Do bugs annoy you more in Ubuntu?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Steven_Rosenber Apr 29, 2009 3:55 PM EDT |
I've been this way myself: "I understand that there's a bug ... and something's not working right ... but this is Ubuntu ... and you think that a bug in some other distro is understandable but in Ubuntu is just that much more unforgivable." Of course many of you might think that Ubuntu is full of bugs that never get fixed and that the project is all about making the six-month release schedule and pumping new features and apps and not paying attention to persistent bugs I also wonder if bug-fixes (both from upstream and unique to Ubuntu) happen at all for the non-LTS releases, which do have support lives of 18 months, just as I wonder how vigilant the project is about patching the LTS (3 years on desktop, 5 years on server), which I use on two desktops right now. I'm only using two hunks of hardware for Ubuntu 8.04, and my experience so far has been mostly positive, even though I'm not using the distro heavily enough to really know what I'm talking about. My point: Is Ubuntu held up to a higher standard when it comes to stuff actually working? Does it meet that standard? Is it better/worse than other distros? I'm not trying to start any kind of "my distro is better" flurry, just wanting to know your experience with and impression of Ubuntu at this stage in its (and your) life. |
| gus3 Apr 29, 2009 4:27 PM EDT |
Quoting:Is Ubuntu held up to a higher standard when it comes to stuff actually working?If it wants to position itself as the Linux that any reasonable "human being" (i.e. non-geek who can't fix foibles as easily) would want to use on the desktop, then it does need to be held to a higher standard. |
| dinotrac Apr 29, 2009 4:56 PM EDT |
Steve - I don't know about anybody else, but my frustrations with Ubuntu have mostly been a matter of some oddity in "the Ubuntu way". My last install -- Jaunty -- was the best I've had yet, but that's likely because the Ubuntu mainline has finally caught up with my equipment and I didn't have to do any custom installs to get things working well. Well -- almost. I do have something of a performance regression in flashplayer, but... Mostly, pretty good. |
| caitlyn Apr 29, 2009 9:03 PM EDT |
I actually find that Ubuntu has as many or more bugs that other major distros and even some smaller ones. The last release I actually had mostly "just work" was Edgy Eft. It's been quite a while. I don't think it's a higher standard but I think that gus makes a valid point that maybe it should be, and in that case, on my equipment, they fail miserably. If I keep the standards even they are just a little subpar. Oh, and yeah, I do blame the rigid and rapid release schedule for a lot of it. |
| tuxchick Apr 29, 2009 10:17 PM EDT |
I'm currently mired in "KDE4 in Kubuntu Jaunty is too weird" land. I'm going to try Sidux or Mandrake and see if KDE4 is any different in them. In Kubuntu it's like it got taken over by a gang of swoony, impractical artists who want to share their visions of Beauty, and ignore functionality completely. I want to make them write 100 times on the blackboard "Form follows function." The tireless Canonical hype machine does raise expectations quite a bit. My last major upgrade was Hardy Heron; I skipped Ibex. Hardy got frequent updates and was reliable for me, though it had some annoyances. Like the buntu desktop kernel is supposed to be more preemptive in order to feel more responsive to user inputs, but for me it was the opposite. Hoggy processes, like nasty bad Web page scripts would grind the system to a halt. And this is no weiner system, but a modern bigass CPU and herds of powerful RAMs. Canonical and Ubuntu are making fantastic inroads into the commercial arena, and raising the visibility of Linux everywhere. On the technical side I'm not so thrilled, but I haven't researched if it's Canonical weird stuff or Linux development weird stuff. Like xorg-- dammit, I want my user-editable config file and not everything all hidden away! I hate when they take away user-fixability before making a subsystem reliable. |
| Steven_Rosenber Apr 29, 2009 10:30 PM EDT |
I think you can run the config program for xorg and end up with an xorg.conf file in the usual place. I did that in OpenBSD, which also runs w/o xorg.conf to get X working with an external CRT monitor on my laptop. |
