Dear reader
I've told a million times by now, that I am a Linux person. I like the operating system, the tools, the applications, the works. I like the process. I like the community. I like the people. And all these positive feelings are not distribution-specific, or "KDE vs. Gnome" or "Is Amarok the best media player?" kind - its genuine people-to-people kind of a thing, and the love for the technology.
Recently I got to read more and more stories about Linux in general (at least that what it was insinuated by the name of the article) where term "Linux" is quite replaced by Ubuntu. The latest one was from the LifeHacker blog, which I follow frequently (I have it in my RSS reader) and respect greatly. But why Ubuntu is the Linux chosen all the time? I know that this is the most spread and used distribution (or maybe 2nd most), but there's still no reason for it to be a solely used in such an article. It really makes me sad that media uses term "Ubuntu" and that there are no mentions that almost all of the things described in those stories can be done on any other Linux distribution. There's even no mention that Ubuntu is the distribution.
I've told already before, I fear that if the trend goes on (and at the moment I don't see why would it stop), then the Ubuntification of Linux is unstoppable, just as Windows became a follow up to the "PC" term. There were days (and in many cases are still), when some tech support person would ask you: Do you use Mac or PC? (just like in Apple's commercials). You would say, "PC". "OK then, go to the Start menu....", "I don't have one", you would interrupt. "How so? In the left low corner of your screen...", "I use Linux...", you would interrupt again.
Silence. "Hm, well, I'm not sure we support that. Are you sure this is PC?"
I'm afraid, that Ubuntu can overshadow Linux. I know that technologically literate people will not confuse the two, but for general public, there will be no Linux - just Ubuntu. Just like Windows - do you family members know that there are versions of this thing?
I already said that it scares me. It scares me that I am in no power to change the state of affairs. It scares me because competition between distribution benefits them all, perfecting the tools, causing applications to be developed, economies and companies created, communities united. Without all this, Linux would stop being the "way of the l337", and the title "cool" and talent may move to other directions. So I hope it's not too late. I hope there's still time to differentiate. To explain to all that Linux is what matters, not the specific distribution, no matter how good and successful it may be. Hell, I may even use Ubuntu for different purposes, but I will use others as well (Gentoo for example, but also Fedora Core/CentOS and others), and remember the most important thing.
There's much more to Linux than just Ubuntu.
An Update: I spoke with my friend Alon, and I agree with him that although I'm said with aforementioned stuff, I am still very happy that Linux gets attention, even if its Ubuntu and without mentioning "Linux".
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
There's more to Linux than Ubuntu
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
119 Comments:
I feel the same way as you... all those Ubuntu tutorials (than can be applied to any distributions) make me crazy :(
It's just because they have never tried any other distribution
I am a user of Ubuntu Linux and I agree a lot with what you say here. Whenever I write or talk about Ubuntu (or any other distribution) I always try to make it clear that it is a just one of the many Linux distributions. I'm also sad to see that more and more people in Ubuntu community are forgetting about the bigger Linux community we all belong to. I'd even go so far and say that general Linux comes first and only then specific distributions.
Devloop said: "I feel the same way as you... all those Ubuntu tutorials (than can be applied to any distributions) make me crazy :("
Ubuntu has very active users who often write tutorials "Howto: Ubunto ... ...". Too bad that other distributions don't have that many volunteers to do the same.
@ Anonymous 1
I had a talk with a friend, and I agree with him upon this: I'm glad that Linux in general is getting publicized, even by Ubuntu, I really am. I just want everyone understand that there are other distributions as well.
@ Anonymous 2
There are many documentation contributors for many other distributions. I use Gentoo, and it used to be the best documented distribution once, and it is still very good. But if Ubuntu person writes an "Ubunto" howto, I'm not sure how good it is.
But then, its might be just a typo.
I think the linux community in general has felt like this for a while now, at least I have. It seems like everything, in terms of applications and tutorials are leaning towards Ubuntu, simply because of it's notorious ease of use. Target the largest audience type of thing and let's face it in terms of Linux, Ubuntu is the largest distro. Having said that; I'm starting to hate Ubuntu.
I wholeheartedly agree!
Perhaps a workaround this problem is just naming Ubuntu "Ubuntu Linux" instead. At least Linux is there!
interesting how you want to warn us not to call it ubuntu instead of linux when it should not be called linux it should be called gnu/linux
The fact that PCLinux is on top at DistroWatch, to me, means that more people are talking about it than Ubuntu at the moment. At least, that is, people who visit websites like DistroWatch. So I guess this is sort of preaching to the choir.
funny....Richard Stallman must be laughing his stomach out, after all, he's had the same complaint for many years because of people not referring to Linux as GNU/Linux.
I guess it all depends of what the user cares, and I think GNU and Linux live under the hood now, Ubuntu is achieving what no other distro has, it's natural selection, the one that comes with choice.
IMHO, ease-of-use is the thing that Linux has been lacking for years, and now Ubuntu's finally bringing it to the table. This is a natural process, and if you want Linux to be more widely supported, it's kind of a necessity that the distro that's easiest to use is going to win out. Linux isn't dying, as a result of this; it's evolving.
For the record, I'm not an Ubuntu fanboy. I'm a Linux fanboy who recognizes that Ubuntu is great for Linux.
You have a choice. Either you choose to get Linux into the mainstream, or you, as a community, continue to live in the shadow of Microsoft.
If you want to be mainstream, then you need to rally around a standard (meaning flag). "Linux" isn't going to replace Windows. Ubuntu could. Or Debian. Or Redhat. Or... whatever. But if you start throwing everything and it's grandmother out there... you're going to fluster people and they will go back to what is easy.
This is the problem with Linux people. You have simply no conception of what it is to be a user. If you did, we wouldn't have to use 'sudo' any more.
The world of the OS isn't a peace and free love hippy commune. If you want your name talked about, make your distro have something Ubuntu doesn't. Write some user friendly documentation. Create some distinguishing features. Differentiate yourselves.
Or, slip into obscurity. I'm not interested in installing 5 different distros to try them out... what makes you think my parents are going to want to do that?
"If you want to be mainstream, then you need to rally around a standard (meaning flag). "Linux" isn't going to replace Windows."
I don't understand comments like these. I use linux because it works better for my own purposes. Why should it matter to me if it is mainstream; why does it have to replace windows? Isn't that the true spirit of GNU/Linux; to each his own?
I've been using Linux for over 5 years now. But just as some of you have said, this is the evolution of things. Red Hat used to practically be called Linux. If someone comes up with something better, it will take the dominant stance.
Ubuntu, on the other hand, has done more than any other distro. Dell is shipping brand new computers with it and people are finding out how easy it is. That's the thing, my grandmother can use Ubuntu. My grandmother can not Gentoo, it's just not possible. You have to remember that people don't have the attention span you do. If they did, the world would be a much better place.
PS. This is possibly the best thing that could happen to Linux (sorry, GNU/Linux). Most people don't care about all of the other distributions. They just want a computer that works. So in the end, since Ubuntu is really Debian, learn Debian and be a power user in 5 years.
This may be one of the most ridiculous things I've read in a long time.
This whole "it scares me ..." makes me feel sorry for you.
People shouldn't have to know about the nuances between the distributions of linux before they start using linux.
If you insist on ramming these small details down people's throat, linux will never get any meaningful mindshare among most average computer users, but at least you would have "saved" the day and score one for the pedants, right?
