SEARCH

Enter your search query in the box above ^, or use the forum search tool.

You are not logged in.

#1 2009-11-14 15:16:38

achristoffersen
#! Junkie
Registered: 2009-03-23
Posts: 354

What's wrong with ubuntu

Not sure if this is the right forum - but anyways: With all the talk about a debian based #! a lot of people have argued against ubuntu. On OMNS blog phillip have even stated that:

I have become somewhat disillusioned with the direction of Ubuntu and I am not sure that I can develop/support/endorse another release of an Ubuntu based CrunchBang.

Since I really really really like #! (and openbox!!!) I most definitely want a happy Phillip.

But what is it that people don't like about ubuntu?

From searching I gather it something about:
* unnecessary and slow blot (but what exactly - and is it a problem for deriviatives like #!)
* 6 months release cycles vs. rolling release (What exactly is gained by a 6 months release - I only hear about rolling being "nice")
* Unstable (but is it really - after all nobody seams to compare it with debian stable - but unstable - or even testing)(I use debian stable on my webserver  - because stable on that server is alpha and omega).
* Freedom attitude (Branded firefox - but what else? Something about canonical not contributing upstream?? - Is this that certain "direction of ubuntu")

I would really like to hear everybody thoughts on this.

Offline

Be excellent to each other!

#2 2009-11-14 16:04:09

jobester
#! CrunchBanger
Registered: 2008-11-29
Posts: 151

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

I think the idea against Ubuntu is:

To update to Karmic, you have to go through too many problems.

Last edited by jobester (2009-11-14 16:31:24)

Offline

#3 2009-11-14 16:06:46

snowpine
#!-a-roo
Registered: 2008-11-24
Posts: 2,922

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

Nothing wrong with Ubuntu; I like it fine.

But it's like Batman movies... would you rather direct a remake of the 1980s Tim Burton version, or go back to the origin story and reboot the franchise? smile


/hugged

Offline

#4 2009-11-14 16:24:04

achristoffersen
#! Junkie
Registered: 2009-03-23
Posts: 354

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

jobester wrote:

To be up to date with Karmic, you have to go through too many problems.

That's the rolling release issue? So whats the rationale from ubuntu's point of view?

snowpine wrote:

But it's like Batman movies... would you rather direct a remake of the 1980s Tim Burton version, or go back to the origin story and reboot the franchise?

Michael Keaton was the best - but Christian Bale and Heath made a great couple also...

I don't know. Maybe it's a stupid question. It just seams there are to many (like my self) thinking - Debian: The original and best. But come on- OS can't be like Kellogs cereal. Theres got to be some reason why debian is better. Especially I'm interested in canonicals point of view. Why do they do what the do (or dont) - I mean they got to have a reason for being in this world?

Offline

#5 2009-11-14 16:38:53

snowpine
#!-a-roo
Registered: 2008-11-24
Posts: 2,922

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

achristoffersen wrote:

Especially I'm interested in canonicals point of view. Why do they do what the do (or dont) - I mean they got to have a reason for being in this world?

This is not an "official" answer, just my understanding: Debian has 3 branches: unstable/testing/stable. They release stable "whenever it's ready," so it might take 3 years for a package to travel from unstable, through testing, to stable. Ubuntu accelerates the process to about 6 months from Debian unstable, through Ubuntu testing, to final Ubuntu release. Basically, Canonical went after a niche of users whose needs were not being adequately met by Debian: desktop users who want a stable (not rolling) release cycle, but also want newer applications than in Debian stable.


/hugged

Offline

#6 2009-11-14 22:46:47

DixieDancer
#! Junkie
From: Florida, Occupied C.S.A.
Registered: 2009-04-25
Posts: 291
Website

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

I have read about complaints from other developers about "the direction" of Ubuntu, more specifically that it is apparently getting harder and harder for developers to use Ubuntu as a base. Something that Ubuntu is doing that Debian doesn't, I guess. Our own Distromeister is not the only one saying so, so there must be something to it. Perhaps when he has the time, our esteemed Founder will explain in more detail. All I know is that he's not alone in that sentiment.

-Robin

Offline

#7 2009-11-15 03:44:37

corenominal
WRONG
From: Lincoln, UK
Registered: 2008-11-20
Posts: 5,057
Website

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

DixieDancer wrote:

I have read about complaints from other developers about "the direction" of Ubuntu, more specifically that it is apparently getting harder and harder for developers to use Ubuntu as a base. Something that Ubuntu is doing that Debian doesn't, I guess. Our own Distromeister is not the only one saying so, so there must be something to it. Perhaps when he has the time, our esteemed Founder will explain in more detail. All I know is that he's not alone in that sentiment.

