Canonical Comes Up With Its Own FUSE Filesystem For Linux Containers

[gotwig]

Like them or not, Canonical made Linux popular.

No, they don't.

[Thaodan]

No, they don't.

In Germany it was SuSE. You could/can (don't know if still) even buy it.

[eidolon]

All hail Casiodorus Rex, dragonslayer!

...Canonical made Linux popular.

That is to a certain extent a matter of perception (and marketing).

For example, here is another person's perspective:

https://www.happyassassin.net/2013/03/07/some-sad-numbers-on-how-linux-desktop-adoption-is-going/

https://www.happyassassin.net/2010/07/29/the-success-of-ubuntu/

I'm not emphatically claiming that you are wrong in your assertion, but I think it would be an oversight to simply dismiss Adam's point as (purely ) motivated by bias.

The scene from Dragonslayer where King Casiodorus arrives and is credited with slaying the dragon comes to mind here. To the degree that Linux has made gains in the desktop market, it has been a collective effort over time. But roaming scavengers are free to fight over the kill if they so choose.

[blackiwid]

hmm how does that relate to using btrfs for with systemd to make application installations? Is that a concurent?

Does Canonical here try to conpete with btrfs and or systemd?
for me now "made by cannonical" is similar to "made in china" and stands for bad "products".
But I am open for arguments that I am wrong here, just sounds just a bad idea even technicaly.

Ubuntu always aims at fast implementation and using shortcuts to reach the goal instead of doing it one time right.

Its always about, we did it first, not so much about we did it best. A bit like our politics, that want to put flags everywhere.

[magika]

Ubuntu always aims at fast implementation and using shortcuts to reach the goal instead of doing it one time right.

Its always about, we did it first, not so much about we did it best. A bit like our politics, that want to put flags everywhere.

This is common bussiness model. Get your plans approved and funded by higher entity, get some work done that resembles what was promised and loudly claim its superiority (investors wouldn't know the difference.) Money in your pocket, when project is completed switch to another, rinse and repeat.

[pal666]

Like them or not, Canonical made Linux popular

google made linux popular with android. ubuntu lags by few decimal orders of magnitude

[Guest]

google made linux popular with android. ubuntu lags by few decimal orders of magnitude

Google made Android popular, not Linux. Sure, Android may essentially be Linux, but majority of people don't know this. The only Linux-related thing most people are going to see in Android is the kernel number shown under the About Device section, which most people aren't going to be looking under or caring about.

Meanwhile, people associate Ubuntu with Linux.

[blackiwid]

Meanwhile, people associate Ubuntu with Linux.

partialy that is more right then the first statement, ubuntu did made many users including me switch from another linux distro to ubuntu. new users from windows only users not really a few shure, but very very few. And it made maybe the live of linux network admins somethimes a bit easier somethimes the opposite.
Ubuntu did maybe help in switching some windows SERVERS to linux, but not mention worthy desktops. windows and if you count tablets in android still has the same high numbers. bug nr. 1 did never get even in any degree get resolved/resolved by ubuntu.

the diagnose was just the false, yes maybe for a very very low amount of users linux was to difficult to install before ubuntu, even I dont see that a mandrake or suse was to difficult to install. Most users would not install linux if it would take one click and would take 1 second that problem and the reasosns behind it, were not adressed by ubuntu.

And another thing, ubuntu was a one time hit. they made at some point a not bad distro, a debian with a good installer and a good gnome theme + default settings. They never did go further, all their attempts to go further than debian did go did either just fail or did made it even worse. upstart, unity, mir.

They claimed to target desktop but was always to conservative for it, ok maybe not if you only want a very old very long stable free software basis to use proprietary software primary on top of it.

After the switch to fedora and archlinux as second alternative, I finaly saw how aged ubuntu is/was. thats ok for servers but not for desktop, and thats were ubuntu is or at least were very strong as a alternative for debian on servers. yes it is also still pretty successful on the desktops of this hardcore linux users, that use then ubuntu also on the servers mostly or maybe somethimes debian. but thats because people are very lazy and many will suffer many years from what ubuntu did in last years with mir and unity and adware and keeping bugs forever and shitting on developers and evil lisense agreements, failed technology attempts like upstart....
so the big numbers ubuntu still have, is 1. from a good reputation of debian 2. outdated expirences with other especialy rpm based distros 3. the better past of ubuntu where ubuntu was a ok/good distro. 4. from the lazyness of the users

Ubuntu isnt sexy anymore they have still many old users but they will not gain much new users, except maybe because for a arm device like a mobile or tablet is not able to install a different os. and I try here to not also start the x86 vs arm discussion, that would even complicate the point here more.

To mention again what Bug I meant ubuntu does not deinstall old kernels if you do not type in some even for people that like the console stupid and long or complicated console commands you have installed 100 kernels after some time, it even at some point did not only give you at the start in grub 100 options to boot, it even dont stop to install new kernels when it fills the root partition, that results in not beeing logging in. that bug is there since many years and its state is even WONTFIX its a feature.

But that aside, I know there are haters on everything, but lately gnome-shell gets very good reviews, not so much for unity.

So gnome was the 2nd ingredient after the debian base that made ubuntu a kind of good distro, they now did now switch away from gnome, and from this point they started to be no real good distro to migrate to, neither from another distro nor from windows.

you cant even install lvm based setup with the grafical installer, ubuntu did not made any advance since they startet, they more or less made one good point then only updated their distro packages and did nothing real mention worth since then. it feels so 2005 now.

[eidolon]

Google made Android popular, not Linux.

By a similar token, it could be argued that Canonical made Ubuntu popular, not Linux.

Indeed, there are some Ubuntu observers and users who live in the dark as to the who's who and what's what of Linux. Ubuntu is all they know. Which is fine, but it's not so wholly different than some observers and users of Android who know little with regard to the technology background.