all of which can't be a bad thing.
I used ubuntu since the warthog oinked out and only swapped over from Ubuntu when it became a pain to use on client sites, plus I didn't like the Unity interface and the compromise between feature/bug fixing and meeting release cycles let it down for me.
Each to their own, there's plenty to choose from and my advice to anyone looking at trying linux is to start with Ubuntu (or derivative thereof) then have a look around to see which suits you best, if you do wish to change.
No matter how much people berate or complain about Ubuntu it has done a lot in promoting and raising the awareness of Linux. The Raspberry PI is doing the same thing, all of which can't be a bad thing.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
