Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu Set To Terminate Its Brainstorm Project

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

  • Ubuntu Set To Terminate Its Brainstorm Project

    Phoronix: Ubuntu Set To Terminate Its Brainstorm Project

    Ubuntu Brainstorm served as a way for the Ubuntu community to nominate new ideas for the Linux operating system, comment on these ideas, and vote on the ideas should you find them interesting and worthwhile. However, now it looks like Ubuntu Brainstorm is going to be eliminated...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTM3MTM

  • #2
    So... does anyone know what features came about as a result of this project?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by gigaplex View Post
      So... does anyone know what features came about as a result of this project?
      A very good question.

      Research should be made on what happened in this project and why everyone lost interest. It sounds like ideas were just killed, and everyone called it a day. That was the worst case scenario. In a better case it was just bureaucracy not needed.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by moilami View Post
        A very good question.

        Research should be made on what happened in this project and why everyone lost interest. It sounds like ideas were just killed, and everyone called it a day. That was the worst case scenario. In a better case it was just bureaucracy not needed.
        IIRC e.g. the installer starting installation even before user enters all the field data. There are not many. People lost interest because Ubuntu stopped considering the ideas. Go and see for yourself. There are ideas with thousands of votes... not implemented.

        I couldn't even register a year ago, with the admin not responding.

        In any case. QA? It's definitely 'not among the core values of Ubuntu'.

        Comment


        • #5
          Yeah. Who cares if you defeat windows, if you become windows in the process. Not listening to the users is bad business.

          Comment


          • #6
            It was exciting when it was new, and I proposed many ideas with mockups and such.

            But it seems developers didn't have interest, and those who did lost interest.

            Comment


            • #7
              Interesting times...

              It's indicative of the new Ubuntu. Canonical has the reigns tightly in hand and they don't need contributing users anymore. They need uncritical consumers, who ooh and aah at any new shiny thing Canonical tacks onto Ubuntu. Tada, look, shiny.

              Canonical is pulling an Apple. They are creating their own incompatible OS, completely Canonical specific and amazingly they do it while releasing the whole shebang under a FOSS license. It's quite a feat to create proprietary benefits while being FOSS to the letter. Brilliant, but completely detrimental to the larger Linux ecosystem.

              All the cheerleaders for Ubuntu will increasingly find them locked into Canonical's OS. Once they have structured their computing life around Ubuntu and Canonical succeeds in creating an Ubuntu specific ecosystem, they will be back at square one. Facing another switch if they don't want to be beholden to the whims of Bug #2.

              "But, but, but it is FOSS. It is out there and you can choose to use it." Oh yeah, but you'd have to become Ubuntu in the process. I don't think the whole world is waiting for an Ubuntu monoculture, with all distributions basically being an Ubuntu respin.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by r_a_trip View Post
                It's indicative of the new Ubuntu. Canonical has the reigns tightly in hand and they don't need contributing users anymore. They need uncritical consumers, who ooh and aah at any new shiny thing Canonical tacks onto Ubuntu. Tada, look, shiny.
                You have to consider that Ubuntu has been around for quite a while now, but it failed to take away any real market share from MS and Apple. So apparently a new strategy is needed.

                Not a big issue, IMO. There's plenty of Linux distros to choose from.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Gnu os

                  Originally posted by phoronix View Post
                  Ubuntu Brainstorm served as a way for the Ubuntu community to nominate new ideas for the Linux operating system, (...)
                  It's not a Linux operating system, it is a GNU operating system with the (monolithic) Linux-Kernel; thus it's called "GNU/Linux".
                  Even though I would not consider Ubuntu to be free software at and after all, we shouldn't deny the fact it utilizes a lot of GNU software, rendering it a GNU OS.
                  Unless their NiH-syndrome gets bad enough to attempt to replace those tools, this won't change, and even if, in no case it would turn into a Linux operating system.

                  I am not a FSF-fanatic, but we should at least give them credit for their hard work. We wouldn't be here today without them.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Breaking news, "Canonical does not want input from users or community members."

                    Shocking.

