Another ubuntu distro?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| weblordpepe Oct 25, 2010 6:32 PM EDT |
Is this really needed? Really? Is there something hard about making a customized Ubuntu install disc without the need for poaching userbase from the company which actually develops the OS? |
| azerthoth Oct 25, 2010 6:46 PM EDT |
weblordpepe you mean Debian? |
| caitlyn Oct 25, 2010 7:00 PM EDT |
Yeah, did we really need Ubuntu when Debian worked so well at bringing people to Linux and selling itself to OEMs? [ducks and covers] |
| azerthoth Oct 25, 2010 7:12 PM EDT |
hehe, subtly not my strong point of late I guess. It was meant to point out the glaring hypocrisy of the statement. If there is a niche to fill, an itch to scratch, and the motivation to do so, then the answer is yes. Did Daniel Robbins have to put a spin on the distro he created by making Funtoo, yes. Did Fabio Erculiani have to scratch an itch to create a binary Gentoo with Sabayon, yes. Just a few points, if the question is, do we need another distro ... yes. If its any good it drives creativity and advances everyone. |
| hkwint Oct 25, 2010 7:26 PM EDT |
Today, it all the suddenly - out of the blue occured to me distro-makers are system-integrators.
While obvious for most people, for me, such a thought was new. Does Linux need ever more system integrators? As long as there are people saying it isn't integrated enough, probably, yes. However, integration - in some way - is about convergence. Creating new distributions - in another way - is about divergence. Which seems to be a bit of a paradox, something I haven't figured out - yet. |
| azerthoth Oct 25, 2010 7:32 PM EDT |
@hkwint if those who did had not diverged, Mandriva's awesome control panel that others borrowed, Sabayons shipping with compiz enabled by default that others borrowed, OMG the list goes on and on. It is those who are willing to diverge and try something new and different, the smaller distro's that have nothing really to loose that lead the way most of the time. After it's proved viability do others pick it up, so divergence is the best thing to happen because it drags everyone else along kicking and screaming. |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 25, 2010 9:08 PM EDT |
I did a Debian install today. It's not impossible, but also not as easy as Ubuntu or Mint. By a very long, long, long shot. I'm a big Debian advocate, but without Ubuntu and Mint we'd lose many, many users to Linux in general. Debian isn't for everybody. I'm glad a project like Ubuntu is taking that code, putting it within the reach of millions of other users, and more than likely making Debian the better for it. Hey, while we're on the subject, I used a daily build of Debian Squeeze, and it had Shotwell and Tomboy in the default. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. |
| weblordpepe Oct 26, 2010 1:25 AM EDT |
It's not hypocritical at all. Canonical heavily develops Ubuntu, and Debian is heavily developed by ..well the Debian community. If Debian suffers, Ubuntu helps. If Ubuntu suffers, Debian helps. The distinction here is that is there really a niche to fill? Because there is a penalty for forking which affects everybody in the FOSS community: You are adding another name for Joe Normal to hear about, and sucking away what little attention Ubuntu gets. The reason this is important is because unless there is seriously a good reason for the OS to make a noise, then you are making the FOSS community look fragmented... which is intimidating and scary, as far as marketing goes. Think to yourself: What if all Ubuntu users jumped ship and started using your AWESOME NEW OPERATING SYSTEM that you made all by yourself? Would Canonical keep developing? Would they see their user base shrink? Remember, Canonical in effect develops most of the OS you are marketing out to people. This is distinctly different from the Debian/Ubuntu relationship. My personal choice? Ubuntu, although I am getting a bit annoyed at the constant UI changes. |
| caitlyn Oct 26, 2010 1:29 AM EDT |
With all due respect, Joe Normal has, for the most part, never heard of Linux at all. If he has he probably has heard the names Ubuntu or Android. Where on earth would he hear of SuperOS? Joe or Jane Average User never read LXer.com or LinuxToday or DistroWatch and the mainstream press could care less about another obscure Linux distro. The price you attribute to forking is, IMHO, imaginary. If someone really does develop the better mousetrap I do hope they get the mind share and market share. If SuperOS is really super then let it shine. If not it will be ignored. That's how free markets and competition work which, IMHO, is a good thing. |
| weblordpepe Oct 26, 2010 1:40 AM EDT |
And this approach has worked amazingly well so far. It makes distrowatch look like a bloody mess. He needs to label his 'operating system' the correct way. He needs to call it a modification to Ubuntu. Not a new 'operating system'. And before you mention Ubuntu being a 'Debian modification', the distinction here is that Ubuntu is vastly different in operation, appearances, and also design philosophy. In general Canonical has done a lot to earn the label 'new operating system'. Its debatable if Xubuntu and Kubuntu are other operating systems. You might argue yes because they use different technology frameworks but I'm not really sussed either way. The short answer is: Is it actually needed? Because its very existence incurs a cost. If it's not needed, then being promoted & eventually ignored is collateral damage, not zero-penalty or healthy to the 'free market'. |