I also love ubuntu/Linux and am VERY glad that the rest of the world is finally realizing that an Open Source operating system is a great thing. Frankly I don't care if the average joe user knows that it is Linux under the hood - as long as they start using Ubuntu and make it more mainstream than it already is. Becaseue THAT very 'mainstreamness' is what will make more hardware vendors start supporting it, and just make it grow. Some people are still afraid of Linux, becasue it used to be just for hackers. I'm glad it's now for everyone and I don't care what they want to call it. Nobody calls Windows WIN32?? If they did it would be wierd. All versions of Windows are really WIN32 technologically. So dude, get over the name!!!
"I don't understand comments like these. I use linux because it works better for my own purposes. Why should it matter to me if it is mainstream; why does it have to replace windows? Isn't that the true spirit of GNU/Linux; to each his own?"
Oh so true...
Why should we want Linux in the mainstream anyway? People would just corrupt it. I'd rather just eat my pie, play with Gentoo, and be happy.
People just now switching over to windows from Ubuntu don't know where Linux ends and Ubuntu begins. For all they know, apt-get (or even worse, automatix) is how everything gets installed in Linux. Without a clear distinction between Ubuntu and Linux, newbies are going to use the terms interchangeably.
I first started with Linux about 6 years ago. At the time people would get started with mandrake or redhat before moving on to debian or gentoo. I tried all those distros plus a few more in my first 6 months with Linux because I was always looking for something more. Newbies are settling on Ubuntu, because it fills their needs. Unless they go play around with another distro, they'll never learn to distinguish between Ubuntu and linux.
WTF? I've been using Linux for 10+ years. Ubuntu is pretty new. Some of the distros have bad names, but I think ubuntu wins for worst. I know it has a meaning and symbolism, but it is still a dumb name for a linux distro. It seems like all the newbies are the ones jumping on the ubuntu bandwagon. Face it, it is just another distro, not the best, not the worst, but popular amongst a more visible crowd than some other distros...
I actually think the use of "Ubuntu" is a clarification: Linux is an operating system kernel. Even "GNU-Linux" does not quite specify what it is the authors are talking about.
When you're making a tutorial on something, and you want it to be the most useful to as many people as possible, you don't want to get bogged down on what little detailed step might not work quite right on some other distribution. You specify what you're working with (Ubuntu) and let those more knowledgeable in other distros deal with the differences... mebe write their own distro specific tutorial, or perhaps a tutorial that goes into all the gory details of what always works on every GNU-Linux, and how each distro tries to make it easier with a specific GNOME/KDE/etc GUI...
I hope you stupid fanbois realize that strictly speaking, Linux is just the kernel. Ubuntu or whatever distro one is using is the complete operating system. So when people say they are using Ubuntu they are correct. Windows xp users don't say they are using NT do they?
Hi, Ubuntu haters!
I'm a proud user or Ubuntu, and I don't feel obligated to use the term "Linux" when I'm talking about my Ubuntu experience.
I have used a lot of distros in the past,eight years ago I felt SUSE extremely slow, Red hat ugly, but there was this little thing called Debian, if only it had frequent updates and official repos.
So when Ubuntu came it had everything I wanted for my computers, I haven't use anything else in two years.
When I make a tutorial I put it clear "how to make this in UBUNTU" that's because is my experience, I don't know if it's going to work on others.
If you are upset for this, just fuck you and dedicate the same time I have spend working in my tuto DOING SOMETHING INSTEAD OF CRITICIZING OTHERS.
Have a good day
a lot of tutorials _ARE_ Ubuntu specific, some of them cannot be used on Xubuntu, Kubuntu, etc. Some might work on other Gnome specific distros, but do you want the author to test it on each one? Linux is so diverse, I think Ubuntu tutorials should be Ubuntu tutorials, not Linux tutorials.
There is also more to GNU/Linux than just Linux too.
There is alot more to UNIX than OSX, but you don't hear anybody complaining that UNIX doesn't get enough recognition.
Anybody who is using Ubuntu is aware of it's Linux roots. I don't think it's possible to ignore that fact. Maybe once people have switched to Ubuntu, they will be more open to other OS's as well, including other Linux distros.
It really is not a "Bad Thing"(tm) to see a distro, any distro, bring so much attention to the product. How often do people say "Kleenex" when they really mean facial tissue, or "Xerox" when they mean copy? So if people say Ubuntu instead of Linux, well I just can't find it in myself to get up in arms about it.
Some replies here are dismissive towards the 'newbies' ubuntu has generated -Do not discount people just because they are new - every guru started somewhere, and it is product awareness that will strengthen linux as a whole, regardless of how it comes about. I came to linux via ubuntu. I am now aware of the different 'flavors' and "benefits/detractors" of many distros - and of the fact that anything which can be done on one, can be done on most any - one of countless things I would have never learned had I not been brought in through Ubuntu in the first place. Odds are perhaps decent that this is true of many who are exposed to Linux through Ubuntu, and maybe, like myself, try other distros and end up coming back.
The stronger the overall Linux community, the further it will advance. There is no downside to that. If Ubuntu helps to encourage the growth of Linux, that is just as dandy to me as if Suse or Mandriva or any other did - appealing to a broader base = more combined knowledge=more answers and development=appealing to a broader base..etc.
Without a broader user base, Linux can never truly replace windows, because of vendors supply/demand for related products. I would love to take XP off my machine, but the fact is I can't without giving up other things as a result. Linux is superior in almost every way - but until there is enough demand that vendors will release all major programs compatible with both - it just won't realize its' full potential.
Isn't Ubuntu actually a derivitive of Debian ?
Isn't Debian a fork from UNIX, much like Linux ?
Wouldn't that mean Ubuntu actually has little do do with Linux ?
mac osx is also a kind of the bsd. has a bsd person been made sad for it ? i presume that the linux is a kernel like the bsd is so of mac osx. ubuntu is a package of perspective for the computer user. it also has many applications and controls like windows has internet explorer, windows media player and so on. the manufacture which make a difference perspective could implements the firefox as a primary browser instead of internet explorer. under the firefox operated, the user does not matter whether the operating system is windows or ubuntu(=linux). as so, it is a problem of the shell and the application packaged in the computer. i think the gpl philosophy is for free of use but not for advertise.
Okay, maybe you're right -- maybe Linux is being "Ubuntu-ized." However, is this a bad thing? I've said for years that one of the main reasons why Linux never catches on is because it's so confusing even to get started, precisely because there are so many different distributions.
I think a certain amount of standardization could go a LONG way in the Linux community. And besides, what's the big deal? The kernel of Linux will always remain open, and what works for Ubuntu (when it comes to drivers and such) will work for any other distro.
Not to get rude, but every time someone starts whining about "Ubuntu-zation" like it's a bad thing, the Linux movement takes an unfortunate step backward.
Meh, same thing happened when redhat came out, it will blow over
Linux has become a trend lately, there IS more to Linux than Ubuntu, but then again Ubuntu is doing the most when it comes to desktop use.
I started using Linux 10 years ago and won't tell you the hell I went through to get help for it, there wasn't as much help published online back then and recent Blogs have made it alot easier for newbies, I can only really say the Linux community itself was to blame for the way the OS was. At least now it has some popularity and a team behind it that's willing to make it easier for the new user.