| theboomboomcars Apr 29, 2009 10:53 PM EDT |
The new system will take a config file. I have to manually setup the screen on my laptop. I have a via unichrome chipset, and the drivers are less than stellar so I can't change resolutions. It setups up my 1280x768 screen as a 1600x1200 which gives me a small part of the available real estate, and when I try to change it the screen gets all messed up and unless I put in a mode line in the xorg, I can only get a usuable desktop with a 1600x1200 resolution, which isn't really usable. So thankfully the new system will take a config file. |
| caitlyn Apr 29, 2009 11:02 PM EDT |
Yep, Ubuntu produces a black screen after install on my old Toshiba laptop. dexconf just doesn't handle the old chipset. The only solution is to boot to the CLI and add an xorg.conf file. I copy one from an old install of an old distro and all is well. FWIW, a number of distros that use the current X.org correctly detect and configure the same chipset so it is a dexconf or an Ubuntu thing. Ubuntu support for older hardware is simply horrible IME. |
| InTheLoop Apr 29, 2009 11:24 PM EDT |
Another thing I wonder about is if Linux is held to a higher standard. Perhaps it's just what I read, but I constantly hear people complaining about updates causing problems and all sorts of issues that other operating systems apparently don't have. In the past month, I've have do deal with an OS X update breaking an application, and now I am trying to solve an issue with connecting to network shares on the Mac that looks like I'm going to have to reinstall a bunch of Samba stuff. Guess what apparently causes this issue... an update. I can't speak for many other distros, since I don't use them full time, but Ubuntu gives me very few troubles compared to other operating systems when I am doing normal things with it. |
| caitlyn Apr 30, 2009 12:21 AM EDT |
InTheLoop: Folks who are in the business of defending (or shilling for) Microsoft will point out any and all flaws in Linux they can find, both real and perceived. It doesn't matter if Windows or MacOS X have similar or more severe issues because pointing that out doesn't suit their agenda. If someone does point out that Windows or MacOS X have the same issue the answer becomes that Linux simply isn't better so there is no reason to switch. In general I think an upstart OS does have something to prove when compared to the incumbent. People are afraid of change. Change is difficult for a lot of people. There is a very real learning curve which, for some technically challenged people, is quite steep. They have to be convinced that switching to Linux really will make things markedly better to even vaguely give it any consideration at all. Holding Linux to a higher standard eliminates any such considerations. |
| bigg Apr 30, 2009 6:43 AM EDT |
I'll give you an example of an Ubuntu bug that makes me scratch my head. I installed Jaunty a couple days ago on my office machine just to see what it would look like. Attempting to print a PDF file, I got an error. Google showed that error to be common in Ubuntu but not in any other distro (at least I found no other instances). It has been reported to their bug tracker. For the newbie, this is a show stopping bug - back to Windows. I installed Okular, with lots of KDE stuff, and it printed at low quality. Not exactly the end of the world for me, but as far as I can tell it is unique to Ubuntu, and would be the end of the Linux journey for probably 95% of Windows users. That is exactly why I left Ubuntu long ago. |
| tuxtom Apr 30, 2009 7:57 AM EDT |
Hey Bigg, what did you go to after you left Ubuntu that would have satisfied those 95% of Windows users? Would that distro have caused those users less aggravation, all things considered? It's not vary Linux-like to ditch something and condemn it 100% because of one problem. If we all did that we would all be running Windows now, wouldn't we? |
| bigg Apr 30, 2009 8:48 AM EDT |
> Hey Bigg, what did you go to after you left Ubuntu that would have satisfied those 95% of Windows users? I moved to Debian. > Would that distro have caused those users less aggravation, all things considered? I don't think I'd recommend Debian to a newbie. I was not a newbie at that point. > condemn it 100% because of one problem I'm not condemning it at all, and didn't leave it because of just one problem. I do believe a number of distros such as Mepis, PCLinuxOS, and perhaps Mandriva are better choices. Even Mint, which is based on Ubuntu, is a better choice in my opinion. Those distros tend not to release with ugly bugs such as not being able to print a pdf file. It's great if Ubuntu works for you, but I do not have faith to recommend it to anyone else. |