                    [/sarc]

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by r_a_trip View Post

                      "But, but, but it is FOSS. It is out there and you can choose to use it." Oh yeah, but you'd have to become Ubuntu in the process. I don't think the whole world is waiting for an Ubuntu monoculture, with all distributions basically being an Ubuntu respin.
                      Dunno, the world e.g. masses can actually welcome that kind of future. Gladly it should not kill current "independent" distributions like Gentoo, Arch, Redhat, SuSe, Debian and 100 other projects.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by frign View Post
                        It's not a Linux operating system, it is a GNU operating system with the (monolithic) Linux-Kernel; thus it's called "GNU/Linux".
                        Cool story, bro.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by frign View Post
                          It's not a Linux operating system, it is a GNU operating system with the (monolithic) Linux-Kernel; thus it's called "GNU/Linux".
                          Even though I would not consider Ubuntu to be free software at and after all, we shouldn't deny the fact it utilizes a lot of GNU software, rendering it a GNU OS.
                          Unless their NiH-syndrome gets bad enough to attempt to replace those tools, this won't change, and even if, in no case it would turn into a Linux operating system.

                          I am not a FSF-fanatic, but we should at least give them credit for their hard work. We wouldn't be here today without them.
                          There is (probably) a person called John Smith. "Smith" is his surname and gives crucial information about his family, without whom he wouldn't exist. His friends all call him John though because they all know who John is, they know who his family are and don't need to specify that every time they mention him. When John is interviewed for a newspaper article, the article probably mentions him as John Smith at some point, but from then on simply refers to him as John, because we all know who they are referring to.

                          A name is a name, it serves the purpose of identifying something. When there is ambiguity as to which Linux you are referring to, then additional information may be given, Ie Arch Linux or Ubuntu Linux. Even then they are usually just called Arch or Ubuntu, as the Linux is implied as they don't create anything else. A time may come when there is an alternative to GNU and the GNU cannot simply be implied. In which case, then referring to GNU/linux where there may be confusion with another form of Linux will make sense. Although if Hurd doesn't go anywhere, we would probably just call it GNU as the Linux would be implied.

                          My point is that a name is there for identification. When I use the term Linux, people know what I am referring to, therefore calling it Linux is fine. Sure, if you want the full name to be GNU/Linux, then I have no objection to that, GNU/Linux is the term for the GNU OS with the linux kernel. But in the same way it is perfectly acceptable to refer to John Smith as John amongst people who know who you are reffing to, it is perfectly acceptable to refer to GNU/Linux as Linux.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Anthony View Post
                            There is (probably) a person called John Smith. "Smith" is his surname and gives crucial information about his family, without whom he wouldn't exist. His friends all call him John though because they all know who John is, they know who his family are and don't need to specify that every time they mention him. When John is interviewed for a newspaper article, the article probably mentions him as John Smith at some point, but from then on simply refers to him as John, because we all know who they are referring to.

                            A name is a name, it serves the purpose of identifying something. When there is ambiguity as to which Linux you are referring to, then additional information may be given, Ie Arch Linux or Ubuntu Linux. Even then they are usually just called Arch or Ubuntu, as the Linux is implied as they don't create anything else. A time may come when there is an alternative to GNU and the GNU cannot simply be implied. In which case, then referring to GNU/linux where there may be confusion with another form of Linux will make sense. Although if Hurd doesn't go anywhere, we would probably just call it GNU as the Linux would be implied.

                            My point is that a name is there for identification. When I use the term Linux, people know what I am referring to, therefore calling it Linux is fine. Sure, if you want the full name to be GNU/Linux, then I have no objection to that, GNU/Linux is the term for the GNU OS with the linux kernel. But in the same way it is perfectly acceptable to refer to John Smith as John amongst people who know who you are reffing to, it is perfectly acceptable to refer to GNU/Linux as Linux.
                            offtopic
                            I prefer to call it "Collection of Bits". How about that? Why "Linux", when its about bits?
                            offtopic/
                            ---

                            Lol, wow, I presume bug nr 1 is unfixed and never bothered fixing xD

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                              You have to consider that Ubuntu has been around for quite a while now, but it failed to take away any real market share from MS and Apple. So apparently a new strategy is needed.

                              Not a big issue, IMO. There's plenty of Linux distros to choose from.
                              I see the writing on the wall and I can sense where Canonical's little coup is leading them. I'd rather not wake up in a world where there are three behemoth OS vendors (Microsoft, Apple, Canonical) all with their own ways of being self serving to the detriment of their users and traditional Linux distro's now having to fight three nuisances instead of two.

                              The dream was to have a few major distro's on equal footing so the coopetition kept them honest and the users would benefit from this power balance. Canonical up ends this by deliberately setting a course to be incompatible with the very ecosystem that bootstrapped them.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X