Ubuntu Set To Terminate Its Brainstorm Project

[GreatEmerald]

No, it would have been nice if the general populace would have pulled their heads out of their butts and just picked their own preference of distro out of the available supply, but as the lemmings they are they just pick the one that screams the loudest and then they convince themselves that that is the only thing that lets them do any computing. Nevermind that Ubuntu is just a run of the mill, mediocre Linux distro for now (it could stop being a Linux distro).

The problem is that Ubuntu isn't a run-of-the-mill distribution. If it was, nobody would be complaining. But they're trying their hardest to be different than anyone else, and that's what's bad about the situation.

You know, it would be interesting to see what is the most average Linux distribution. For example, take the most popular distributions (30 or so), then see how many of them have graphical installers, how many have text ones, how many ship GNOME by default, how many ship KDE, how many use RPM, how many use DEB etc. It would be interesting to see what the real average Linux distribution is.

[madjr]

@ Madjr:

No, it would have been nice if the general populace would have pulled their heads out of their butts and just picked their own preference of distro out of the available supply, but as the lemmings they are they just pick the one that screams the loudest and then they convince themselves that that is the only thing that lets them do any computing. Nevermind that Ubuntu is just a run of the mill, mediocre Linux distro for now (it could stop being a Linux distro).

Doesn't matter. Now we just have to contend with Windows users, Mac OS X users and Ubuntu users. The elusive Linux user will just keep on trucking.

What you don't understand my friend (and is why I said you were in the land of OZ), Is that the "General Population" is ONLY on the Hardware Vendors hands.

The "avg joe" does not download and install a distro. And even LESS so, after the UEFI fiasco that makes installing one like 5X more difficult than before (even I experimented Linux user had tons of trouble installing one for a friend recently on new hardware).

So Msft has ALL the POWER (90% of the power balance). And sadly even the crap that is Win8 will get 10000x more users than all linux distros combined.

The hardware is the key and vendors who venture and risk pissing off msft will only sell one Linux distro. The consensus (and demand) has been for Ubuntu.

If we fragment even more this opportunity we're lost.

But the good thing is that if one big Linux distro succeeds this also means open source for the masses and also a flock of users to other distros, DEs, etc.. but most of all TAKING from MSFT and balancing the world OS power, hardware and developer support, etc..

Still some distro already have all the users (or type of user) they need. So don't think they care too much on gaining marketshare.

So repeat after me: HW vendors, HW vendors

[dee.]

This is exactly the attitude of the basement losers who think canonical is evil:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ubuntu destroyed my youth.

Postby X11 ? Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:08 pm
Well,

Firstly I will ask a simple question, what is it that really made us all hate Microsoft? I believe most will accept my own response: That it treats all users as the same idiots and that this patronizing attitude towards the customer is unbearable. Even on its server front Microsoft treat all administrators as the same idiots and this is also unbearable. Shift aside the issues of bloat, the issues of embrace/extend/extinguish and it becomes quite abundantly clear that there is the same collectivist evil on our "side."

Ubuntu is pure unrefined evil. This distribution ties down all users as the same idiots, this distribution itself has embraced Linux, extended it, and extinguished Linux culture which really is my own heritage. I guess if one were to go to opposite extremes Slackware comes to mind. Ubuntu was created by the worst of the Linux community. I wish I never hoped for friendly open source because as the phrase goes: "Careful what you wish for." Ubuntu on its server and desktop fronts is a force that is utterly destructive to what Linux was really all about. It hasn't made anything better for the users, because afterall they really are just idiots and there is no other common characteristic for them.

The only way to deal with idiots collectively on the mass-market is with the worst form of collectivist judgment and the CeNsOrEd child of this movement is Ubuntu. Everything wrong with Microsoft is wrong with Ubuntu and everything morally wrong about Microsoft's approach to software is also going to be morally wrong about Ubuntu. It really doesn't matter which ethos you live by either. Ubuntu's evils create bad user habits in the same way that Microsoft does, through the acceptance of stupidity. Ubuntu puts the user in the back seat of his own operating system and as a result, garbage goes in and garbage goes out. It's a living memorial of the results of hedonism.

