Ubuntu is NOT a part of community

[next9]

I dont see any sense instaling Linux onto NTFS partition and HDD image. Installer automatically resize HDD partitions and create space for Linux. the difference is almost none.

And again. I don't know about Mandriva, but it is possible to install Opensuse from Windows environment using standard installation DVD.

So. Your previous post is nothing more than Ubuntu propaganda again. Windows based installer is not ubuntu exclusive. Kid

Maybe one day Canonical invent the weel, and you come here and tell me, that wheel is ubuntu exclusive

[yotambien]

Ah, you have more energy than I do to keep up with this. I think all the points are made, so I will end my part with two common ground remarks.

It's an interesting experiment, you should try this sometime. It shows exactly where Linux distros are still lacking (Ubuntu included) and what they still need to improve.

No need to imagine anything, I did exactly that to help install Linux to a friend living abroad. The Windows installer is the best thing I saw in a long time. Granted, if I was there he'll had Debian in a proper partition right now, but given the situation installing Ubuntu from within Windows was the easiest thing to do (*).

At the end of the day surely Ubuntu's popularity lives or dies by the user experience it provides in relation to what else is available. If and when there is something out there that's judged better for the common use case, I think you'll find people move to it.

Absolutely, that's the key point. I don't think people is inherently stupid. If something works for them they'll keep using it, in this case Ubuntu. As a side note, I think this is the very same reason why Linux has such a low 'market share'. See this thread, some of us who have used Linux for a while point out problems with Ubuntu, and tend to think that the same problems are perceived in the same way by other users. In the same way, many here would wonder how is it possible that most people keep using Windows, as if its problems and argued Linux advantages were equally important for everybody. But I digress.

(*) As a side comment, after 3-4 days taking him by the hand and walking him through the basics of package management, I had to leave it clear that I wasn't his personal IT guy. Afterwards he handled it reasonably well. He is my living example of Skype not working due to PA, but he managed to fix it after I gave him a couple of links. The only thing I found I couldn't fix for him through a GUI was changing the boot menu in GRUB. The rest were problems not specific to Ubuntu but to Linux, like not having drivers for his scanner/printer.

[gordboy]

To Blackstar

Education process means what it says on the tin. And it starts with people getting their hands dirty and hosting linux workshops.

There is no need to name names, everyone with a scintilla of honesty knows the score here.

Your second (hasty) point doesn't even answer the same question. I said Linux, you said Ubuntu.

As for the inevitability of outcomes, the shameful Ubuntu 9.10 release couldn't have made my point better.

[gordboy]

To mugginz

First of all, I would like to thank you for actually making some decent points. A lot of this thread seems to be irrelevant wankery from people who haven't even made it to the (for them) dizzying heights of ineptitude.

On the point of Ubuntu PPAs being Mickey-Mouse, they have no signing keys, and there is no single bug reporting or bug tracking process. The "if you don't like my repo, then fsck off and don't use it" mentality is laughable elitism, from people who clearly are new to the software development game.

Mark S. said he was looking for new blood, and clearly he got some, if somewhat anaemic and even potentially life-threatening ... I believe that it was a daring gesture, but with the benefit of hindsight, a complete disaster. If you hire muppets, you get a second-rate children's TV show.

[mugginz]

Does really anybody think that 1 person would care about that? When you don't install it then you hear absolutly no webstream in amarok for example. When you don't do a hd install of Kubuntu and you don't know what to install it is a very quiet solution

Booted from Kubuntu Live CD (9.10)

Started Amarok
Pointed it to an mp3 stream
No playback
Pointed it to an Ogg stream
It Playsback.

Booted from OpenSuse KDE Live CD (11.2)

Started Amarok
Pointed it to an mp3 stream
No playback
Pointed it to an Ogg stream
It Playsback.

Booted from Fedora KDE Live CD (12)

Wanted to start Amarok, but it's not there.
Started Juk
Pointed it to an mp3 stream
Sorry, only plays local files...
Download mp3 file.
No playback
Downloaded Ogg file.
It Playsback.

Booted from Debian Live CD (502)

Amazing, it's KDE 3.5.10
(So ladies and gentlemen looking for a KDE 3 live CD, here it is!)
Wanted to start Amarok, but it's not there.
Started Juk
Downloaded an mp3 file
It playsback.
Downloaded an ogg file.
It playsback.