-Robin

Firstly, I think I should point out that I do not think there is anything wrong with Ubuntu per se. As a full Ubuntu member myself, I believe that the project is fundamentally worthwhile. I am particularly in favour of the Ubuntu Code of Conduct document, both because of what it stands for and because of what has been achieved because of it.

Secondly, I should probably state that I do not think there is any technical reason why CrunchBang could not continue to use the Ubuntu repositories as a base to build off of. From what I have worked on so far, I do not believe the latest Ubuntu release is any harder, or easier to develop on.

Thirdly, and something I want to make absolutely clear, I do not have any personal issues with any of the Ubuntu members or developers with which I have ever conversed with online, or met in meatspace. They have all been the best of people.

So, you could now be asking yourself, what is his problem with Ubuntu? Well, I know this may come across as a bit airy, but my problems are more philosophical in nature. Now, I am not much of a philosopher myself, but if I were, I would probably be pondering on the following questions:

  1. Are there too many Linux distributions?

  2. Is the Linux community spreading itself too thin to its own detriment?

  3. Ask yourself, if there was only one Linux distribution, which one should it be?

  4. If you can answer the previous question, ask yourself, are you already using it?

  5. If not, why not?

Of course, the initial question is absurdly broad and is often answered quite bluntly. The second question is almost as broad as the first, but I think it does at least provide a little more food for thought. Now, when you factor in questions 3,4 & 5 and apply some personal values, beliefs and logic, you could either find yourself in a quandary, or you might surprise yourself and actually come to a conclusion.

Now, I understand that some people who read this might be thinking that it is a little late in the day to be concerned with such matters, but that aside, I would be really interested to know what others think.

P.S. Anyone attempting to publicly answer question 3 with "CrunchBang" runs the risk of getting a slap with a wet haddock! lol

Last edited by corenominal (2009-11-15 04:18:24)

Offline

#8 2009-11-15 04:05:44

anonymous
The Mystery Member
From: Arch Linux Forums
Registered: 2008-11-29
Posts: 9,418

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

1. No, but I do think there are too many package managers/formats.

2. You mean in trying to become mainstream on the desktop? Then yes. People complain about Windows (Vista) having too many editions, so the countless Linux distros seem worse in comparison.

3,4,5. I refuse to answer these questions. No matter what distro was picked as "the one", there would be no way to satisfy everyone's wants. And besides, since Linux is open source anyone could make a Linux distro and then post it on their blog or site as an experiment to see if people like it.

Offline

#9 2009-11-15 04:17:09

corenominal
WRONG
From: Lincoln, UK
Registered: 2008-11-20
Posts: 5,057
Website

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

anonymous wrote:

3,4,5. I refuse to answer these questions. No matter what distro was picked as "the one", there would be no way to satisfy everyone's wants.

Sorry, I was not overly clear. If you can come up with answers for questions 3,4, & 5, they should be for yourself, not for everyone else. smile

I will rephrase the question in the original post.

Offline

#10 2009-11-15 08:23:55

stopie
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2009-02-02
Posts: 547

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

I say that #1 is caused by #3. I think it is the curse, and the blessing of linux. Because it is so versatile, many make the distro that is their "one" whether it is based on what programs, or what blueprint, or what package manager to have, or what have you. So because everyone wants to make their own, there are "too many distros" to chose from - but I think thats how it should be - choice is power. If you dont like your distro, you can make your own, or go to another one...you cant go to "another" windows 7 or osx wink

Annnd its 02:22, at work, so

$brain ne $functioning

so thats the only contribution I will make to the philosophical disscussion of doom.

Offline

#11 2009-11-15 09:31:27

omns
#! wanderer
From: ~/
Registered: 2008-11-25
Posts: 5,131

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

I think I'd answer question 1 by posing another question. What is a distro? Is it a distribution with its own package base or is it a derivative that tweaks another distros base, or both?

As for Q2 I guess it depends on how you view the results of all the branched out efforts from the main distros. Do they give back or detract from the original? I guess if Linux just stuck with the main older distros then we never would have had Ubuntu to begin with. So the answer I guess is no, it doesn't spread things to thin. In the long run it develops skills that benefit many communities and distributions.

