Originally posted by mugginz
View Post
YES.
* When buying support from Canonical, none of the money provides a benefit to the upstream projects.
YES. Almost. (I know they have 0.1% patches in kernel etc...)
* No upstream developers, not even one single one, is happy with Ubuntu feedback.
A little bit different.. I haven't seen any upstream developer satisfied with Ubuntu feedback. I have seen so many have not been satisfied.
* Ubuntu is a circus based on drove of Shuttleworth sheep.
YES. (this was reaction on ubuntu free-ness and powerful community). Let have a look, how ubuntu project vote. Shuttleworth pre-select, and community can vote 5 of 8 person (or something like that). What important decissions were made by ubuntu community? Almost none. Shuttleworth rules.
* You claim Ubuntu doesn't have the largest base of users
NO. I claim, that user-base can not be measured, because Linux is decentralized ecosystem. I claim, it is really funny, that the only distro have ever declared itself to be the most used was ubuntu! Nobody did it so loudly before ubuntu, and nobody does it today. Nobody except Ubuntu has need to do so. It is funny to see efforts of Ubuntu idiots claim Ubuntu best instead of doing some work. So much energy wasted uselessly on marketing instead of helping community.
* No Ubuntu patches go upstream
YES. According to many upstream developers. i am not upstream developer.
* That Canonical sponsored code is only usable in Ubuntu.
NO. They have some patches accepted, so this claim can not be truth. I say that most visible Ubuntu "projects" are accepted mainly by Ubuntu only or created to support Ubuntu ecosystem. Not Linux ecosystem.
* That Canonical has paid for devs to be used by Google,
YES. And I was wrong here. My informations were imperfect.
* Then claim that Canonical only provide code when it's paid for by others.
IRONY connected to previous point.
* Packages in Ubutnu's PPA's are unfindable,
NO. But Almost unfindable. Every time I tried it was horror for me, to find package I want. Searching portal is very ugly designed.
* That you have tries evey version since 5.04 and in your opinion it "strongly sucks",
YES. Completely.
* ubuntu is not so free.
YES (this was reaction). Blackstar claimed that SUSE is not free. I proved that Ubuntu is LESS free than SUSE.
* You "Forgot to mention non-compatible combination of kernel and intel xorg drivers they uselessly included into last ubuntu version,"
YES.
* You suggest both OpenSuse and Mandriva live CD's are easier for a novice user.
NO. I told Blackstar, that live CD installer with options to install from Windows environment is not Ubuntu exclusive. So this can't be example, what Ubuntu does better for BFU.
*You claim that Ubuntu's support for closed codecs is lacking when compared to other distros,
NO. I claim that Ubuntu support is NOT BETTER compared to other distros. Some ultimedia are easier in Ubuntu, some multimedie are easier somewhere else. I don't see problem in any distro and I can't accept claim that Ubuntu is best in this task because this is obviously not true. In the end, adding all common multimedia support to Ubuntu is even a little bit harder because of adding medibuntu repository to apt sources. Thats not problem for me, but Blackstar claims, that Ubuntu has best multimedia support for BFU are just lies.
* Canonical is a European company and therefore isn't exposed to the same kind of legal troubles as say Novell is.
YES. Everybody who thinks, ubuntu is so genius they invented how to add mp3 support automatically, is idiot. This is such a stupid task, everybody can realize. But. No official mp3 support in Novell (and Red Hat too) stuff is company politics, many times officially claimed. It is precaution preventing SW patent attack. This kind of attack can be done only in US, nowhere else.
* You see no value in the Ubuntu Wubi installer for novice users,
YES. I don't see any Windows with easy installers but everybody use them, install them, etc. Let's try to install Windows onto you Linux machine, and you will se. Corrupted file systems, destroyed bootloader, etc... everything is possible. Still, most of the people use Windows. Because people are not complete idiots.
Do you want to test Linux? Run it in the virtual machine. Do you want to test it more? Install it on your drive. It is easier for BFU to install common Linux distro than Install Windows. Most of the Windows users does not even know how to Install Windows. And you tell me that these users should have the possibility to install Ubuntu onto NTFS partition? Come on!
* "Ubuntu lacks any acceptable GUI tools and it is impossible for BFU to manage that system"
YES
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.
According to my experience half of Ubuntu releases failed to boot on my HW to X. According to my experience, Ubuntu had many annoying bugs for me, i did not meet in other distros. But thats my experience and I don't force others to accept it. I claim it is bullshit to claim ubuntu better for average user than other distribution. Nothing more.
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.
Comment