So, clearly the only Live CD in the list that'll playback mp3's without codec install is Debian. It's also KDE 3.5.10 so that may be a hurdle to some. If not and you don't want to install your OS to disk, then it could be the one for you.

For those who are going to install to hard disk, I'd suggest Kubuntu.

For those who want to run KDE 4, I'd also suggest Kubuntu.

Does really anybody think that 1 person would care about that? When you don't install it then you hear absolutly no webstream in amarok for example.

But to speak directly to your comment, I would suggest that yes, at least one person does care, and indeed, probably thousands more would care about auto codec installation.

Still, I'd be interested to hear the metrics you have available of those who do, and those who do not install their OS to a hard disk.

[mugginz]

I dont see any sense instaling Linux onto NTFS partition and HDD image. Installer automatically resize HDD partitions and create space for Linux. the difference is almost none.

And again. I don't know about Mandriva, but it is possible to install Opensuse from Windows environment using standard installation DVD.

So. Your previous post is nothing more than Ubuntu propaganda again. Windows based installer is not ubuntu exclusive. Kid

Maybe one day Canonical invent the weel, and you come here and tell me, that wheel is ubuntu exclusive

Your posts in relation to this particular matter clearly demonstrate that you have never held a professional position in the IT industry helping end users with their computing needs.

Either that, or you are very blinkered in you approach to people.

[mugginz]

(*) As a side comment, after 3-4 days taking him by the hand and walking him through the basics of package management, I had to leave it clear that I wasn't his personal IT guy. Afterwards he handled it reasonably well. He is my living example of Skype not working due to PA, but he managed to fix it after I gave him a couple of links. The only thing I found I couldn't fix for him through a GUI was changing the boot menu in GRUB. The rest were problems not specific to Ubuntu but to Linux, like not having drivers for his scanner/printer.

Yes, Skype has had it's issues with PusleAudio. As a person who uses bluetooth headsets on various Linux systems running Skype, I can tell you that PulseAudio has been a godsend. Especially the latest versions. The ability to switch a call from main speaker and mike to a bluetooth headset and not have it crash, crackle or crumble is just fantastic, and demonstrates one of those new Pulse features some talk of.

Also, the current version of Skype seems to work better with Pulse than without... Go figure

But, this is not to minimise you're own personal experience, for if there is one thing in the Linux community I can't stand it's the "well it works for me buddy" dismissive attitude of some.

Also, there is a GRUB GUI for changing boot order, etc available, but yes, it does need to be installed via the package manager. It's funny, just the other day me and a friend were discussing just that very issue of modifying boot order, and how Ubuntu should have it installed by default.

[mugginz]

First of all, I would like to thank you for actually making some decent points. A lot of this thread seems to be irrelevant wankery from people who haven't even made it to the (for them) dizzying heights of ineptitude.

On the point of Ubuntu PPAs being Mickey-Mouse, they have no signing keys, and there is no single bug reporting or bug tracking process. The "if you don't like my repo, then fsck off and don't use it" mentality is laughable elitism, from people who clearly are new to the software development game.

Yes a lot of PPA's don't have keys, and when someone finally uses that vector to start infecting end users, Canonical would likely be VERY red faced about this. This hopefully will be recified before compromise, not after.

There are some non-standard repos with keys though, so thankfully this isn't universal.

Also, as anyone is able to offer third party software, I guess you'll get a broad spectrum of devs building them so you may come across bad attitudes from time to time (but thankfully I haven't come across them yet in the Launchpad hosted ones.)

Also, usually PPA's are used to stage pre-distro software for testing by the more experienced users out there. Thankfully as software becomes more robust, proven and useful, it winds up in the distro popper, and eventually negates the need for users to utilise them for particular packages.

Mark S. said he was looking for new blood, and clearly he got some, if somewhat anaemic and even potentially life-threatening ... I believe that it was a daring gesture, but with the benefit of hindsight, a complete disaster. If you hire muppets, you get a second-rate children's TV show.

Interesting. He has been hiring, but I'm not sure of the negative outcomes of this yet. Have his new hires been steering people wrong? Ripping him off? Breaking their products? Would be interesting to hear.



EDIT:

After looking through a few PPA's it would seem they are indeed protected with signing keys.


2nd EDIT:

Is anyone able to find any Launchpad hosted PPA's without digital signatures?

[next9]

Your posts in relation to this particular matter clearly demonstrate that you have never held a professional position in the IT industry helping end users with their computing needs.

Either that, or you are very blinkered in you approach to people.