As for Q's 3,4,5 I think a couple of weeks ago I would have answered yes to finding the distro that suits me best and was confidently using it. Recent events have changed that somewhat but at least I guess I'm down to a choice between two. Currently I think the Bigger distro will win the day and be my permanent home for quite a while. This I guess brings me back to Question 1 smile

Offline

#12 2009-11-15 11:22:37

DixieDancer
#! Junkie
From: Florida, Occupied C.S.A.
Registered: 2009-04-25
Posts: 291
Website

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

1. Are there too many Linux distributions?

No, but it is confusing to a newcomer who doesn't know how to describe what he or she wants. And even if one can define what one wants in a distro, there are several choices within even the narrowest of categories.

   2. Is the Linux community spreading itself too thin to its own detriment?

Only inasmuch as making it harder for newcomers to sort out. I think that one thing that might have helped me when I was a brand newbie would have been a list of distros categarized according to what hardware they run best on. Mandriva and PCLOS were really cool lookin', but slowed my poor little 'puter to a crawl and balked at my HP printer and had no respect for my sound card. The 'buntus and spinoffs "just worked." Might have saved myself a little trouble knowing that ahead of time...


  3. Ask yourself, if there was only one Linux distribution, which one should it be? Something kinda sorta like Arch or Debian net-install, where you can "build your own Linux" to taste. For newbies who don't know the difference between Gnome and KDE or Openbox and Fluxbox, a guide should offer descriptions, screenshots, positives and negatives for each, and a way to easily change from one to the other.

  4. If you can answer the previous question, ask yourself, are you already using it? Yup. I built my own Debian Lenny with additional repos and stuff - and options to switch desktop environments, explore new applications (K-mail, for instance, is surprisingly like Thunderbird only faster on my machine), and change back again when I feel like it. Cuz I keep changing my mind and Debian lets me do it and doesn't complain when I do. It does slow things down to have all that stuff (and all those dependencies) on while I'm still exploring and learning, but I don't mind a little loss of speed in exchange for this cool adventure. When I settle down and finally pick a favorite system, I'll uninstall the stuff I don't want anymore and (hopefully) gain a little speed. Lenny is rock-stable, too, which is another reason it is my answer to question #3!

   5. If not, why not? I was about to answer "Not Applicable," but it really is. In fact I don't yet know what suits me best. I'm just having fun trying them all (within the limits of Debian Stable and Debian Testing - Sid is naughty).

-Robin
(who thinks the questions are awesome and thought provoking. Thanks!)

Offline

#13 2009-11-15 12:18:42

IgorP
#! Junkie
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Registered: 2009-07-10
Posts: 338

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

Answers:

1. Yes and no. There is a few fundamentaly different distributions (main), but we have too much derivates with some cosmetics changes which call themselfs a distributions. Ok, if I changed settings on #!CB, add some apps, remove some, should I call that my distribution ? Metaphorically speaking, we have many different cars with few engines below hood of the car..
2. Yes
3. No, I see several (not 100) main distros (direction) based on way/style/goal you want. It shoud be the one which suites me the best.
4. Yes, my friend! #!CB
5. Answers in no if you didn't found your OS (Windows/OS/Linux 1, 2, 3, ..). There is no better way than try.

Regards!

Offline

#14 2009-11-15 13:42:25

p0rksh3d
#! CrunchBanger
From: Brownsville, Texas
Registered: 2009-09-28
Posts: 107

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

Linux is like the earth, organic.  Let's let it grow and enjoy it.

Offline

#15 2009-11-15 13:50:01

jinnstar
#! CrunchBanger
From: Philadelphia, Pa
Registered: 2009-07-19
Posts: 213

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

So, you could now be asking yourself, what is his problem with Ubuntu? Well, I know this may come across as a bit airy, but my problems are more philosophical in nature. Now, I am not much of a philosopher myself, but if I were, I would probably be pondering on the following questions:

  1. Are there too many Linux distributions?

  2. Is the Linux community spreading itself too thin to its own detriment?

  3. Ask yourself, if there was only one Linux distribution, which one should it be?

  4. If you can answer the previous question, ask yourself, are you already using it?

  5. If not, why not?

1: Yes and no. Variety is a good thing however, the package manager thing is getting a bit out of hand for my personal tastes.
2: I agree that infinite forking causes focus shifting among users, and developers. Sometime this leaves bugs, usability issues and the like unsolved.
3: Debian for the Moderately Lazy Power User. Debian is my distro of choice, and as such I exercise the choice of many distros with X and my fav window manager or environment pre-configured. I can and have built up Debian boxen via net install, but alas I'm moderately lazy. I suppose what I'm really choosing is a package manager.
4: Honestly? No, I'm using a down stream distro based on it.
5:The reason why is simple I'm moderately lazy. big_smile


Roar!