Perhaps the reason that articles refer to Linux as "Ubuntu" is because it's a way to open people up to Linux without scaring them. People hear that "Linux is hard" but "Ubuntu is easy and free."
Do I agree that this is ideal? No, but sometimes you've just got to roll with the punches.
Isn't this just a typical result of Ubuntu catering towards the common user? I mean, the sole purpose is "Linux for Human Beings" not just the technical elite. It makes sense then that the not-so-technical or newbie/casual user would push the Ubuntu branding versus Linux. Also, calling it "Linux" is a bit disingenuous anyway... people refer to their car as a Mazda RX-8 not a Renesis Rotary - the the name of the brand gets the focus, not the engine it uses.
Overall reactions to the "Ubuntuification" of Linux sound very much like "Because what I like is now popular, I no longer like it".
A funny example of this concept can be found here:
http://www.dieselsweeties.com/shirts/elitistdiagram740black.gif
Overall what matters is that there is large amount of attention being focused on a linux based distribution - this helps to strengthen and feed back into all distros, no matter what name is garnering the majority attention.
While I agree that "Ubuntu" is often used where "Linux" is more appropriate, I also think that it often is the other way around: people use "Linux" where they mean "Ubuntu".
@ devloop
First, there is no reason for an average user (even one who writes a tutorial) to have try another distribution if they are perfectly happy with what they are using.
Second, I think it fair to right distribution specific tutorials because there are differences between distributions and the person knows his/her tutorial works in Ubuntu but it might not work in other distributions because some additional software or library is needed. S/he could add a line saying "you need to add such-and-such line before this step in Fedora because it does not have something" or "you don't need to do such-and-such in Gentoo because it already has this". But this would (a) turn off newbies from the tutorial (b) the person might not be sure about other distributions even if s/he has used some version of them previously.
As a loyal OpenBSD user, let me just say, "Welcome to our world." All of the *BSD operating systems (FreeBSD, NetBSD, and DragonflyBSD are also excellent) get overshadowed by Linux all the time. When I show people my laptop, running OpenBSD, people ask me if it's a "kind of Linux"?
As an advocate of free and open-source software, I'm glad that GNU/Linux is doing so well, but if you're tired of your distribution not working, give one of the *BSD OSes a try. OpenBSD undergoes a full code audit before each six-month release.
i saw this trend coming from a mile away when i started hearing that vista was not doing well.
Excellent Article, I'm an ubuntu user since 2005 but I've also used Redhat, Fedora, Suse, Mandrake and Debian in the past and I think that one of the best thing Linux can offer us is the distribution diversity and the possibility of the OS to adapt to the user needs.
Keep writing, you're doing it pretty well.
Open source.... open mind
The other linux distros can achieve the same thing once they get a bigger user-base.
I shifted to ubuntu because of that factor. As there are alot of people who can help you out in case you run into problems getting something to run (especially when you like to test out new hardware).
In any case, the more people who use any linux flavor the merrier.
Who cares? The problem is that all of you so called linux geeks talk down on those who don't have the time or desire to spend hours getting a frickin wireless card to work. Ubuntu is the easiest by far in simply getting the hardware to work. Nobody really cares what the hell it is called, they just want it to work on their hardware. We're talking about end users here, not linux admins after all.
Oh and btw, what makes me mad is when someone spouts off about "newbies." You were one too once....ass.
Right, but what are you calling it Linux for? Please give credit to what matters here - GNU!!! Linux is just the kernel, that's not the tools and more importantly the 'spirit' you are referring to I think. So PLEASE use the term "GNU/Linux" (at the very least in writing) because GNU is what matters :-)
Good points, unfortunately if there are hundrets of different linux distributions used by novice users, it will be a hell for software developers.
As you may know every distribution has a different package manager (if any) and is slightly different in terms of configuration files or pre-installed libraries.
If you want more people to use Linux, consider the following things:
1) You need good software for an OS to be successful. Most people don't care about the OS itself if the software does the job it is supposed to do.
2) Software developers are busy enough already - if there is not a standard way of installing apps on most of the systems, they won't bother and simply target more standardized platforms like Mac OS X or Windows.
Ubuntu makes this extremely easy - even for novice users. The Debian-like package manager is the best I've seen so far.
3) No novice user cares about the system technology itself (wah? kernel?). They just want the system to do it's job - if it does, they will be happy.
4) More distributions = more freedom to choose = more variations = more work = less developers = less software.
This is my personal experience as software developer. I can say that Ubuntu is so hyped because it is the first ever Linux distribution that just works for novice users and developers alike.
I wouldn't be 'hatin' on Ubuntu. I sort've understand where you're coming from in that Ubuntu could become the AOL of Linux distros, but at the same time, it's the one distro that is opening the door to the masses, and quite possibly the one distro that will be the undoing of Microsoft (and Apple too if they're not careful). The more people that use Linux in whatever brand, the more support there will be from big time developers. I know most Linux users have an aversion to paying for software (not a bad thing) but the more attention a platform gets, the more mature software it gets. There's tons of great software out there, but how many are held back because they can't easily run Photoshop or some other program that may be mission critical to their job? How many companies would switch their desktops if native apps were built for Linux and didn't have to be run through a virtualization layer or require lots of hoops to jump through to get the thing going? 'Course it might put people like me out of business when the amount of virii and spyware drops to near nil. :D
Plus, I think it's good in that Linux sort've makes the user learn a bit about what's going on under the hood of their machine. We're not just along for the ride, we actually have to steer the car from time to time. The more the user knows, the more educated they are and that means more contribution to the community. True, Ubuntu isn't the only Linux out there. (I use Damn Small Linux as well.) But it's the one making a difference. And that's what counts.
can't agree more, even been there in the 'helpdesk situation'
I'm a debian person myself, some time now there have been feelings that ubuntu takes a lot, but doesn't give much back to the debian community, someone even called it using debian as a free supermarket
I used to call it 'dumbuntu' before I tried it myself, if your pc is heavy enough (I use abbandoned hardware) it works nice. It's nice that you can install proprietary drivers from apt, debian should give more choice to the users in that way imho.
Still, it's all ubuntu you hear right now. I used to love visiting sites like debian-administration, but now it feels like they should change name..
@Mike
You seem to be saying that it's ok for Ubuntu to claim all the good of Linux as its own. And when some novice sees something real cool on PCLinuxOS and then tells his friends how cool Ubuntu was it's ok? That's what's happening. That's what people are angry about. Oh, I almost forgot. I see this a lot on the blogs: "Ubuntu wouldn't recognize my wifi card, Linux sucks". So Ubuntu is not only reaping all the good of Linux, it's sloughing off the bad on to the rest of the distros.
The problem is not that Ubuntu is so popular, the problem is that it is misrepresenting Linux. More distributions = a healthy Linux, monoculture = decline and death.
I didn't know squat about Linux until I started hearing about Ubuntu. So I gave the liveCD a shot. It didn't function to my satisfaction on my computer, but my curiosity was whetted. I found out that there are other "flavors" of Linux, and tried a bunch. I've now got PCLinuxOS on a flash drive, and it works rather nicely. So, Ubuntu got me into Linux.
Now everyone who knows me thinks I've gone off the deep end. "What the heck is Plucknisox? Never mind...I don't really want to know...and I'm NOT letting you touch my computer." Sigh.