| tracyanne Oct 26, 2010 2:12 AM EDT |
I think SuperOS adds the Medibuntu repositories, and a few other nice to haves, by default, and like LinuxMint installs the codecs by default. If I remember correctly it's all there after install, no mucking about. Also I think it was originally called Ubuntu something ot an other, a year or three ago, but canonical asked them to change the name as it 's not a Canonical sponsored project. I remember installing it about 2 years ago, and I'm pretty sure that's correct. |
| caitlyn Oct 26, 2010 8:14 AM EDT |
Sorry, weblordpepe, I think the only cost is in your head. "Joe Normal", as you called him, has never heard of DistroWatch. Most Linux users stick with the major distros. |
| ComputerBob Oct 26, 2010 8:35 AM EDT |
Quoting:And before you mention Ubuntu being a 'Debian modification', the distinction here is that Ubuntu is vastly different in operation, appearances, and also design philosophy. In general Canonical has done a lot to earn the label 'new operating system'.Without Debian, Ubuntu would cease to exist. |
| helios Oct 26, 2010 9:44 AM EDT |
What we're seeing is evolution...but like all those who only perceive through the short cycles of the larger change...we don't see it. Evolution isn't always linear. Sometimes there are small regressions in the process but ultimately, the new grows from the old and the new is, by nature, going to be better. Look at where we are on the Linux plane and to do so, take a look at where we've been to get here. What has been our most persistent inhibitor to growth? The inclusion of proprietary drivers and codecs. Slowly, this has improved with some of them, through community pressure or the simple passing of time, have made their way into our kernel and ultimately a part of our user experience. And in some form, Darwin's skewed views fit here...it is the most fit that will survive. We've used Linux Mint for two years now to do our installs but lately, we've needed to do custom spins to meet the requirements of the kids we serve. While there are some tools that certainly help, many of them don't do the job we need them to do and if they do, they require extended periods at the command line to perform. I simply don't have the amount of time these tools require so I've looked around to see what is available. There are times when I need the OS on particular computers to have specific software and codecs to be ready to use upon installation. With Mint, I had to do the whole thing all over again. Then I found a tool called UCK. Uck allows me to take an Ubuntu ISO and through a localized instance of synaptic, add and remove apps and codecs/features on the fly and reburn the ISO to meet our needs. Unfortunately, UCK only works on Ubuntu distros. Fortunately, I can take the last ISO I created and further alter it without having to start over. Now where efforts such as Super OS come in should be clear. All the codecs are pre-installed. I don't have to manually add them when creating the ISO which saves me tons of time. We are averaging 400 computers a year now so if I can save even 10 minutes on each OS install on each computer, I've done well. So as a stand alone effort, does Super OS qualify as a distro? Most of me says no...it's simply Ubuntu the way Ubuntu should be, but then again US patent and copyright laws preclude the inclusion of some codecs and code. But like the relentless force of small amounts of water, great canyons are formed. Maybe the persistent efforts of some to include these things into a distro will show the same effect. h |
| tuxchick Oct 26, 2010 10:20 AM EDT |
What fragmentation? You can run any Linux app on any Linux. Why do people keep getting all worked up over "fragmentation" when it's not an issue? Distros are pretty much respins, just different packaging and artwork. |
| gus3 Oct 26, 2010 10:35 AM EDT |
Quoting:Without Debian, Ubuntu would cease to exist.Without Sun Microsystems, OpenOffice.org would cea.... oh, wait. |
| mrider Oct 26, 2010 12:29 PM EDT |
Arguments about fragmentation always remind me of the arguments that developers trot out about projects on e.g. Sourceforge: Do we need another project? Why don't people work on stuff that's already out there instead of starting something all new? Your stuff is poop, why don't you just use something established? Because I want to. That's why. The simple fact is that 99% of the distros (as well as O.S. projects) will fall by the wayside. But that doesn't make them worthless. If all that happens is that one of the main-stream projects gets a good idea from it - then it was worthwhile. Besides, what's wrong with "I just wanted to see if I could, and now I've published my results"? |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 26, 2010 6:25 PM EDT |
TC, you're right. We get blog posts on wallpapers, fonts and default-app lineups. I've even done posts like this myself. Far from wondering why there are 1,000 distros, I wonder why there's still one Linux kernel (albeit with distro-specific tweaks). Nobody's got enough crazy in them to fork it. |
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!