I don't think the Ubuntu community is in any position to judge anyone as being childish and immature based on its reaction to the Abbie Schubert story.
The "community" that you are quick to defend is giving the rest of us a black eye.
no, without python ogre - but the 3rd party ebuilds for that are broken and the build instructions on the website suck. I already have boost and the rest installed, I will not install it again just to make the build script happy.
If you want it but compilation takes too long: Suse build service
it can build everything for you. For most distributions
(another reason why phoronix should drop ubuntu for opensuse - or at least at it to the coverage. And unlike fedora opensuse is not broken by design)
joshuapurcell - what exactly has ubuntu done for linux? What? linux patches? gcc patches? glibc patches?
They break KDE - kde comes with complete internationalization - but with kubuntu it is utterly broken. They take working packages and break it. Ubuntus gnome is overloaded with patches so people don't see what a shitfest it really is with all the missing features - until they might hit a real gnome someday - but what of that patches goes upstream? Ubuntu is bad for linux, reasons:
even worse - there have been douzends of debian based 'userfriendly' distris before ubuntu came around. But ubuntu is special - the hype started long before the first release - together with a manpower drain on debian (another reason why ubuntu is bad).
The worst thing: canonical is destroying suse and redhat. And without these two it would be very bleak. Very, very bleak.
Ubuntu is a cultural movement. It's about using an operating system that is designed with you in mind. Unfortunetely, just like windows and mac, that "you" they have in mind is a lobotomy patient.
Distro's like OpenSUSE and Fedora see "you" as a person who needs to get work done(precisely why I use it.). And those like Gentoo and Arch see a "you" who has waaaaaaaaay too much time on his hands.
IMHO, Ubuntu will do good if it popularizes and increases the Linux userbase. I have yet to see a commercial application that only runs only on Ubuntu, but many applications that have improved thanks somewhat to Ubuntu's influence.
For example, bringing more people to linux brought us a Flash release on time!
Arch isn't that time intensive.... if you stick to defult configs
GenToo is also not time intensive. And furthermore you can do things that you can't do with other distros without twisting your thumbs around using a wrench.
open konsole tab. eix-sync *fetchhotwater* emerge --keep-going -auD world *checkoutput* y <enter> work done, 30seconds of my time 'wasted'. A while later check results. Done.
when ubuntu is delivered with dell machines it hurts redhat and novell
also opensuse and fedora are testbeds for sles and rhel.
Last&worst, it is a marketing scheme get the people with free stuff (ubuntu cds) so you can sell them subscriptions later (canonical support).
Ubuntu is bad for linux.
Unfortunately this is untrue. I know quite some people which got in contact with Linux first through Ubuntu and hate Linux now or rather consider Linux a piece of shit and inferior to Windows due to tons of non-working shit. So yes, they DO damage Linux.
Originally Posted by sc3252