Oh my god...First you hear "linux needs more visibility and more users, it needs to be easier, we need to make it to regular joes desktops" for years, and now when thats actually happening, you cry that you dont want to lose your l33t status? :)
I started using GNU/Linux with Ubuntu Hoary, the second version. I had tried Suse earlier, but it wouldnt ever give me even a command prompt since it totally did not support my graphics card at the time, I think..So it was back to Windows I hated for a couple more years.
Then someone told me of Ubuntu - "Its an easy linux". I thought id try, liked it, it was pretty easy, and I started exploring.
Now Im still using Ubuntu, have been betatesting every release since, and have installed Ubuntu (and sometimes some other distro like DSL on old comps) for several friends, and have passed out tens of cds to others.
Ive tried other distros as well, but Ubuntus mix of easy access at first, huge community and popular forums are what I like.
People worrying that going over 1% of all desktop users is mainstream?
Muhaha. Let me have my belly laugh while you worry about having to do tech support for all the "clueless windows lemming hordes" ;)
I believe it is best to say "Ubuntu Linux". Because this tells everyone that you are talking about Ubuntu which is also Linux. Just like people don't refer to windows as just "XP" or just "Vista" but instead they refer to it as "Windows XP" or "Windows Vista"
Another thing, Just like it is rare to see some one say "Microsoft Windows XP" it is proportionaly rare to see someone say "Ubuntu GNU/Linux"
Popularization of Ubuntu doesn't really detract from the other distros. I doubt Ubuntu is going to eat into Red Hat's server profits in any significant way. Fedora will still have its followers. Novell will have their faithful legion of customers. There will always be plenty of competition with Linux. Its the nature of the beast. Even if Ubuntu gets 90% of Linux users there's still a very real chance of someone in that 10% taking over and offering up something more appealing. With Windows or Mac there is absolutely no possibility of competition within their markets. It can never be more than XP vs Vista or Tiger vs Leopard in that world.
For the record, I will NOT use Ubuntu or its derivatives precisely because of what was said in this article and I have been a Linux user now for over 8 years. There are aspects of the Ubuntu OS which I dislike immensely - and which others like immensely, one of which is the lack of a proper root password controlled, GUI admin section as used in SUSE or Mandriva.....but that is my choice. I applaud what Ubuntu is doing but dislike intensely the developing synonymy of Ubuntu and Linux in the general non-Linux population.
ubuntu forever!
Long live Windows 98SE, the best operating system every created!
Crabs in a bucket I tell ya and its SICKENING. I agree with some that if you want linux to become mainstream (which means more linux ports of popular Windows only software and games) then you are going to have to rally around one or maybe a few distros. That doesn't automatically make it the best distro which is subjective anyway (even though the huge amount of communnity support for Ubuntu can't be overlooked...I often find Ubuntu howtos more than anything when searching for info on other distros ). You are never going to get 100's of distros to be accepted all at the same time.
For those that don't care about mainstream acceptance then why be concerned when the mainstream identifies with Ubuntu. The other distros will not die and they will benefit from the attention that Ubuntu gains...as the article states most things can be accomplished across all distros. So a port for Ubuntu is a port for all of linux. I think one distro becoming synonymous with linux is a small price to pay for the benefit it could bring. And being honest Red Hat is ALREADY synonymous with linux server to alot of non-linux admins...but no one complains about that. Quit hating.
Count me among the Linux users who don't need it to become "mainstream". I am very happy with PCLinuxOS, and used to use MEPIS. It worries me also that often "Ubuntu" is used where "Linux" is really meant.
I don't get all technical with people when I explain some of the differences in the way I use my PC, but neither do I act as though MY choice of distribution is Linux.
Ubuntu is a great thing for those who prefer it, but it's not the only one out there.
lol!
Here's the thing: Ubuntu is easy to install, relatively easy to use, and does a good job of hardware detection. These things are appealing to new users switching from Windows. Mom & Dad don't want to sit down and read through the specs of 37 different Linux distros before choosing one to install on their machine. That's where Ubuntu comes in. It's well marketed, simple to use and Linux newbies feel comfortable making the choice.
Why else do you think Apple is so popular with non-techie types? You don't have to understand technology in order to pick an Apple computer. Ubuntu is the Apple of the Linux world, and that's a good thing.
As for all the media coverage, well all it takes is a few minutes of CNN-watching to realize that the media likes simple. The simpler the better. Hence, Ubuntu.
So, here's the thing: If Linux is going to become mainstream, then it needs a mainstream representative, and that happens to be Ubuntu. If you don't want that to happen, then stop recommending Linux to your family and friends and keep it in the tech world.
I've used or tried out many a distro, I've used Mandriva for almost a year before I switched to Ubuntu, I have been using Ubuntu for over a year and find it to be the most polished Linux distro around.
I've at least tried the other distros to see if there was another that I liked more.
An really I don't even feel a need or want to switch, I am completely satisfied with Ubuntu, I love it!
It does absolutely everything I ever need done and I can even play the game I love (ET:QW)
I see where your coming from with Ubuntu being used rather that Linux in general.
I think it would be nice for others to catch the spotlight as well, but if Linux is ever to catch on there needs to be an easy choice, a choice that is proven and that there is lots of support on.
So in other words I Like seeing Ubuntu get the spotlight, but on the other hand I don't like it.
But overall I know that if Linux is to gain a foothold in the market share there needs to be a flagship...
Very nice article, thanks for posting!
why don't you run off and play a nice big game of hide and go fuck yourself
Ubuntu users NEED all those tutorials. It's the #1 Handholding Distro for a reason.
While its fun to figure out how to get things working in linux not everyone has the time to reinvent the wheel just to get sound going or get an NVIDIA driver running so its good that people post their experience. Isn't this one of the points of FOSS anyway...building off the contribution of others?
Since you want to scoff at hand-holding then drop linux and go write your own kernel, desktop, WM, drivers, compilers, and supporting software and quit letting the community hold YOUR hand. And don't use any textbooks or manuals while your at it....GDI.
Basically, I disagree with this article. It's not that important for an average user to know that Ubuntu is a Linux distribution. Most people don't care what operating system they use or that different operating systems exist. The ones that have at least a passing interest will know that Ubuntu is a Linux distribution. Even then, they will normally be interested in the operating system as an end product, which Linux on its own is not really.
Linux is a derivative of Unix and there is no need to be aware of this to enjoy it. Similarly, linux distros are in some sense derivatives of linux and there is no need to be aware of what is going on under the hood or what it is called. The only important thing is that is free (freedom) software and that is what should be emphasised.
Average users need to know that many others are using a product successfully before they will risk wasting their time to try it themselves. Ubuntu gives this feeling of security by being widespread and presenting itself in a user friendly way. So many distro websites would be too confusing for the average joe. Having a news post as the front page or a download link leading to an ftp folder is the easiest way to scare off a newbie.
I say let Linux proliferate under any name. In a situation where it has a greater market share the more adventurous users will eventually try different distros. Of course you're free to use any distro you want and even if you have to occasionally explain to people what a distro is, there won't really be any negative consequences of their ignorance (compared to those of the uninformed windows user currently).
If your complaint is against the "Ubuntification of Linux" then I would ask is there really any need for the Linuxification of Ubuntu?
Don't worry. Linux will be always the 2nd term after Ubuntu.