The system exists for nothing other than the short-term whims of computer users that need to be protected from themselves. Tell me, Void, why in the hell don't you just ban discussions about Ubuntu on this forum for the same reason we don't talk about Microsoft and SuSE? One day you will wish you had, as Ubuntu carries with itself the same cancer as Microsoft Windows! I'll always be waiting in the sidelines to tell you that I told you so, but it doesn't have to have such an abrupt ending does it?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is exactly how fucked up they are and they see nothing wrong with themselves.

Now here is an example of the sane user who tries Ubuntu and sees through their bullshit:


Re: Ubuntu destroyed my youth.

Postby Duo Maxwell ? Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:33 am
So, the basement dwellers are still around I see. Afraid their defining trait is no longer going to be so defining, that it'll become uncool because it's become popular. Just like how bands suck once they've pressed an album.

Nobody wants to remember 60,000 commands and variables to run everything from the terminal. So some things are faster that way, but most aren't because humans are visual creatures, most of us prefer to actually see what we're doing in a non text manner because it's how our brains are hard wired.

So what has Canonical done that has E.E.E.'d the OSS world? I've seen no proprietary projects from them, only a group that actually has a semi coherent idea of what they're doing and where they want to be next release.

Don't fear success man, you want to be able to ensure any and all hardware works on Linux? How about having games finally come to Linux? Well you need a cohesive distro that actually attempts to keep up with the times and makes things inviting enough that a pointy haired manager can use it.

So yeah, that means Linux no longer a hipster geek product, but if thats your thing, theres always Plan 9, from outer space.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perfectly said. Use Plan 9 losers. You are against success.

Oh man, this guy... I swear, this guy takes strawmanning to a whole another level...

[Kivada]

The problem is that Ubuntu isn't a run-of-the-mill distribution. If it was, nobody would be complaining. But they're trying their hardest to be different than anyone else, and that's what's bad about the situation.

You know, it would be interesting to see what is the most average Linux distribution. For example, take the most popular distributions (30 or so), then see how many of them have graphical installers, how many have text ones, how many ship GNOME by default, how many ship KDE, how many use RPM, how many use DEB etc. It would be interesting to see what the real average Linux distribution is.

And if you are talking about desktop oriented distros, Ubuntu and it's direct derivatives like Mint and Studio has more users then the next 30 desktop oriented distros combined.

This is why Ubuntu became the goto linux distro for hardware manufacturers releasing preinstalled Linux boxes. you remember a few years ago when the first big push happened and every company used a different distro, what happened? THEIR EFFORTS FAILED AND MOST DISTROS THEY CHOSE SUCKED.

Now look at the push for Linux machines happening now, you have major OEMs like Dell and HP selling UBUNTU boxes, and all of the Linux first minor OEMs like Ohava, Think Penguin, Zareason and System76? Their default distro is you guessed it UBUNTU!

Now, I gave up on Ubuntu directly because of Gnome3 and Unuty, only to find a new home on the Ubuntu derivative Linux Mint Mate Edition so that I can continue to have a real working desktop environment on top of Ubuntu without having to add a PPA that doesn't mesh 100% like the Mint version does.

[dee.]

Now look at the push for Linux machines happening now, you have major OEMs like Dell and HP selling UBUNTU boxes, and all of the Linux first minor OEMs like Ohava, Think Penguin, Zareason and System76? Their default distro is you guessed it UBUNTU!

Funny of you to mention that, because ThinkPenguin just made a deal with Mint, they donate money to Mint for every computer they sell with Mint preinstalled...

[GreatEmerald]

And if you are talking about desktop oriented distros, Ubuntu and it's direct derivatives like Mint and Studio has more users then the next 30 desktop oriented distros combined.

