Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu Tries To Attract New Developers

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ubuntu Tries To Attract New Developers

    Phoronix: Ubuntu Tries To Attract New Developers

    Through improving the publicly available Ubuntu Linux documentation and reaching out to new developers -- along with existing Windows developers that may now be thinking of targeting Ubuntu as their next supported platform -- the Linux OS hopes to increase its developer and application count...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTIyMTA

  • #2
    Is it just me or is ubuntu seems to be trying hard to go forward without having much substance underneath it.

    Comment


    • #3
      It is pretty obvious Phoronix' members want Canonical to fail, think it's too mainstream or that it's ruining everything by now.

      I am glad they're not listening and actually pushing the Linux desktop.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
        Is it just me or is ubuntu seems to be trying hard to go forward without having much substance underneath it.

        Yeah, it's called vaporware or bafflegab like cloud computing, social media, next-gen solutions and other PR garbage that no one remembers 2 days after the presentation. I'd like Canonical to allocate 2-3 full-time devs to nouveau and other 2-3 devs to AMD's graphics team, but Canonical would rather spend 10 hours working around bugs or filing them rather than doing 2 hours of real hard work like Red Hat and Suse.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
          Is it just me or is ubuntu seems to be trying hard to go forward without having much substance underneath it.

          The problem is you can't excape from the Linux mess, no hard you try. The only way is to build something on top of it keeping "linux" under the hood, exactly like Android does or any other consumer project with linux at the "bottom".

          Linux, intended as typical distribution we all know today, will never become "succesful" in the desktop market for obvious reasons. You first have to create a unique and undestroyable ecosystem, so this is the exact contrary of what Linux is (and this is Linux's strengh, evolution and not intelligent design).

          This is why Linux will always be the best project in the world, but not the best in terms of consumer market share.

          Comment


          • #6
            "Ubuntu Desires Lower Audio Latency For Gaming"
            And yet they use PulseAudio.

            "Ubuntu Needs To Improve OpenGL Drivers For Gaming"
            And yet they use Unity.

            "Ubuntu Tries To Attract New Developers"
            And yet they don't contribute upstream.

            "Ubuntu Developers Realize Need For Non-3D Desktop"
            And yet they use Unity. Do they even know that there are fully developed desktops already existing out there?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by RealNC View Post
              "Ubuntu Desires Lower Audio Latency For Gaming"
              And yet they use PulseAudio.
              I could have sworn PulseAudio had application-customizable latency, expressly for the purpose of power saving when you don't need low latency, and getting good performance when you do need it. After all, waking up every 2 or 6 ms for music playback is foolhardy if you can buffer up several seconds of audio at a time from disk (or even the network if you use Icecast since it provides several seconds of buffering). The point is, it's flexible. I've played native Linux games (Trine, Steel Storm, Savage 2, HoN) with fantastic audio latency on top of PulseAudio.

              Besides, now that PA is the de facto and some programs exclusively support it and 99% of programs at least mostly support it as an alternative, what alternative would you change to that still maintains compatibility with all apps that use PA as the default or the only option? I guess if you're one of the 10 people who has a hardware mixer you could do direct ALSA, and ignore the fact that for every person who has a hardware mixer there are 999,999 people who don't, and just not support audio for those people at all since PulseAudio is all bad and stuff (according to you).

              I agree with the rest of your points about Ubuntu, but at this point it is ridiculous to think that PulseAudio is not the solution to Linux audio and can't be improved further to resolve situations where latency is unacceptable. The existing alternatives are not real alternatives due to some combination of: the lack of universal adoption, the lack of proper power management, the lack of user-friendly GUI tools, or the lack of various features that PA supports (bluetooth, flat volumes, network transparency, changing speaker configuration / number of channels, changing output device of running stream, etc.) If the only gripes against PA are that the latency is too high (on some hardware? definitely not mine) and it adds an unnecessary layer to hardware mixing, it's doing quite well -- considering the very grave problems presented by every other solution, including any totally new solution, which would just cause a re-hashing of all the upheaval and arguments that occur every time a new audio solution is presented for Linux. It's time to stop running and start sticking to our guns. PulseAudio has plenty of bullets left.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
                Is it just me or is ubuntu seems to be trying hard to go forward without having much substance underneath it.