| jsusanka Apr 30, 2009 10:54 AM EDT |
"Like xorg-- dammit, I want my user-editable config file and not everything all hidden away! I hate when they take away user-fixability before making a subsystem reliable." YES! YES! YES! configuring troubleshooting these has not been fun. my old radeon 7000 cards have had a bad time with xorg and the latest releases. it has been a bad experience and I bought these cards because they had an open source driver and worked flawlessly for years. Compiz and all and has performed very well. But now with the latest versions xorg I have been get random lock ups with my desktop. I can login and kill xorg through ssh because it doesn't take down the whole machine. This has not only been ubuntu but ALL disrtibutions - Mandrake, Suse, redhat, ubuntu, pclinuxos, and debian. Something with xorg has changed with open source radeon driver and it is driving me insane. I don't want to get new cards because these work and work well and do what I need them to do. -sigh- running centos 5 on them now without compiz and it works fine so maybe it is something with compiz-fusion I don't know. |
| bigg Apr 30, 2009 11:47 AM EDT |
I will give Jaunty a big thumbs up in the xorg area. I have a nVidia card and currently use the proprietary driver for dual monitors. On Ubuntu I installed the nouveau driver package, added Driver "nouveau" to xorg.conf, and configured the dual monitors in the Display GUI. Much, much better than the old approach. (Whether Ubuntu deserves any credit I have no idea.) |
| ColonelPanik Apr 30, 2009 2:58 PM EDT |
OnT Sugar CRM, that is for professional use only. Do not try this at home! Unless you are a pro, then its okay. |
| caitlyn Apr 30, 2009 5:15 PM EDT |
tuxtom: I recommend Mandriva to newbies. It generally has fewer bugs and less aggravation than Ubuntu. I haven't tried the brand new release yet but I will. In another thread tracyanne noted that Mandriva's GUI tools cover just about everything and anything you might need to administer your system easily. Ubuntu is not quite there yet. |
| tracyanne Apr 30, 2009 5:31 PM EDT |
My reason for not using Mandriva is KDE4, I don't like their GNOME, and I'm finding Ubuntu quite nice to use. The only laptop I've had any problems with either Ubuntu or Mandriva is a cheap, bottom of the range, Lenovo, the BIOS is crook, and I can't use ACPI, as when I do the OS can't find the CD/DVD hardware, this applies to Mandriva 2009 and Jaunty. Intrepid had a slight problem on a cheap HP with ATheros Wireless card, easily fixed by either building the latest MadWIFI driver, or upgrading to Jaunty. Jaunty fixes, or rather improves, suspend and Hibernate (they are more reliable, strike that, they are now reliable) on all the machines I've upgraded from Intrepid on. I expect Mandriva 2009.1 will do the same, but I've not tried it. I've also noticed that I no longer lose my Compiz 3D cube background image when I return from suspend, It would disappear on Intrepid, but only after suspend. So far I've not noticed any bugs that cause me any grief on any of the machines I've set up, so far. |
| caitlyn Apr 30, 2009 5:53 PM EDT |
tracyanne: Just be glad you don't have my machines :) I've already described my main issue with the Toshiba and also my annoyance at the Intel graphics bug in Jaunty. Mandriva One has an Xfce build which I quite like. Far less GNOME cruft than Xubuntu. I also don't have the aversion to KDE4 that some have. I just dislike having duplicate KDE bits to get some KDE3 apps that haven't been ported yet working. In general, though, I think KDE4 is coming along nicely. |
| Steven_Rosenber Apr 30, 2009 6:47 PM EDT |
Even Kubuntu has a lot of GNOME in it, if I remember correctly. |
| caitlyn Apr 30, 2009 6:53 PM EDT |
Steven, you remember correctly. Ubuntu's system administration tools are all GNOME apps. Ubuntu is a lot like Red Hat in that respect. |
| Steven_Rosenber Apr 30, 2009 7:05 PM EDT |