Offline

#16 2009-11-15 14:32:29

p0rksh3d
#! CrunchBanger
From: Brownsville, Texas
Registered: 2009-09-28
Posts: 107

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

1. No

2. Linux community, No.  This is impossible, because of the type of organism it is.  Distro communities, some Yes.

3. Arch, I'm a Gentoo man, but Debian is also necessary in this world of convenience.  Gentoo + Debian = Arch.

4. No

5. #! is pretty much identical to the Gentoo system I always setup minus, the source based backend.  I don't have time to maintain a source based system at this time in my life.  I like the dpkg structure since I've converted my whole family to Linux, and they use Ubuntu.

Offline

#17 2009-11-15 15:20:09

jobester
#! CrunchBanger
Registered: 2008-11-29
Posts: 151

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

  1. Are there too many Linux distributions?
    Yes, but not because of quantity, and not enough to cause a problem.  To generalise, imo there are too many cases of two weak distros targeting a desktop environment market that can currently only support one quality distro.  For example, at this moment in time I think there should be one absolute Xfce distro, and the rest should call themselves "Xfce for people who want X" [where X = Ubuntu base, or open-source software only, etc].  The rest should actively support the one, until the quality is high enough that a distro of equally high quality can easily be made.  This opinion is entirely based on my belief that there are a lot of distros, but it's incredibly rare for one to meet my highest expectations.

  2. Is the Linux community spreading itself too thin to its own detriment?
    No.  This is a pretty simple case where you should let people do what they want.  If spreading yourself too thin is a problem, encourage people to stop doing it, but never as a requirement.

  3. Ask yourself, if there was only one Linux distribution, which one should it be?
    Linux from scratch?  Or Debian minimal?  Or a more supported Slackware minimal?  Why not a BSD?  For me personally, I'd go the opposite and just throw on Ubuntu standard.

  4. If you can answer the previous question, ask yourself, are you already using it?
    Hellll no!

  5. If not, why not?
    I want a balance between no bloat and hardware support; and something that I can precisely customize, but with the least amount of effort.  For example, #! Openbox is highly customizable, but if the configs were locked I would still use it.  So I can make tweaks one at a time as I want to make them.
    So basically, I'm using a less standard distro because it takes too long to customise a minimal distro.  And it's so much easier having one default video player, terminal, et cetera pre-selected for me.

Last edited by jobester (2009-11-15 15:25:32)

Offline

#18 2009-11-15 17:41:39

Shinkanzen
#! CrunchBanger
Registered: 2009-01-30
Posts: 130

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

1/2. No, different people have different needs, special purposes call for special distros, and the distros noone uses get weeded out by evolution;-)
the people who are too lazy to find the one that suits their needs shall stay with windows.

Anonymous +1

3. #! for sure, it runs fast on old and new machines @distromeister it would be my pleasure to be slapped a knight of your kingdom

4. yeah i'm loving it

Offline

#19 2009-11-15 18:31:18

benj1
Wiki Wizard
From: Yorkshire, England
Registered: 2009-09-05
Posts: 1,084

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

interesting questions, i read an essay partially covering this (by Eric S Raymond i think, but can't seem to find it at the moment, although i believe CATB skirts the issue), it was on duplication of effort in open source, and came to the conclusion that it wasn't a problem for distributions because theyre using standard building blocks.
to answer the questions

Are there too many Linux distributions?

no

Is the Linux community spreading itself too thin to its own detriment?

no, i think the detriment would come from too few distros, no one distro can make all the right decisions, and no distro can please everybody.

Ask yourself, if there was only one Linux distribution, which one should it be?

and this would be the biggest detriment, the linux community would tear itself apart before it ever reached a conclusion, and thats not even going into the practical aspects of one distro for embedded systems, servers,desktops, beowulf clusters.


- - - - - - - - Wiki Pages - - - - - - -
#! install guide           *autostart programs, modify the menu & keybindings
configuring Conky       *installing scripts

Offline

#20 2009-11-15 21:27:39

illumin8
#! Junkie
From: Seattle
Registered: 2009-05-30
Posts: 407
Website

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

Lets wax philosophical...

