Mark Shuttleworth Makes More Comments On Ubuntu GNOME, Mir, Convergence

[GreatEmerald]

This is incorrect. There is nothing a game needs to talk to the display server directly for. It's entirely possible to write a game entirely using libSDL2 and OpenGL (plus the host of SDL support libraries for sound, texture loading, networking,... you know what I mean). In fact, you can take a properly-written game using libSDL and recompile it for Windows, Mac OS, and consoles, and you can find such AAA games on Steam or GOG. If it's making direct calls to the display server, the game is just broken.

The same goes for practically any client software you can name.

I know; I made a game using SDL2 and OpenGL and have both Linux and Windows builds. But games, as well as proprietary software, will inevitably want to interface with the display server for whatever reason they think makes sense, even if it's a bad reason. And there's nothing one can do about it.

Besides, the integration bits have to be maintained by someone. It's great that SDL2 doesn't mind maintaining them for their project. But not everyone has that kind of resources to spare, nor did Canonical have the resources to maintain all of them on their own.

This is really the same old petitio principii argument that gets repeated again and again. And again. And again and again and again. At least it's not hate.

Thanks, I guess? Of all the threads, ones like this require constructive criticism rather than insults. Mind you, you haven't really been contributing much to it by just pointing out "hate".

[GreatEmerald]

I'm trying to read between the lines here. Does this mean that there will be no "default" Ubuntu flavor? Right now there are Ubuntu, Ubuntu GNOME, Ubuntu MATE, etc. In the future will there just be Ubuntu GNOME, Ubuntu MATE, etc., and nothing called just "Ubuntu"? Or perhaps Ubuntu GNOME will be renamed "Ubuntu" and manged by the Ubuntu GNOME project? Or maybe the core team will manage Ubuntu, and the Ubuntu GNOME project will only manage the GNOME components?

I read it as Ubuntu GNOME being renamed to Ubuntu, with the same GNOME maintainers staying but getting support from Canonical. Obviously the non-GNOME bits would also be maintained by Canonical.

[Luke_Wolf]

We get it space boy... You love to lie, and if you can't be the center of attention that everyone is drooling over even when you're busy pissing everyone off, then you've just got to sic your sychophants on the actual community. Meego's and KDE's convergence efforts totally didn't exist, and oh how could anyone be upset about a project shoved into the community causing loads of extra work and muddying the waters for outside corporate groups like Valve, for no reason whatsoever (Since all the reasons given were built on lies).

It's almost like... If you act like a terrible community member the community isn't going to like what you're doing *shock horror*

[microcode]

It became a political topic as irrational as climate change or gun control, where being on one side or the other was a sign of tribal allegiance.

Well, as for tribal allegiance; show me the swaths of rational proponents of Mir outside of Canonical's tribe.

[GreatEmerald]

I never really commented on Mir (or at least I think I did not), personally, I did not like the idea of segragation, but I've kept it for myself. I don't know what is the current state of Mir, what i do know is that X is still best option, and that wayland isn't there yet. Eitehr way, looking forward on improvements and final replacement when it happens.

I'm curious, why do you think Wayland isn't there yet, when Fedora is already shipping it? Granted, it's just one distribution, but others will follow.

You seriously can't read it for yourself and tell? Really? I don't buy that.

That post points out some of the many decisions Canonical made that pushed users away from core Ubuntu, or even away from Ubuntu totally. And then he bashes them meanly for the decisions that Canonical alone made.

edit: The acts of Canonical that disenfranchised many of its userbase does not make those users haters.

See, this is why there isn't a dislike button: it's destructive. Instead, create a good reply rebutting the post and look at the likes you get instead. That's how it works. Else nobody knows why you "dislike" a post. What you're pointing out here is pretty subtle. There have been plenty of posts that were not constructive about those decisions, and could very well be labelled as "hate". Of course, there was also criticism that's quite valid.

[duby229]

I'm curious, why do you think Wayland isn't there yet, when Fedora is already shipping it? Granted, it's just one distribution, but others will follow.



See, this is why there isn't a dislike button: it's destructive. Instead, create a good reply rebutting the post and look at the likes you get instead. That's how it works. Else nobody knows why you "dislike" a post. What you're pointing out here is pretty subtle. There have been plenty of posts that were not constructive about those decisions, and could very well be labelled as "hate". Of course, there was also criticism that's quite valid.

I totally disagree. How is it possible to get a point across by not saying something? What I mean is, you can get a point across that you like a post by clicking the like button, but how does not clicking the like button get the point across that you don't like it?

I don't think every post has to be constructive, I think trying enforce that ideology is highly -destructive- because you miss a whole half of the truth. (edit: I was raised to believe that part-truths are just as wrong as lies.)