Most open source advocates always think that Linux will replace Windows in the PC realm. If these advocates had just thought of uniting under one linux distribution since the kernel has been published. Windows might have been wiped out from the desktop market. And I think, Ubuntu has grasped the meaning of it. Just late, of course.
Better late than never.
Just because we have freedom creating linux distro's at will, it will do good for the community and the non-technical people we want to invite. I don't think so.
Hi have to agree!
I've been using Linux for more than 5+ years.
UBUNTU is Debian based. SuSE / Red Hat is .rpm based. I've run SuSE, but switched to Linux Mint about a year ago.
The greater argument is all those open source goodies that allow me to run sites, forums, and blogs.
I can do it all. UBUNTU is cool, but there is a history here. I've moved on to other versions, and might go to Debian 4.0.
BTW, I've grown tired of these Blogger Blogs. There is better, and more personal out there.
www.jjmacey.net
The bottom line is that it IS Ubuntu. That's the distribution name. It's currently the most used one by a fair amount. When I talk about the Linux kernel, it's Linux.
If I want to talk about adding repositories and installing software, it's Ubuntu / Red Hat / Fedora / Debian / Slackware / whatever.
There's also the matter of Ubuntu users not knowing or caring what Linux is at this point. They don't search for "Install Skype on Linux," they search for "Skype on Ubuntu." If you want to help people (or get page views, or whatever your goal is), your Ubuntu howto had better be Ubuntu-specific.
http://ibeentoubuntu.blogspot.com
When I read the article I thought the author meant that sometimes Ubuntu was used when Linux (maybe GNU/Linux) should have been, not when the distro should have been named. Some have commented on the difference and how an average user would perceive it; I think it is important that the community be represented and credit given where credit is due.
This sounds much like the people who decry the fact that the GNU usertools are ignored and referred to as simply Linux.
Is Linux used as part of Ubuntu? Yes.
Is the GNU toolset used as part of Linux? Yes.
And this is exactly what is supposed to happen with Free software... building upon what others have done.
When you look at the entire distribution, Linux (the kernel) is really just a tiny fraction of the software that's included. So I'd just as soon call it simply "Ubuntu" and leave the Linux part out.
I agree, there are some HOWTOs which work on distributions other than Ubuntu. But some of the tutorials would appear to work on other distributions, but might not work on all due to differences in file locations, kernel modules, and preinstalled packages. Anyone who is using a distribution other than Ubuntu will know that they can try it on other distros.
I have to agree. The Ubuntuzation of Linux is disturbing. I have no personal gripes against the distro, in fact, it dramatic rise may be the main reason the linix desktop is growing in popularity the last couple years. However the shear amount of resources that Shuttleworth and co. are able to put into Ubuntu probably even dwarfs Redhat's offerings. They are able to put out the most polished thorough distro in the shortest time span. If this Kleenex effect continues, I too think that other distros will develop problems and will more than likely fold. I already think that is bound to happen in good number the next couple years. The Ubuntu effect can make it even more so.
Definitely Linux
I have a ThinkPad X40. It doesn't have a disc drive, so I bought an external USB drive so that I could do a clean XP install.
XP wouldn't take, no matter what I tried. I thought my X40 was a lemon. There were a lot of stories circulating about Linux, and specifically Dell shipping Ubuntu boxes, so I thought it was worth a shot. Nothing is more mainstream than Dell, and what's good enough for the masses is good enough for me.
As you can probably tell by now, I'm not incredibly tech-savvy. I love my Apple and I've been with Windows since 95. The thought of Linux scared the crap out of me. Finding drivers in Windows was difficult as it is, what would it be like in Linux?
Here's what I liked about Ubuntu right off the bat: the 700 MB ISO, a fast download for my slow DSL connection. Here's what endured it to me even more: painless setup, no drivers necessary, and it WORKS. My X40 was a functioning computer after all.
Coming from OS X, there are a lot of things that annoy me about Linux usability, but for the most part it's been a nice experience. I have zero interest in trying the other distros either. User-friendly is the name of the game, and if Ubuntu is the epitome of that for Linux, good enough for me.
While I'll never let go of Apple (and to a much lesser extent, Windows), I'm thankful that Ubuntu saved my computer.
Hi...Ive been using Linux for years now and am a contributor to lkml. It does concern me that people talk of Ubuntu `as` Linux, but look at the bright side-
1. it does end up with Linux
2. once they are accustomed, they may move on to other distros, or not at all
3. we do free them from properietary
4. its the path, and not the end.
At the end, even if Ubuntu overshadows Linux, how does it really matter, lkml will keep working and there WILL be people who will have special requirements and they will keep coming up with custom distros.
End result that is most important is that the users benefit.
The developers irrespective of what distro they use are going to make contributions which at large is going to be distro unconstrained.
If ubuntu is making life easy using Linux for amny people then, its a lesson to be learnt by the rest.
At the moment there are quite a lot of activity in bringing packages across different distros and very soon this would become united into a single or very few large package repositories. Once that happens, its easy sailing for any distro.
End result is the user is benefited and also the community gets attention...
There is no stopping Linux...call it anything ;)
Anyone who doesn't like Ubuntu should have a flamethrower nozzle shoved up their butt while a deranged nigger is chewing on your face like it was a plate of fried chicken.
And then a candiru should swim up your weiner while Jesus casts a spell on your dog.
And then then then the flamethrower should be lit and a meteorite named Jose should hit you in the back and snap your spine like some dry twigs when a squirrel falls out of a tree. Hahaha lololo.
There's tons of great software out there, but how many are held back because they can't easily run Photoshop or some other program that may be mission critical to their job? How many companies would switch their desktops if native apps were built for Linux and didn't have to be run through a virtualization layer or require lots of hoops to jump through to get the thing going?
Never heard of Pixel image editor? It's a 1:1 copy of Photoshop and is native on Linux (even Windows and Mac) ... http://www.pixelimageeditor.com
Mahenda,
I have to agree. People who are supposed to be "professionals" can't seem to look left or right, and see what is out there.
That means, open source has an alternative for "everything". Plus a very active community of supporters.
That is where the fun is with Ubuntu, Linux, FOSS, and open source.
Ubuntu probably has done more for Linux than most, but I've been using Linux for a long time, and have dropped most distros including Ubuntu.
I like to stay "free", and "flexible".
Hey, I need to do something I can find an open source solution, then get community support.
JJMacey
www.jjmacey.net
Mahenda,
I have to agree. People who are supposed to be "professionals" can't seem to look left or right, and see what is out there.
That means, open source has an alternative for "everything". Plus a very active community of supporters.
That is where the fun is with Ubuntu, Linux, FOSS, and open source.
Ubuntu probably has done more for Linux than most, but I've been using Linux for a long time, and have dropped most distros including Ubuntu.
I like to stay "free", and "flexible".
Hey, I need to do something I can find an open source solution, then get community support.
JJMacey
www.jjmacey.net
Without all this, Linux would stop being the "way of the l337", and the title "cool" and talent may move to other directions. So I hope it's not too late. I hope there's still time to differentiate. To explain to all that Linux is what matters, not the specific distribution, no matter how good and successful it may be.Hell, I may even use Ubuntu for different purposes, but I will use others as well (Gentoo for example, but also Fedora Core/CentOS and others)...
Exactly. Ubuntu is right for creating a very usable desktop quickly. But being "1337" counts for shit. Seriously who gives a fuck about being "1337".