Does Linux have too many distributions?
This is too broad a question for me -  with too many hidden assumptions.  It needs a qualifier. Something like... "are there too many Linux distributions for Linux to become a mainstream consumer product - assuming that the entire Linux community needs to be concerned with molding ourselves into a consumer product."
The answer to this is my mind is no, and not probable.
The beauty of Linux is freedom and availability.
As long as the sharing ideal stays ahead of the GPL so that it is sharing rather than enforcing that is happening, Companies like Canonical can only help the Linux community as a whole.
The problem comes when Canonical (and we) start to believe that they ARE the community; Or we start defering to Ubuntu's Distro decisions as Linux Policy.
It seems to me that the more distros there are, the more there is to work with. Trying to artificially restrict this, would be like limiting restaurants.
Good food, good advertising, and good location are the determining factors for restaurants success. The weeding out process takes care of itself based on what is produced excellently and consistently. Presentation is key. I can only assume that the motivator for this question is out of concern for new  new users to enter the Linux world. Thats where companies like Canonical are a blessing.

To me the better question to be asking at this point is, how can we as a Linux community take steps to ensure that standards stay in place.
By default, this happens naturally by what is most frequently chosen as the primary building foundation for distributions. Which brings me back around to the original question that started this discussion. "What is wrong with Ubuntu?" I would rephrase this question as " When looking at the Ubuntu community as a whole, the policies and outlooks of Canonical, and the leadership style of Mark Shuttleworth, do we think that placing Ubuntu at the core of Linux by chosing it as the primary building block of distro development is a good idea for community in the long term?"

In my opinion, the answer is a resounding no.
I am not making judgements on the primary Ubuntu developers as people, or even developers, but frankly, (and here is the inflammatory part)
I view the underlying principles and motivations of Ubuntu and Debian as fundamentally different. I get the feeling based on a number of factors that Canonical has much more of an imperialistic nature than Debian does. Debian seems to make decisions with the broader view in mind. Ubuntu seems to make decisions based on what is best for Ubuntu and Canonical's business goals. I would be willing to change my mind about this, but that is the conclusion I have come to based on my interaction with them. Personally I think this is a very serious issue.  I love what they have done for and with Linux, but I would even go so far as to say that placing Ubuntu in the position of foundational building block is potentially dangerous for the long term. The philosophies of Debian, Gentoo, and Slackware seem more benevolent to me. Personally I would love to see #! go Debian. There would most likely be some popularity fall out at first, but with the level of innovation in this community, I think it would be a good long-term play. But again, that could just be my opinion.

Last edited by illumin8 (2009-11-15 21:29:56)


Website    500px     DeviantArt
God never ends anything on a negative; God always ends on a positive. -- Edwin Louis Cole --

Offline

#21 2009-11-15 21:57:57

toor58
#! Member
From: USA
Registered: 2009-01-10
Posts: 65

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

This really is a philosophical argument. For now at least.

Let me say here something that I have said before. Having watched Ubuntu's development since 7.04, I feel strongly within myself that it is moving toward a proprietary like nature. Every one can disagree if you want. I have no problem with that. But, I strongly feel that this is taking place. There are many little things that lead me to think this way. And then there are some, shall I say, "intangibles", things that I can not quite put my finger on, so to speak. More akin to an intuitive insight. Spaceman can say what he will, I am sticking to my guns on this. Remember Mac's are Unix based. And Shuttleworth has a thing for Mac.

1.Are there too many Linux distributions?
   2. Is the Linux community spreading itself too thin to its own detriment?
   3.Ask yourself, if there was only one Linux distribution, which one should it be?
   4.If you can answer the previous question, ask yourself, are you already using it?
   5.If not, why not?

On the first point -- I agree with anonymous. Too many package managers.

second point -- Perhaps not. But the larger community is filled with a personality type that is constantly eroding its reputation. Image is everything. Ms = buisness suite; Mac = cool demeanor; Linux = dirty hippies with a bad attitude.

Thirdly -- singularity = target. Our strength is in our diversity. This somewhat negates point one, but, notwithstanding, it is a truth nontheless. Variety keeps us virus free. It also dilutes our capacity to reach John Q Public. We need a unified front, minus the fanaticism of FSF or the snobbery of elitist Debian.

Point four -- in agreement with IgorP. This is the longest and most peaceful I have evry been with any distro. Corenominal, I salute you and your fine work, and this fantastic community. A gem in the Linux crown.

Point five -- For me the point is mute.

Michael


smile Free your Software -- Free your Life smile

    ASUS eee pc 1005HA -- awesome#!

Offline

#22 2009-11-15 22:11:32

Ronin
#! Member
Registered: 2009-11-10
Posts: 95

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

Ilumin8 just posted what I was trying to write (in a more spaced out and ethereal way, I fear), and so I salute you. You said what I was thinking better.

