1. Computers
  2. Display Drivers
  3. Graphics Cards
  4. Memory
  5. Motherboards
  6. Processors
  7. Software
  8. Storage
  9. Operating Systems


Facebook RSS Twitter Twitter Google Plus


Phoronix Test Suite

OpenBenchmarking Benchmarking Platform
Phoromatic Test Orchestration

Many Ubuntu Users Still Hate The Unity Desktop

Ubuntu

Published on 02 August 2011 02:44 PM EDT
Written by Michael Larabel in Ubuntu
68 Comments

Two weeks ago on Phoronix it was asked what do you dislike or hate about Ubuntu? This was following a discussion on the Ubuntu development list about Ubuntu developer applicants being asked about what they like the least about Ubuntu. The overwhelming response among Phoronix readers was clear: they still really hate the Unity desktop.

The 13 pages of Phoronix responses to the distastes concerning Ubuntu can be found in this Phoronix Forums thread. Overall, Unity was the most negatively voiced feature of Ubuntu.

Other leading complaints include dealing with updating packages to newer versions post-release, Canonical's not-invented-here syndrome, and the release cycle has also been criticized as causing too many regressions with too little testing in between releases. Below are some of the highlights from the aforementioned feedback thread.

Unity:
- "I can't stand Unity. 'nuff said."
- "Aping the mac's UI brain damages its plain damn wrong uninnovative and stupid"
- "I definitely don't like Unity. I think that it was the worst thing they had done to Ubuntu."
- "Unity is awkward to use and incoherent so much of the time."

Hardware:
- "The hardware support in Ubuntu has always been one of those things that has generally gotten better over time, but it's still to common that one release will work fine on a machine and the next one won't even boot."
- "Its slow. On my machines I've found it slower than windows 7..."

Packages:
- "They keep (very) old versions of software as stable even when upstream already released 2 or 3 versions marked as stable. Ubuntu (and Debian and maybe others) then try to backport those changes into their "stable" vision of that software. I really can't understand how this can happen in Linux. Maybe it had some reasoning 10 years ago but now I don't see any excuse for it. Even latest git packaged by a capable maintainer is more stable and feature rich than what Ubuntu has."
- Inclusion of Mono.
- PulseAudio
- NetworkManager

Other:
- Copyright assignment for contributions to core applications.
- Frequent regressions.

Everything:
"I dislike everything about it.
- it does a LOT of marketing, but does very LITTLE to progress
- it has marketing cult and tries to steal the focus from linux kernel, gnu, xorg on itself, claiming itself center of collaboration
- it has completely useless, unflexible in terms of modification, package system
- it implements worst most unstable versions possible
- canonical develops easily proprietary commercial software
- in the essence, it is as ignorant to users requests as Microsoft
- it does not have any "linux" in its name
- the developers-users collaboration model is absent, instead users are animals to bugtrack for free. Good Lord, thanks for linux mint.
- it spoils the culture of foss and linux in particular with african theming. Foss is about choice! Not about unified marketing."
- "I dislike that they removing good programs form base install and replace them with unstable/useless stuff."
- "I dislike Ubuntu because it uses Gnome instead of KDE."

Longer posts:
- Ubuntu rights and wrongs
- A victim of its own popularity
- A list

About The Author
Michael Larabel is the principal author of Phoronix.com and founded the web-site in 2004 with a focus on enriching the Linux hardware experience and being the largest web-site devoted to Linux hardware reviews, particularly for products relevant to Linux gamers and enthusiasts but also commonly reviewing servers/workstations and embedded Linux devices. Michael has written more than 10,000 articles covering the state of Linux hardware support, Linux performance, graphics hardware drivers, and other topics. Michael is also the lead developer of the Phoronix Test Suite, Phoromatic, and OpenBenchmarking.org automated testing software. He can be followed via and or contacted via .
Latest Articles & Reviews
  1. Sub-$20 802.11n USB WiFi Adapter That's Linux Friendly
  2. The Lenovo T450s Is Working Beautifully With Linux
  3. Linux 4.0 SSD EXT4 / Btrfs / XFS / F2FS Benchmarks
  4. Linux 4.0 Hard Drive Comparison With Six File-Systems
  5. Lenovo ThinkPad T450s Broadwell Preview
  6. How Open-Source Allowed Valve To Implement VULKAN Much Faster On The Source 2 Engine
Latest Linux News
  1. GCC 5.1 RC2 Arrives, GCC 5.1 Planned For Next Week
  2. F2FS For Linux 4.1 Has New Features & Fixes
  3. Phoronix Server Upgrade This Weekend: Dual Haswell Xeons, 96GB DDR4
  4. Google's Experimental QUIC Transport Protocol Is Showing Promise
  5. Red Hat Joins Khronos, The Group Behind OpenGL & Vulkan
  6. NetworkManager Drops WiMAX Support
  7. Wine 1.7.41 Works More On Kernel Job Objects, MSI Patches
  8. Linux 4.1 Has Improvements For The Multi-Queue Block Layer
  9. X.Org Looks To Have Six Summer Projects
  10. DragonFlyBSD Pulls In GCC 5 Compiler
Most Viewed News This Week
  1. Nouveau: NVIDIA's New Hardware Is "VERY Open-Source Unfriendly"
  2. Linux 4.0 Kernel Released
  3. Microsoft Announces An LLVM-Based Compiler For .NET
  4. Linux 4.1 Brings Many Potentially Risky x86/ASM Changes
  5. Encryption Support For EXT4
  6. VirtualBox 5.0 Beta 2 Released
  7. Mozilla Start Drafting Plans To Deprecate Insecure HTTP
  8. Elementary OS 0.3 "Freya" Now Available