Nothing like a bit of Buntu Bashing
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| gary_newell Sep 26, 2013 3:41 AM EDT |
It seems that there is nothing more popular in the Linux community than Ubuntu Bashing. A lot of people genuinely don't like Unity. Fine, no problem with that. If you have ever read the Linux sub-reddit on Reddit however there are so many people who write statements like "Which distro should I use? I tried Ubuntu but hated Unity, maybe I should try Arch". Give me a break.... from Ubuntu to Arch is a big step and whether you like Unity or not you can't take away from the good things that Ubuntu have done over the years. Sure go to Arch but you are going to be expected to think for yourself a little bit. I like Unity. I happen to find it very intuitive and I work quicker using Unity. If you don't like it why not use Gnome or KDE or XFCE or Cinnamon. They all work on Ubuntu. I think new users to Ubuntu actually think Unity is pretty good as well. So whilst Ubuntu may have lost some users to Mint there are many new people who are more than happy with Unity. Much of the criticism of Unity is based on the 11.04 version which was truly awful but now it is slick and I wonder how many of the the naysayers have actually tried it recently. |
| djohnston Sep 26, 2013 6:29 AM EDT |
Quoting:It seems that there is nothing more popular in the Linux community than Ubuntu Bashing. Bashing? What if the article had highlighted questionable practices about Fedora or OpenSuse? Would you still consider it to be "bashing"? Jim Lynch's article quoted only a portion of the full Datamation article. Although the full article questions the wisdom of foisting the Unity interface on unsuspecting users, it lists more instances, such as Upstart, Mir, "repositioning of title bar icons and the introduction of the HUD menu replacement". Note that the title of the Datamation article is Are We Witnessing the Decline of Ubuntu? It's a question, not a declaration of fact. Bruce Byfield, the Datamation article's author, also said that: Quoting:In those early years, Ubuntu did many things to improve usability on the desktop. Probably the most noticeable was the installed support for multiple languages and keyboard locale switching that are now standard in all major distributions. Personally, I thought the Datamation article raised valid points about Canonical/Ubuntu. You may not agree with me, which is, of course, your right. But, the claim that "Ubuntu bashing" is a favorite pastime of the Linux community is stretching credibility. Quoting:If you don't like it why not use Gnome or KDE or XFCE or Cinnamon. Or, why not use Debian? It was around long before Ubuntu, is the parent of Ubuntu, and has a huge repository of packages to choose from. In fact, there are many, many choices a Linux user can make, including, but not limited to, choice of distro and desktop. |
| the_doctor Sep 26, 2013 8:55 AM EDT |
Is Ubuntu doomed? No. Are Jim Lynch's articles nothing more than a cheap copy and paste job from other websites? Absolutely! |
| r_a_trip Sep 26, 2013 9:12 AM EDT |
I expect Ubuntu to be around for a long time. That said, I don't care if Ubuntu disappears or not. Recent years have revealed that Ubuntu is a millionairs play thing, where a small company autocratically decides what users want (and have to accept). If that is your thing, more power to you. I don't support it, in favour of more open en more traditional Linux distributions. |
| thenixedreport Sep 26, 2013 9:27 AM EDT |
@djohnston:Quoting:You may not agree with me, which is of course, your privilege. I take issue with such phrases. It's not somebody's privilege to disagree with another. It's their right to do so. I've seen plenty of instances in which people would criticize Ubuntu. This to me is no different than when other distros, such as PCLinuxOS, have been criticized while being very popular at the same time. There will always be criticism of things that have quite a following, and of course it's much easier to play armchair quarterback or act as a backseat driver than actually learning how to write code, contribute artwork, edit/create documentation, etc. |
| mrider Sep 26, 2013 11:02 AM EDT |
I don't use any of the *buntu distributions. That said, I have two questions: 1) How insipid would something have to be so as to inspire no criticism? 2) Which is better - to be widely criticized, or widely ignored? |
| skelband Sep 26, 2013 12:41 PM EDT |
> I don't use any of the *buntu distributions. That said, I have two questions: > 1) How insipid would something have to be so as to inspire no criticism? > 2) Which is better - to be widely criticized, or widely ignored? What mrider said. :D To be widely criticised is to be acknowledged as important. That people feel that they need to criticise means that they care in some measure. |
| djohnston Sep 26, 2013 2:34 PM EDT |
@thenixedreport,Quoting:I take issue with such phrases. It's not somebody's privilege to disagree with another. It's their right to do so. I see your point. I stand corrected. |
| montezuma Sep 28, 2013 6:41 PM EDT |