Irrelevant to what I said. They still use different technology (especially DEs). Also, you could just as well say that they are all based on Debian. Debian sure sounds more like the average distribution than Ubuntu itself.

[moilami]

Finally somebody with common sense. Why can't people stop hating Canonical for trying to become popular and gain larger marketshare? Oh right. They don't play nice with the 'ecosystem'. As if Canonical should ask everybody before making any move since who knows it might upset people who would hate to see them popular but hide their hate with thinly veiled arguments like 'they're trying to pull an apple' or crap like that.

I've noticed that some people who use linux like to think of themselves as rebels that fight against the system and since linux has 1% it maintains that rebel spirit. The moment it will become popular they will probably lose interest and move on to BSD or BeOS or god knows what. You don't use linux because it's better but because it makes you feel special, against the masses of common sheep. Those very people keep bashing on Canonical on this forum.

1/10.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

[moilami]

Forgot to say that maybe switch to Apple forum?

[Serge]

Trying to be different is now bad? So if they realize that the 'community' doesn't do what the user wants to do they should just continue doing what the 'community' allows them to do? They really shouldn't try anything else? They don't try to be different just for the sake of being different. They just run studies on the masses and adapt their solutions for them. You may not be one of the masses and that is why you don't understand why they do what they do.

If a given piece of software offers features another piece of software does not, that's good. That's merited differentiation. I think what has so many veteran Linux users upset with Canonical is that it's hard to see how the areas in which Canonical is trying to make Ubuntu different are technical improvements over community- or ecosystem-backed solutions. I think the Ubuntu experience is very unique, and even though it is not my cup of tea, I can see value and quality in that distro. However, with the more recent decisions, especially the decision to develop Mir rather than contribute to Wayland development, the technical merit is not immediately apparent.

I think Canonical has to work with an agenda. I think they want to own as much of their stack as possible so that they can dual-license or sell indemnification agreements to vendors to protect vendors who wish to sell devices with Ubuntu without complying with GPL terms. I like the GPL a lot and prefer to use software covered by this license more than any other license, but it's also no secret that the GPL is a major turn-off to many companies. I think Canonical is simply looking for ways to be able to do business with those kind of companies. A lot of users feel that decisions that are guided by business needs rather than technical merit hurt the technical quality of the solutions available in the ecosystem.

So, BO$$, you say that they aren't trying to be different just for the sake of being different, but I think that a strong argument can be made that that is exactly what they are trying to do.

[Serge]

You just said that they don't try to be different for the sake of being different but to cater to companies who hate GPL. That is a valid reason. But just like Unity that I hated when it first appeared and now I actually find quite usable, it could be like a puzzle that it looks good only when you add the final pieces. Maybe they're playing a game of chess and we can't read the moves ahead and will only realize what they were going to do only in the end with the final move. I don't like the simplistic view that Canonical is evil and wants to kill open source that is so common in these forums these days.

I too don't like the simplistic view. Ubuntu has a lot to recommend it. But Linux users who don't use Ubuntu feel that the development of Ubuntu affects the ecosystem as a whole, and therefore affects them whether they want it to or not. Also, Ubuntu is developed from a base that mostly comes from that ecosystem. Therefore, non-Ubuntu users feel justified in demanding answers. And in that regard there are questions to which there have been no satisfactory answers.

I don't think there's any chess game here. Ubuntu developers have been very articulate about their technical vision of Ubuntu. In my opinion, there has been absolutely nothing so far that would suggest that Canonical's decisions regarding Ubuntu development are not intended to make that vision a reality.

However, Canonical has been making decisions that only help Ubuntu when they had available to them choices that would have helped not just Ubuntu but everyone. This is an ecosystem that depends on everyone contributing to the shared pie. If Canonical's decisions looked like they were the better technical decisions for Ubuntu, then these decisions would have been easier to swallow. Many people don't see the decisions as being technically superior, and so we get back to the question of, "why choose the route that does not help everyone else?"