Yeah, after running Xubuntu for awhile, installing and running Debian with Xfce only was a bit of a shock. I got over it eventually and will probably do it again. In Slackware, Xfce seems more of an afterthought. If you install Slackware without the KDE sets, you don't have an office suite, but you still end up with a bigger install than Debian/Xfce, and the latter has the full OpenOffice in there ... Hence the popularity of (and need for) Zenwalk, Vector, Wolvix and the like. |
| tracyanne Apr 30, 2009 7:18 PM EDT |
@caitlyn, interestingly jaunty reports tyhat there is a BIOS problem, anrecommends that I upgrade the BIOS or run with PNPBIOS=off |
| jdixon Apr 30, 2009 9:20 PM EDT |
> f you install Slackware without the KDE sets, you don't have an office suite, but you still end up with a bigger install than Debian/Xfce, and the latter has the full OpenOffice in there ... Slackware includes all the compiler tools and kernel source code. I don't believe those are installed by default in Debian unless you tell it you want a developer system. |
| bigg May 01, 2009 5:55 AM EDT |
> In Slackware, Xfce seems more of an afterthought. Do you mean there is no customization? There's really no customization of anything in Slackware. The question to ask is whether it works, and it's tough to find any bugs. One of the things I've really come to like about Slackware is that Patrick doesn't fiddle with the individual packages very much. |
| tuxchick May 01, 2009 11:10 AM EDT |
KDE4.2 sux. :( I want to like it, but it's driving me crazy. It's inefficient-- it takes all these extra clicks to do anything. Like what the heck is the point of the new system menu? It's too big, too slow, and you have to click and scroll to see the menus. The old menus are fast and easy. What's the big flaming deal with the Widget Dashboard? You click a button to get The Widget Dashboard (imagine hearing this in a deep, echoing voice with a choir) and you get this stupid little control panel that doesn't do much of anything, and it makes your desktop and panel disappear. WTF?? I miss my little herd of useful panel widgets, like the CPU, memory, and network monitors that functioned when they were just sitting there in the panel. You can see status at a glance, mouseover for more information, and right-click for configuration. You have to click the new ones to see status, and they're Mr. Magoo huge, and there are hardly any options. KDE4 has lost a lot of right-click menus, you have to go hunting for configuration menus, and when you find them they have hardly any options. It's slow, with perceptible lag between click and apps opening. This is much more than a port to Qt4. It's a change of direction and design, and not a good one. I'm picturing all these swoony designers squealing "ooo it's EXQUISITE!" |
| azerthoth May 01, 2009 11:31 AM EDT |
TC I can get those things onto my taskbar no problem, and a simple right click on the start bar gives you the option in the 'classic' start menu. The lack of reconfigurability I have to agree with 100%, but I think your have overlooked or missed a few things. Either that or your distro has a truly horrid implementation of 4.2 |
| tuxchick May 01, 2009 11:41 AM EDT |
az, I know how to get the classic start menu, believe me that was the first thing I did after spending half a day fighting the other one. The taskbar is botched mess-- you can't put the widgets where you want them, and they have no functionality other than being little application launch buttons. Their KDE3.5 cousins had actual functionality. I didn't mention a lot of other irritations, like the crippled stupid video configurator that does NOTHING. Hello, in this excellent year 2009 is there some reason to not have a good video configuration tool? Geez la weez. Or the completely disorganized desktop configurator-- right-click for one set of options that does not include screensaver; go hunting through three other video-related thingies to find everything. Oh, and just like Gnome you only get one common background for all virtual desktops. In 3.5 you can have a different picture in every desktop. and you could do slideshows. Not in 4.2. Tell ya what--- I don't want to spend my day listing reasons why KDE4.2 needs to be humanely euthanized. Anyone who can talk about anything that it does better than 3.5, please do so. **edit** This is Kubuntu Jaunty jackalope, so it could be a combination KDE4/Kubuntu borking. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!