What a strange coincidence my sister and her boyfriend asked me to help with their Ubuntu Laptops. Both of them use Ubuntu, because somebody told them it is easy of use, because medial madness around it claims every day - it is best distro for BFU. I had no influence on their distro decision and I don't care. It's up to them.

But due to the many things said in this thread, I would like to point out, that every problem with their ubuntu is solved by me remotely. No miracle here. Ubuntu lacks any acceptable GUI tools and it is impossible for BFU to manage that system. So we have 2 ubuntu users to our statistics, but they could have any distro, because they don't find Ubuntu easy. Maybe with Mandriva, it will be easyier for them to manage system independently, but Mandriva is not COOL HYPER SUPER MEGA distro.

Thas't my point.


This thread evolved a little bit ugly, because some people came here with Ubuntu propaganda. Arguments like Ubuntu has AAA, BBB, CCC exclusively and that's why it is best for BFU are unacceptable FUD, when AAA, BBB, CCC features are widely spread across the distributions. It's same absurd declaration like:
Ford is the best car in the world, because it has the wheels.

[mugginz]

What a strange coincidence my sister and her boyfriend asked me to help with their Ubuntu Laptops. Both of them use Ubuntu, because somebody told them it is easy of use, because medial madness around it claims every day - it is best distro for BFU. I had no influence on their distro decision and I don't care. It's up to them.

But due to the many things said in this thread, I would like to point out, that every problem with their ubuntu is solved by me remotely. No miracle here. Ubuntu lacks any acceptable GUI tools and it is impossible for BFU to manage that system. So we have 2 ubuntu users to our statistics, but they could have any distro, because they don't find Ubuntu easy. Maybe with Mandriva, it will be easyier for them to manage system independently, but Mandriva is not COOL HYPER SUPER MEGA distro.

Thas't my point.


This thread evolved a little bit ugly, because some people came here with Ubuntu propaganda. Arguments like Ubuntu has AAA, BBB, CCC exclusively and that's why it is best for BFU are unacceptable FUD, when AAA, BBB, CCC features are widely spread across the distributions. It's same absurd declaration like:
Ford is the best car in the world, because it has the wheels.

So let me get this straight. You Claim:

• That Ubuntu only take, and give nothing back.
• When buying support from Canonical, none of the money provides a benefit to the upstream projects.
• No upstream developers, not even one single one, is happy with Ubuntu feedback.
• Ubuntu is a circus based on drove of Shuttleworth sheep
• You claim Ubuntu doesn't have the largest base of users,
• No Ubuntu patches go upstream
• That Canonical sponsored code is only usable in Ubuntu
• That Canonical has paid for devs to be used by Google,
• Then claim that Canonical only provide code when it's paid for by others.
• Packages in Ubutnu's PPA's are unfindable,
• That you have tries evey version since 5.04 and in your opinion it "strongly sucks",
• ubuntu is not so free,
• You "Forgot to mention non-compatible combination of kernel and intel xorg drivers they uselessly included into last ubuntu version,"
• You suggest both OpenSuse and Mandriva live CD's are easier for a novice user,
• You claim that Ubuntu's support for closed codecs is lacking when compared to other distros,
• Canonical is a European company and therefore isn't exposed to the same kind of legal troubles as say Novell is,
• You see no value in the Ubuntu Wubi installer for novice users,
• "Ubuntu lacks any acceptable GUI tools and it is impossible for BFU to manage that system"

But I see no genuine basis for any of this, and when you are called out on it, you simply respond with insults and more baseless claims.

Whan asked to tell us how Ubuntu uniquely fails miserably by the general levels of quality that are set by the whole Linux landscape you don't seem to have any valid points to make.

Let me state for the third or fourth time. Ubuntu is not perfect. Neither is Fedora, OpenSuse, Debian, Mandriva, etc, etc. There currently is no perfect distro available.

When you put forward your position that you don't understand why so many people consider Ubuntu to best the best choice from the choices that are available, people try to explain why this might be so. You then simply respond with mostly rubbish.

If you wish to criticise a particular weakness in Ubuntu it is usually considered fair to also acknowledge other distros that would have that same weakness. And by extension, when I point out where I see Ubuntu has a good point, and someone points out another distro that also contains that attribute, I will be happy to acknowledge that as well.


If you have a FAIR and CORRECT point to make, it will be hard to criticise that point, but if you are going to be unfair, then many will find it easy to point this out.