The reason "Ubuntu" is chosen is because the Distribution is what matters for such tutorials.
Take Gentoo for instance. Gentoo can run on kernels other than linux. There is geNToo gentoo/bsd and gentoo/macosx. Ergo it's possible to have a different kernel and the same set of userland utilities and still be a distribution.
devloop said...
I feel the same way as you... all those Ubuntu tutorials (than can be applied to any distributions) make me crazy :(
It's just because they have never tried any other distribution
You assume that just because someone is using Ubuntu they haven't used anything else. Some people have left other distributions because it doesn't optimally serve their needs. I switched to linux during the time of Windows ME; And i tried a variety of rpm distros and hated it. I settled on Gentoo for a while till i stumbled upon ubuntu.
While it's true that yum and yast2 are much better than the old rpm days, I still see no reason to switch back.
emerge is nice but it takes too long to wait for everything to compile. I'm happy with ubuntu, and happy to use other distros if they excel at a particular task
Please, I'm told you can't even login as root on Ubuntu -
Exchanging an Ubuntu Nazi for a Windoze Nazi is no solution.
I don't feel the same way.
Let me remind you that this is the desktop market and for the majority of people ease of use is the deciding factor.
For servers its a completely different domain. Redhat's RHEL really reigns supreme. Just read the articles on the NYSE. Their not running anything else than redhat. Redhat understands the server market and are serving those needs.
Ubuntu is serving a desktop market need right now and its notoriously easy of use, easy to maintain and easy to install.
Other distros just didn't pick up on it and now have competition.
Competition is good and in my opinion the more people that use Linux the better.
I can't wait to see if another distro enhances itself and surpases Ubuntu!
75 comments in two days. Very good for a blog on what you should refer to Linux as. I have been running Linux at home since 1998. I believe that my first install was RedHat 4.2. No that is not RedHat Enterprise Version 4 Update 2. RedHat 4.2 was before any Enterprise version by RedHat, and I believe that it used the 2.0.X series kernel. But, others I have met started with kernel .9 something before 1.0. So over the life of Linux, many folks have used various distros. A new distro will arrive and gather a large following or garner the title of most downloads. However, the steadfast Debian and Slackware distros retain a strong core of users. I prefer to run Ubuntu at home now days, just because it is setup to work nicely with my hardware after a fresh install. After all, I am in the Unix IT field and have enough problems to solve at work. At home, I just want a system that lets me write a few lines of code for my latest useless home project. To paraphrase Linus, the "desktop" allows him to do what his wants to do - that is kernel development. Not very close to his words, but I think that was his point anyway. So use what ever distro is available and suits your needs, and pretty much ignore the MSM and bloggers.
"Redhat's RHEL really reigns supreme"
John Monteiro,
You are kidding, right? What about SLED?
I prefer buidling anything other than .rpm.
Debian sort of rules. And, I really hate dealing with such "free" Blogs from Google.
Get your own life.
JJMacey
www.jjmacey.net
Wow. Just 'WOW'.
The flocking of the Ubuntu fan-boys to this article is _exactly_ they type of attitude the permeates the Ubuntu cult.
Slathering like rabid dogs over an article that is simply one persons opinion.
Can't have people with opinions when the only thing that separates Ubuntu Linux from other distros is rampant jingoism.
mmhh, After reading the comments (more than the article itself) I thought this is why I wrote, http://www.go2linux.org/vista-and-ubuntu-battle
And sorry I am misusing the term Linux in my article.
Sorry this is the Link.
The Desktop Operating System Battle
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to stop all the endless philosophical squabbling and get something everybody can use out the door before Redmond signs off on enough cross-license deals with the smaller distros to legislate Linux right out of existence. At least Cannonical has enough financial clout and personal integrity to push back. Keep it up and there won't be any Linux Microsoft won't have its hooks in.
...and the crabs in the bucket still persist.
Why do those opposed to this article have to be labeled "Ubuntu Fanboys"? Anyone interested in seeing linux go mainstream should disargree and those that aren't really shouldn't care in the firt place. Why worry about what the mainstream thinks of linux if you don't want it to go mainstream?
And why the hate on the Ubuntu Howtos. I have never read one that says "This only works on Ubuntu" nor have I read many other distro howtos that promote using the steps on other distros. Is it simply jealousy that the Ubuntu Howtos tend to pop up everywhere even if you are searching for CentOS help?
Red Hat, SUSE and Mandriva have failed to do what Ubuntu has done for mainstream Linux, so it's fully deserved that it's got the support from newcomers.
Actually you'd think that the aforementioned big distributions would have got their act together by the time Ubuntu arrived, but surprisingly they hadn't.
All I can say is that now it's probably too late since I have tested Ubuntu/Kubuntu and some of my friends and relatives are running it.
That doesn't mean it is in any way perfect, but it is a sign for me at least that community based distributions tend to work better and be less buggy than the walled off RHEL/Fedora and SLE/OpenSUSE worlds for the desktop.
So heads up to Ubuntu for introducing a new class of people to this great operating system. And I say this as the maintainer of a Slackware based distribution who doesn't bear a grudge against any other distribution but would like to see the whole user base grow for all parties alike.
Debian and Slackware tend to be technically the best foundations and attract the best motivated community members for high quality derivative distributions and it would be great to see that fact reflected in market share and user base.
Ubuntu is a platform. A platform for users to enjoy, and platform for developers to develop. Developers know that there is a community that will use their applications, so they develop for Debian/Ubuntu, and the users use the applications they make. Through Ubuntu, we can educate and introduce open source and development to a relatively weak user.
i think what you really wanted to say is: there is not linux but the GNU Linux, meaning if there would have been another kernel than linux, the GNU guys would have taken that, am i right? ;) and so, ubuntu is not the only OS using GNU tools and a Linux Kernel.
My personal experience, btw., is, that most people who started using GNU Linux with a Ubuntu switched to another Distribution because Ubuntu couldnt give what it promised in the long run. What i mean is, it's correct that many people outside of the free software world only know the term Ubuntu, no wonder with this huge marketing effort backed by a rich guy, but people once inside quickly get a clue and find the real thing - somewhere else.
best regards
arno911
On the "GNU/Linux" vs "Linux" question: if you deem it important enought to specify GNU (although the Linux kernel is GPL anyway), I'd say the operating system as a whole should be called Linux/GNU, not the other way around. Because when it comes down to it, what are utilities wihthout a kernel? The kernel is what makes an operating system, it's what 'makes things work' by providing an abstraction layer of hardware.
Let's see, why is ubuntu well-known... oh yeah, Mark Shuttleworth distributed tens of thousands of CDs with ubuntu Linux and mail them out for free. Is it really the easiest Linux distribution to use? No! It has a derivative called Linux Mint which has all of the codecs and proprietary drivers preinstalled which is much easier. Ubuntu isn't even on the top of the DistroWatch hit page, PCLinuxOS has been killing it for six to eight months by five to 6000 hits.
But, none of this really matters. How many Windows's users do you think are going to drop their windows and start using Linux? for very few. But Dell is shipping computers with ubuntu on it. Big deal, they are making you pay $7-$800 for a for a Cadillac when all you need is a good old Ford. Guess what they will both go 55 miles an hour at the same speed but the Ford cost a lot less.