Chaos theory more acurately describes the development process for open source software than the way businesses manage projects, and perhaps this is the difference between Debian and Canonical: Debian does not force its development process into an artificial time frame.

As regards the base of #! being Debian or Ubuntu, I no longer care which way it goes. It's all Linux.

I love Ubuntu. Ubuntu changed the world by making Linux accessible to people who otherwise would not have had access to the computer programs they needed to bridge the digital divide. Through Mint, it changed my life by introducing me to a Linux I could use while I was developing more skill.

And I know we will never know the true impact Ubuntu has had on so many people around the world. 

But Debian also changed the world. Linux changed the world. (And we are changing the world, too, in our own little small ways.)

And thanks, Phil. I'm already learning from #!


Freedom to choose is the most basic of all rights.

Offline

#23 2009-11-16 00:09:22

benj1
Wiki Wizard
From: Yorkshire, England
Registered: 2009-09-05
Posts: 1,084

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

Ronin wrote:

Chaos theory more acurately describes the development process for open source software than the way businesses manage projects, and perhaps this is the difference between Debian and Canonical: Debian does not force its development process into an artificial time frame.

would evolution not be better terminology ?


- - - - - - - - Wiki Pages - - - - - - -
#! install guide           *autostart programs, modify the menu & keybindings
configuring Conky       *installing scripts

Offline

#24 2009-11-16 01:39:31

saneks
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2009-10-01
Posts: 999

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

yeah illumin8, was thinking pretty much the same while reading all the new posts until I found yours..

+1 for you,and now just a few thoughts..

it is confusing to see all the distros at the first time.

linux is confusing for the majority of the people coming from windows, when I saw Linux the first time around 2000, I was thinking that this is gonna be a freak-thing forever.

so ubuntu is the easy start now for anybody. I myself already converted a couple of friends with ubuntu, cause for them it's easy to switch.

but diversity is the soul. after some searching, lucky me found #!, was happy to see it is as comfortable, yet more transparent and interesting. For me its the better ubuntu, favourite linux ,or whatever. it is just good for me. Probably if it had bee more difficult to switch from ubuntu to #!,I would not have tried, but I think anybody truly interested will sooner or later find somethin that suits them.

and being a dirty hippie is alright! The other day, Philip mentioned something like "this forum has more love in it than a busload of hippies"..true. when I found what Linux actually is, I thought: "Wow, that's like the Ideal of Anarchy. Proper anarchy - how it should be in everyday life. everyone do what they want, cooparate freely, voluntarily, are excellent to each other, develop something really good together, just for the sake of the thing and to create something awesome for everyone into the world. that's so cool!"

of course things and people go different ways, but that's life.

diversity is power!


eee701 user & other lap/desktops

Offline

Be excellent to each other!

#25 2009-11-16 03:37:08

Chetamonye
#! Member
From: California
Registered: 2009-07-23
Posts: 65

Re: What's wrong with ubuntu

Ronin wrote:

I love Ubuntu. Ubuntu changed the world by making Linux accessible to people who otherwise would not have had access to the computer programs they needed to bridge the digital divide. Through Mint, it changed my life by introducing me to a Linux I could use while I was developing more skill.

And I know we will never know the true impact Ubuntu has had on so many people around the world. 

But Debian also changed the world. Linux changed the world. (And we are changing the world, too, in our own little small ways.)

And thanks, Phil. I'm already learning from #!

I feel that Debian changed the world much more than ubuntu has.  Debian's solid base allowed ubuntu it's start.  Debian came into being during a period when it was much more difficult to be linux.  I guess your point of view depends on how long you have been a linux user. 

I remember when Knoppix was the darling distro because of it's superior hardware detection, and ability to run from a cd.  Something we take for granted now. 

I would say that the one truly great thing ubuntu did for linux was to create the newbie friendly forums and places to exchange information.  Prior to ubuntu, it could be hard to ask a question and get an answer with out some kind of negative comments.  Not always, but it wasn't uncommon.

Giving away cds for free, encouraging locos, being "more" responsive to comments and suggestions(even if it only appears that way), striking deals with Dell, and other businesses is no small feat either.  Ubuntu is advancing linux, but I believe eventually it would have started happening even without them.  It just would have taken longer.

Chet

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB

Copyright © 2012 CrunchBang Linux.
Proudly powered by Debian. Hosted by Linode.
Debian is a registered trademark of Software in the Public Interest, Inc.

Debian Logo