[DebianXFCE Jr]

Bullshit is on you, I am talking about Linux users in Linux community and what they think about each other and various Linux projects, what they think about non Linux companies is irrelevant, learn to read with understanding.

Can you explain to me what Linux user are thinking about other Linux users and various Linux projects?
And what's your source?
Linux community works in a certain way. Many times it is users who affects how project evolves. Mark wasn't curious about community opinion in some cases.
And if it comes to users, someone who isn't concerned doesn't post his thoughts about certain topic. And with political correctness such people are now thrown in one big bag of 'bad and frustrated Linux users'. Sad but true. If someone post his pov she/he is called hater, troll, etc. So what is the reason for this forum anyway?

[DebianXFCE Jr]

It's your perception, it doesn't mean it's what it is.

My perception is that it's all about having different possibilities amongst which one will suit users/developers/... better than the others. We are not here to be imposed anything, any DE, like OSX or Windows users are. We are here to find what suits us (as individuals) personally best, to ask for the different options that will satisfy everyone (not just our subjective self), for choice and diversity. Not to rule the world.
In that respect, if you can't find anything anywhere close to what you need/want, you have every right to start a parallel project, especially when you have a vision and then users are free to rally it or not, and they're the one that will eventually validate its viability, if it is fulfilling a need or not.
People were free to rally Unity, which they did massively. Meaning its existence as a parallel project is completely justified. Whether haters like it or not. Every DE or distribution as long as it has a solid user base is justified. Otherwise we go back to a monopoly/oligopoly and the same situation as for OSX/Windows or iOS/Android.

OK, but users who are not devs can only make requests about some feature they would like to have. And if you say that you are doing something for community, like Mark did in his post, but you are not listening to people then what?
No wonder that unity wasn't accepted by other distros.
With mac and windows it is a different story. Both have they own interfaces and stating that those companies are imposing they view is only a half of the truth. Windows 8 is the best prove here. Same for vista. I personally know two girls, where one is using vista, yeah at the time of writing, and the other windows 8. MS had to change its policy about user interface so they did it. 10 looks more like 7, vista, xp than tile thing. So user base had a big impact on it. But since unity came out it was holy grail for ubuntu/Mark. For me it's funny that 11 years after I installed ubuntu 7.04 beta I'm using mate. And it's not ubuntu/debian based distro.
So from business pov if you are not making a product that will satisfy as big as possible user base market share, then you make bad or lets call it silly business decision.
Business is business and Mark is now trying to not look like a fool with all his ridiculous explanation about how bad Linux community is.
Consider alternate reality where unity ubuntu is a commercial distro and we, as heads of big companies likes to call us, consumers have to pay for it.
Would anyone argue about how toxic, full of hatred or not community is?
Business is business. He lost his battle for desktop. Not us. No wonder as soon as gnome 3 and unity came out mate was born.

[DebianXFCE Jr]

If you really need to ask whats my point then you completely missed the point of the last 100 posts I made here in the past few days, the fact not all people in Linux community are toxic doesnt justify those that are toxic and often resort to insulting other people on a personal level, you did it too by calling me a moron and telling me to shut up, see how easy it gets toxic.

No its not, while other communities can have infighting it is nowhere near as toxic as it can be in Linux community where hurling insults on personal level is a commonplace. Nobody said anything about censorship of ANY kind, everyone is free to say what they want, it doesnt mean it is good for the Linux as a whole. Stop implying things I never said or I will stop replying to you altogether, just like I stopped replying to pal666 because discussing anything with him is like talking to a wall. Have a good day.

Bad thinking here. You have absolutely everywhere troglodytes who will offend others. Those are a part of immature species called homo sovieticus which makes your post about toxic Linux community (or even a part of it) useless. There is no point in talking about it, as immaturity is a part of becoming adult. Weeellll some people doesn't grow up. Lets stick to the point. Was this decision good or bad? Did unity proved to be useful de or a total disaster. Was Linux community right bitching about it? Was Mark's decision good if you look at it from business point of view? And is there any difference between windows users 'hating' windows 8 tiles ecosystem and linux/ubuntu users 'hating' unity.

No one adopted it as not so many liked it. Personally I used it for maybe 3 months. Curiosity? Maybe trying to understand the ' great vision' of 'modern' de?
Not for me. And I wouldn't recommend it for someone who wants to switch to Linux from windowzer. Even xfce is better at imitating windows.
If I was in his shoes I wouldn't even mention the fact about talking to gnoe/kde devs about unity features integration in those des. I think this 'paints' it very well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeDVNgsYy0k

[DebianXFCE Jr]

"open source is not for creating parallel projects"

If you want to quote than do it properly and don't quote only part of the sentence as it changes meaning of it.