Let's see, Dell sold 10,000 ubuntu computers in four months. That is not really big news. How about Wal-Mart? They sold 10,000 desktop computers with Linux on them in one week. Oh by the way, the distribution was the Gos. None of you even mentioned that distribution. It doesn't matter what distribution. What matters is a computer that will surf the Internet, play and burn CDs and play DVDs, have instant messaging, have e-mail, and a simple office program that will be low-cost. The Everex computer that sells for $200 runs equally as fast as a $500 PC with Windows Vista home. Heck, most of the people that bought the Everex computer at Wal-Mart didn't even know they were buying Linux. :-)
In America, what counts is cost. In late January, Everex is coming out with a 7 inch screen laptop with a 30 GB hard drive, CD burner and DVD player, built-in wireless, and all the basic apps a new user is likely to want. That will kill the Asus EEE PC, which runs too hot, has no CD drive, very poor battery life, and a keyboard that most are complaining about.
It is a low-cost working computer that will bring Linux to the masses. Not your distribution or that distribution etc. So, and sit back and watch the distro wars and enjoy. What will bring Linux to the masses is what has brought everything to the masses in the United States, the bottom dollar.
I'm of the opinion that this is not something to be afraid of.
From what I've read of it, Ubuntu is the first distro that has had good solid financial backing that was still giving out their best versions for free.
Red Hat always let you have their last version for free, but you had to pay for the newest one. Didn't Suse cost money too? And Lindows/Linspire?... all about the Benjamins.
There are tons of free distros out there, but for the most part, their support is abysmal because their developers are busy people. These guys have jobs and families. They can't spend 24/7 working on their distro. And even if they could, they're only one or two people... maybe a handful at best. They can't handle multitudes of support requests. Some of them have trouble making their rent on time.
With Canonical, we have a whole company dedicated to giving out a superior distro, creating multiple avenues for free support, and most importantly, getting more and more people aware of and using Linux.
Thats what counts here. Sheer numbers.
What I like about Linux is not that this elitist crap some of you are spewing. You hate Ubuntu because it is becoming too popular? Boo hoo.
We need numbers. We need the moronic masses to come to Linux. If every single geek and tech savvy person on the planet were to use Linux and no one else, we'd still never get above 10% worldwide usage. That is the nature of humanity... most people are average or below. Most don't care what they use so long as it works.
Without the numbers, we don't get the hardware support. Without the hardware support we don't get cool stuff like Compiz and native game ports. Without cool stuff like that we will just keep on playing catchup trying to emulate and support software designed for an inferior OS. If Linux had the OEM support that M$ enjoys, there's no end to the amazing stuff it could do. And without that support, M$ would be a has-been.
For some of you it is the thrill of being on the bleeding edge. There are and always will be distros for you. And the more people and the more hardware manufacturers that Ubuntu brings into the fold, the better and cooler the small elitist distros will be because of it.
There should be distros for the masses as well. At least one, right?
Would you not feel better if your mother was using Linux? Instead of an OS whose maker is so arrogant that they expect her to buy a new computer every few years just to handle their bloat? Wouldn't you feel safer if your father were using Linux and was therefore safe from viruses and spyware designed to wreak financial havoc?
Stop the elitist snobbery. There is still plenty of work to be done. Work that will be made much easier with proper support and respect from the hardware manufacturers.
I'm not blind to other distros... I use Ubuntu on the majority of my systems, but I also use Puppy Linux and DamnSmallLinux on occasion on older machines. Lately I've come across FireHydrant, a derivative of Puppy, and I like that rather well... but have to say this... Ubuntu was my first one. And I was only brave enough to try it because I kept hearing about it over and over on Digg and other sites like that. If I had heard about 15 or 20 different distros, I would never have been able to decide which one to try, and I probably never would have made the leap.
I've been aware of Linux for about 15 years. But only in the last 18 months have I been brave enough to check it out. Ubuntu was my gateway drug.
To wrap this up, I'd like to say that the kind of people who can use Ubuntu and not be aware of the fact that they are using Linux are the sorry saps that need it the most. They are the victims of phishing scams, spyware installed by their swiss cheese-like browsers, and viral infestations that leave them no recourse but "wipe and re-install". And if they can be convinced to switch to Ubuntu and get away from all that chaos, so much the better.
Stop being afraid. Its foolish.
I didn't even find Ubuntu that easy to use. It refused to accept a resolution that I would accept.
And for the most part, it's not Ubuntu which makes it easy to use. It's KDE/Gnome, the packaging management, etc. Most other Linux distros provide these same tools.
When you look at the entire distribution, Linux (the kernel) is really just a tiny fraction of the software that's included. So I'd just as soon call it simply "Ubuntu" and leave the Linux part out.
And when you recompile the GNU tools and GPL programs that constitute the Ubuntu distribution upon the OpenSolaris kernel, then you get something like Nexenta OS (http://www.gnusolaris.org). And there's no Linux in it, none at all. Wah?
sirno,
Wow! I'm trying to wrap my mind around your comment. Cool!
You make an excellent point, and one that continues to need to be made.
A lot of people who find linux will fist stick with ubuntu. If they're techie, they'll probably explore, tinker, learn to love the idea of distros, bookmark distrowatch, and install hundredreds of distros. In my case, in the last month, I've had nearly 20 distros on my laptop, looking for the best fit (for the laptop).
However, Ubuntu is a type of linux and people have to first understand a little about linux to get that. Its a great publication tool and for those who dont care about being techy and just hate MS, its a good escape.
Could be worse. Could be Red Hat.
"I've told a million times by now, that I am a Linux person."
You mean "GNU/Linux" person? Because, if it's OK to dump GNU, I can't see why it isn't OK to dump Linux?
Discontinue your cross-scripting attempt.
well,
why i use ubuntu or any other GNU/linux distributions ?
some say: it's better than Microsoft
some say : no money?!
i think i want to use ubntu or any other linux distr because it's free(freedom) then it's open source ..?
so ubuntu give me this chance as other distro too <
ubuntu make using linux very easy for newbie , that very good .
but note that : if the user can do everything by just a click?that well make ubuntu like windows?!and the bad thing in windows is that : you don,t have a chance to resolve your problem < windows do'nt give you the choice ?
When the operating system becomes easier, does not require the user to experience more effort to deal with the regime, and it is bad Sekonakther blunt and less need for learning and development
Of course I'm happy that even non computer-savvy people can actually manage to do their jobs with a distribution of a free operating system (Ubuntu or any other).
But I don't like the hordes of people that, not understanding the difference between GNU/Linux and Ubuntu, blame *Linux* for whatever they can't cope with by using the abstract tools, interfaces and documentation that *Ubuntu* (or any other distribution) suggests.
They should at least learn to differentiate *that* much, as to not make false allegations of the kind:
"Linux does not do that"
"Linux has problems"
"Linux is slow"
"Linux is unstable"
"Linux does have good hardware support"
If they can not understand that what they consider as their needs, priorities and problems are not necessarily needs, priorities and problems for everyone else, they will never be able to put things in perspective, never be relevant and, in the end, never be taken seriously by the people that could help them with their problems. Which are community members, not a payed support team.