I think the problem with Ubuntu was that it was schizophrenic from the beginning. Shuttleworth wanted a Ubuntu community and wanted also to be the SABDFL since he poured in big bucks. In the first few years the fundamental tension between these two things was not apparent and the community grew. Thus Ubuntu became immensely popular and Shuttleworth kept pouring in the bucks. Eventually though SABDFL flexed his muscles and the community became just his asset. He had to do this to make the distro self funding but the community felt exploited and many left. I don't think there is any resolution to these contradictions and I am also not impressed by the direction that Shuttleworth is taking Ubuntu in challenging Android |
| herzeleid Sep 30, 2013 1:15 PM EDT |
"Or, why not use Debian?" Fair question, I suppose. A couple years ago I wanted to go with Debian on my laptop, because, you know, the four freedoms and all, right? The install was quick and painless, but I could not get my wireless to work for love nor rubles, I googled, downloaded firmware, trawled Debian help forums and nothing worked. I finally gave up and installed ubuntu. Wireless worked out of the box, and worked fine ever since. Does this mean I'm not competent to run Debian? Another fair question. I'm a Linux system administrator with 20 years experience. Perhaps I could eventually crack the riddle, but life is too short. I have better things to do with my time. Sure, back in 1993 when I was running SLS, it was normal to spend a couple weeks finishing up your install, searching the internet for tarballs to build, fixing permissions, repairing broken scripts. But nowadays I prefer to use a distro where things just work. And if I feel that way, how can I expect a newbie to work through the gordian knot? |
| gus3 Sep 30, 2013 1:43 PM EDT |
Quoting:how can I expect a newbie to work through the gordian knot? With a sword. Atomic weapons are definitely not advised. |
| jazz Oct 01, 2013 10:02 AM EDT |
Quoting:Fair question, I suppose. A couple years ago I wanted to go with Debian on my laptop, because, you know, the four freedoms and all, right? The install was quick and painless, but I could not get my wireless to work for love nor rubles, I googled, downloaded firmware, trawled Debian help forums and nothing worked. It is easy, take a look under /lib directory. There is a /lib/modules with the kernel modules and a /lib/firmware with the kernel firmware. In Ubuntu both directories are populated. By default Debian does not populate /lib/firmware directory. It has however support to bring it in: https://wiki.debian.org/Firmware Or you can just install an Ubuntu kernel in parallel with your Debian kernel. |
| flufferbeer Oct 01, 2013 6:51 PM EDT |
@monte > Eventually though SABDFL flexed his muscles and the community became just his asset. He had to do this to make the distro self funding but the community felt exploited and many left. +1 w/o any doubt! $huttlewroth and his diehard fanbois still at it too, now rampin up the be-all-end-all tech rhetoric for the eventual release of baboontu 13.10 2c |
| penguinist Oct 01, 2013 10:39 PM EDT |
I have to take issue with all this Ubuntu bashing. Shuttleworth is promoting Linux in innovative ways that might or might not work. Time will tell. In any case, Shuttleworth is promoting Linux and I for one applaud him for that. I wish we had more people who put their money and their reputations at stake to achieve something worth going for. |
| DrGeoffrey Oct 01, 2013 10:47 PM EDT |
Personally, I prefer saving my vitriol for MS. After WinME, Vista, Windows 8, Word, PowerPoint, Access, Outlook, Internet Explorer, etc., etc., haven't they earned it?? |
| gary_newell Oct 02, 2013 3:49 AM EDT |
If you use Microsoft products you just always have to skip a version. Keep Windows 3.1, skip Windows 95, use Windows 98, skip Windows Me, use Windows XP, skip Windows Vista, use Windows 7, skip Windows 8. I'm not particularly one for Microsoft bashing either. They do make some good products. Their best product is definitely Visual Studio and SQL Server is pretty decent as well. Things I don't like include ribbon bars for all the new interfaces, internet explorer and reporting services. I also have a mild dislike for Access and Excel although they benefit me as well. Basic cycle. Somebody builds a spreadsheet because they think they are a programmer and then somebody else ends up supporting it so they turn it into an Access database. The Access database is too cumbersome so somebody turns it into a full featured application (that is where I come in). The output from the fully featured application is...... a spreadsheet. Rinse and repeat. |
| jdixon Oct 02, 2013 6:09 AM EDT |
> ...and SQL Server is pretty decent as well. Didn't they get SQL Server from Sybase? > Shuttleworth is promoting Linux in innovative ways... Shuttleworth is promoting his pet project in innovative ways. He seems to be doing his very best to make sure no one even knows it's Linux. |
| gary_newell Oct 02, 2013 6:44 AM EDT |
"Didn't they get SQL Server from Sybase?" If you can't beat them.... steal from them. To be fair SQL Server 6.5 was pretty much Sybase but SQL Server 7 was a rewrite. |
| skelband Oct 02, 2013 1:10 PM EDT |
> If you can't beat them.... steal from them. Microsoft bought it from Sybase so SQL Server 6.5 is pretty much very like Sybase of the time. They then consequently rewrote a large part of the core for version 7 and it was a massive improvement both in terms of execution and interruptability. |
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!