Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mark Shuttleworth Talks Up The Phone's Bottom Edge On Ubuntu

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    First off. I hate phoronix's forum settings. Editing time out so quickly.

    After going to the founding article, it's quiet impressive their thoughts and direction.

    Comment


    • #12
      I was little worried that they have little to no idea what they are trying to do with the edges and that they are taking to much control over edges from developers but seeing their concept videos now I'm partially convinced that they know how important it is.

      Comment


      • #13
        Number of years ago I would've been all over an Ubuntu phone - the sharing and honesty of it all - but the "canonical" since then... maybe he thought it was necessity for expeciendy, but principles and spine are only lost once. And then time and time again.

        A cathedral can feel rich but it's a lonely place. You only break hearts once.

        Good luck with the next half of your journey, whichever way it follows.

        I will always miss Ubuntu for what it once promised.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by profoundWHALE View Post
          Because CEOs end up breaking down mentally when one piece of their many projects is replaced.

          Yeah, no.
          IT. WAS. A. JOKE.

          Get a sense of humor, sometime.

          And people who break down mentally can do so for anything. It's rarely ever a single thing, but rather one last straw pushing them past the tipping point. I don't think CEO's are naturally immune or anything.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
            IT. WAS. A. JOKE.

            Get a sense of humor, sometime.

            And people who break down mentally can do so for anything. It's rarely ever a single thing, but rather one last straw pushing them past the tipping point. I don't think CEO's are naturally immune or anything.
            Yeah, people have been known to even commit suicide because they screwed up at work or got fired. Some people just take their careers very, very seriously.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
              IT. WAS. A. JOKE.

              Get a sense of humor, sometime.

              And people who break down mentally can do so for anything. It's rarely ever a single thing, but rather one last straw pushing them past the tipping point. I don't think CEO's are naturally immune or anything.
              It wasn't funny to me, just weird. What he interprets as "crazed" seems more like passion to me. It's natural given the amount of work they must be putting into their mobile efforts that Mark would be excited about seeing the results coming together in such a slick way.

              Why assume he was so invested in Upstart? I mean they put a lot of work into it but were willing to sacrifice it once they realized the rest of the community was going in a different direction because they can get the same functionality from systemd with less effort, and in the end it's just an init system. I think he cares a lot more about having control over the visual direction of Ubuntu. (I.E. not being reliant on an agreement with Gnome/KDE or other parts of the community in order to achieve their goals, otherwise they would just tweak Gnome/KDE and call it a day)

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by cynical View Post
                Why assume he was so invested in Upstart?
                FFS. The joke is that the internet fanboys were really invested in Upstart - or rather in anything anti-systemD. No one really thinks he's that invested. THAT'S THE JOKE.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
                  FFS. The joke is that the internet fanboys were really invested in Upstart - or rather in anything anti-systemD. No one really thinks he's that invested. THAT'S THE JOKE.
                  What? That doesn't even make sense. The joke was that the decision to abandon Upstart caused a mental breakdown for Shuttleworth, the implication being that he was heavily invested in the outcome. I mean damn, he already explained it...
                  Last edited by cynical; 09 March 2014, 04:48 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by cynical View Post
                    Why assume he was so invested in Upstart? I mean they put a lot of work into it but were willing to sacrifice it once they realized the rest of the community was going in a different direction because they can get the same functionality from systemd with less effort
                    Then why aren't they applying the same logic to Mir/Wayland? It's the exact same situation...

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by dee. View Post
                      Then why aren't they applying the same logic to Mir/Wayland? It's the exact same situation...
                      Actually, it's not. If you look at the history of init systems Upstart came before systemd, and at the time of it's creation there wasn't an alternative. Canonical did it because nobody else was, and they needed something better than what was available. Since then, systemd has incorporated a lot of the same benefits (like parallel execution) and takes advantage of even more features that are kernel specific like cgroups. I'm sure they would have preferred to keep Upstart since they spent a lot of effort developing it, but at the same time they know there is a cost to differentiating too much from the rest of the Linux ecosystem and in the case of an init system, not a lot of benefit to doing so. It will take some effort to integrate systemd into Ubuntu but there is the future benefit of reduced maintenance and more community contributions to look forward to.

                      In the case of replacing X, Wayland came first. The main reason they don't want to adopt Wayland is not because there's anything wrong with it, they just don't like the fact that shell behavior is defined by the protocol. They want something that is more flexible; My assumption is because they fear being limited in some way. This would be consistent with their attitude towards DE's. (That rather than work with Gnome developers to make it fit their needs, they want the flexibility that comes with having control over the design directly so they create Unity)

                      I'm not going to pretend to know exactly what they are concerned about, and they could certainly be wrong, but since they clearly have competent people working there (just look at the Debian mailing list debate, everyone who commented on Upstart praised the code quality even when voting for SystemD) I give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they know what is best for their platform. I think the init system situation demonstrates that they are willing to work with the community but not if they think it will hinder what they are trying to accomplish.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X