                WTF? Ubuntu har all substance underneath it. The substance is called Debian, but, unfortunately Canonical keep Debian underneath them.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by sabriah View Post
                  WTF? Ubuntu har all substance underneath it. The substance is called Debian, but, unfortunately Canonical keep Debian underneath them.
                  Debian Wheezy in February 2012 is US$19,070,177,727 (AU$17.7B, EUR14.4B, GBP12.11B), making each packages upstream source code worth an average of US$1,112,547.56 (AU$837K) to produce. Impressively, this is all free (of cost).
                  http://pc-freak.net/blog/what-is-the...ware-projects/

                  my comment: Debian is the biggest distro out there but they don't get much credit as long as people know only its derivatives like ubuntu and mint. Is this bad, prolly because if they ask for funds(sources like E.U. or U.S.) they might get a reply "you know, you are not that famous, we will give you less than last year". if the host dies then the leech will go find blood from someone else.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                    "Ubuntu Desires Lower Audio Latency For Gaming"
                    And yet they use PulseAudio.

                    "Ubuntu Needs To Improve OpenGL Drivers For Gaming"
                    And yet they use Unity.

                    "Ubuntu Tries To Attract New Developers"
                    And yet they don't contribute upstream.

                    "Ubuntu Developers Realize Need For Non-3D Desktop"
                    And yet they use Unity. Do they even know that there are fully developed desktops already existing out there?
                    I woud bet that in some years Ubuntu is no longer a Linux Distrubtion like Debian or Arch. I bet that it will be still based on Linux but imcompatible to rest of the GNU/Linux world (imcompatible from ubuntu to other distrubtions and not from upstream Linux to Ubuntu), like OS X and *BSD. Ubuntu is a curse and a blessing: in one side its a blessing cause it brings more people to Linux and gets more companys to develop software for liux, in other side its a curse cause it does compared to other distrubtions with simlar size less and cause it develops without the community of the oher projects: it dosn't uses the strengh that the community has.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I'd rather cut my hand off than working on Ubuntu's development. I would like to see Ubuntu and Canonical fail not because I think it is too mainstream, but because it falsifies the purpose of a free operating system in the interest of making money with it.
                      Their intent to attract new developers is not beneficial to Linux and is just an expression of the strive for more profit.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Thaodan View Post
                        I woud bet that in some years Ubuntu is no longer a Linux Distrubtion like Debian or Arch. I bet that it will be still based on Linux but imcompatible to rest of the GNU/Linux world (imcompatible from ubuntu to other distrubtions and not from upstream Linux to Ubuntu), like OS X and *BSD.
                        They definitely seem to be pushing towards becoming their own self-branded operating system. I'm thinking they aim to become something along the lines of Android minus the upstream contributions (has Canonical ever contributed anything upstream?)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by arcas View Post
                          (has Canonical ever contributed anything upstream?)
                          Yes, they committed to their own calculator-program a few years ago! <sarcasm>I dare you not to be so rude to them</sarcasm>.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by arcas View Post
                            They definitely seem to be pushing towards becoming their own self-branded operating system. I'm thinking they aim to become something along the lines of Android minus the upstream contributions (has Canonical ever contributed anything upstream?)
                            Yes. Yes they have. Just because they don't commit as much as Red Hat doesn't mean they're not contributing. If nothing else, look at what they've done to popularize Linux on the desktop. If that's not a contribution, I don't understand English.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by frign View Post
                              I'd rather cut my hand off than working on Ubuntu's development. I would like to see Ubuntu and Canonical fail not because I think it is too mainstream, but because it falsifies the purpose of a free operating system in the interest of making money with it.
                              Their intent to attract new developers is not beneficial to Linux and is just an expression of the strive for more profit.
                              Methinks thou dost protest too strongly. You're a brainless hipster who doesn't like Ubuntu because it's not obscure. By your logic, you should also want to see Red Hat fail.

                              And how is wanting to attract new developers to Linux not benefiting Linux? Is it because Canonical is the one wanting to do the attracting? That's petty. I award you a box of Fail.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X