Of course, the same should apply to us computer-savvy users! Besides, the above is a common, egoistical, mistake we can all make in any area of social life. So, in this particular case, we should learn to keep in mind that not everyone (not even the most) of computer users out there have the time to deal with all the technicalities, organizational or purely technical, of an operating system the spine of which was made by hackers for hackers. It is perfectly normal for those people to want (internally complex, externally simple-looking) interfaces that are adapted to their way of thinking. It is perfectly normal that they prefer shallow, step-by-step instructions, instead of thorough documentation with enough external informational dependencies the resolution of which would keep them busy for days.
Unfortunately, the real problem is that many people are too lazy to bother with thinking. So they engage in pointless arguments with similarly lazy people, none of either sides understands that they can never agree with the other because they *talk in a different context*. Each side takes different things for granted and each side makes global assumptions based on those things, those assumptions are obviously perfectly valid in their context but perfectly irrelevant in the other side's context.
And for the rest of people there is always the problem of expressing themselves accurately and objectively without crossing the "anal" line.
There goes the tech guru's again. Who cares what the name is? I just want a functional replacement for the Micro$oft thing that has been holding me to ransom.
Since I'm not smart enough to understand all the linux terminologies and complicated ways of doing things. I opted for Ubuntu.
You won't believe that as simple as you guys claim it is, it has been a whole lot of effort for me. If you don't mind, you can read my ordeal on my post Microsoft Baby Hard to Wean
I've read tons of tutorial but it wasn't as easy as the geeks will like me believe.
So my argument is, if a linux-newbie calls Gnu/Linux Ubuntu, allow him. When he is grown up, he will know the right terminologies to use ;-) The important things is that you have successfully converted another Micro$oft baby to Linux! Cheers
Ubuntu is easy to install and easy to use = mass market product.
If you other distros are jealous of ubuntu's thriving install base, SUPPORT AND EMBRACE it and help make ubuntu into what you want, the source is available go do it.
The major think linux/gnu and all other distros miss is "ease of install" and "ease of use".
"base" driver support is something that ubuntu saw as a pitfall of massmarket and changed and added to the product. EASY.
Who wants to decide between kde/gnome? not me, id rather any standard window manager and give me customization options.
mesh the technologies and make something that works both ways.
KGnomeDE Window Manager.
When a product is marketed to a mass audience too many choices can be confusing for the customer. Take the Mc*onalds or B*rgerKing approach, #1 #2 or #3?
Amiright?
Not to forget the more customizable os/distros if linux/gnu wants to take ground STANDARDIZE it. Like Microsoft, XP-Pro and XP-Home utilize the same base for drivers/software install. Do you think people would buy XP-Pro if you had to install programs using a command line? or Home? you decide
If you other distros are jealous of ubuntu's thriving install base, SUPPORT AND EMBRACE it and help make ubuntu into what you want, the source is available go do it.
Well, some distributions that aim to the same people (especialy commercially-driven ones, like SUSE or Mandriva) might be jealous, but I can assure you that many other major distributions (like Gentoo, Debian or Slackware) are NOT. There are many things in the way that Ubuntu works that annoy the users of other distributions (and, more importantly their developers), just like there are things in the way other distributions work that annoy new users.
Ubuntu might be simpler and more attractive to some, but it's also limiting and encumbering to some others. It's not *the better* way to go, it's just an other way appealing to many. I'm glad it exists, it's nice to have many possible ways to go. The more ways, the better. But personally I don't like using Ubuntu and I wouldn't want to see all other distributions pick the same orientation.
Fortunately that's not going to happen: many other distributions don't have at their top priorities to increase their user-base or to be attractive to new users, so they gladly opt at the cost of the above and in benefit of stability, choice and ease of use for the more advanced users. I'd like it to remain this way ;)
Ubuntu is cool, I'm a Debian user though. I personally like what Ubuntu has achieved for Linux in general. The publicity is mindbending.
When it come to Debian based distros, you probably won't find an Xfce distro as attractive as Dream Linux. Really, it puts Xubuntu to shame.
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=dreamlinux&a=1
I think it's a great thing. And not just because I'm a (K)ubuntu user. The word "Linux" has severely negative connotations with many people. Justly or unjustly, that's not just going to change overnight. People who would be scared to death of installing "Linux" might just be persuaded to try this "Ubuntu" thing they've heard so much about. And they will learn that Ubuntu *is* Linux, and they will also learn they have choices between different Linux distributions. But the important thing is to get them using Ubuntu(Linux).
what happens when ubuntu becomes so popular that hardware/software companies or isp's start officially supporting "Ubuntu?" I see the same thing that happens now when you tell them you are trying to use linux or (insert distro here).
And also, Ubuntu's hardware detection makes it no easier than any other distro. Ubuntu cd's won't even boot on my computer in graphical mode but fedora works and actually gets my resolution right. On my other computer, ubuntu doesn't get the resolution right and is was a battle to make work.I started with linux with ubuntu and moved on to suse.
In far of ease of use, most every major distro about matches it. opensuse, fedora, mandriva and others i probably am forgetting are just as easy. From the way people talk about ubuntu, it seems they think every other distro is some intimidating process for a new user requireing a command line installer and manually configuring every device and setting in the system which is just not true.xtfamie
Ubuntu are currently reaping the benefits of their hardwork in pushing out their distro. So what if they currently overshadow XYZ; instead of fearing them shouldn't others learn from their efforts and try to over take them? If something does well don't slap it down, do better instead.
Anonymous,
"If something does well don't slap it down, do better instead".
I think that Ubuntu has been great, but others are doing it better e.g. Linux Mint.
JJMacey
Phoenix, Arizona
I guess you haven't looked. PCLinuxOS has been at the top of the Distrowatch page rankings for about 5 months ahead of Ubuntu.
Also, you think the Ubuntu community has pushed their distro forward. Think again. Billionaire Mark Shuttleworth has pushed Ubuntu forward with his millions of free CD's
Off-topic, I'd like to point out that the “Article Snatch” advert to the right is thoroughly disgusting and offensive. It should be removed immediately and whoever's responsible for it should feel ashamed of themself.
@Greg K. Nicholson
Off topic indeed. I checked the site in advert before approving it to be shown here, and decided that it is one of the subjects I could possibly write on my blog. The choice of the picture on the advert is the choice by the author of the corresponding site, so I don't intend to remove it.
My choice of a cow as a picture may be seems by vegetarians as offensive. But it is not good enough reason for me not to use it.
I do it because of my association with Gentoo Linux, who's Larry the Cow is the official symbol.
I'm sorry you're offended by the advert, but I assure you I only approve the adverts in those segments that are relevant to my blog.
Hi All,
I have to think that "Snatch Ad" was a bit out of order.
Hey, what was the purpose there any way?
JJMacey Dot Net
John
It's been an ad from Entrecard.
But it's now gone. In the future I will try and make a better effort by selecting more appropriate ads.
i first tried FC 5, then FC 6, Mandriva, SuSe, PCBSD, and lastt bu not least Ubuntu. Well...i'm still using it now. I am not saying that it's the best distro out there, but it's the best distro for me. All the people are different so it's in their nature to use different things. I don't think that there should be such a fuss about what Ubuntu has to be called. I don't give a damn if it's Linux or if it's GNU/Linux. All i care is that it gets the job done. I totally agree that this competition between distros is the best way to make more applications, better applications so that more people will dump Windows for a better OS (whatever you may call it). Hail Linus Torvalds :)
Hail Linus Torvalds :)
Radu,
I have to agree. His work is amazing! And, look what has happened. A free alternative to Microsoft.
Regards,
JJMacey Dot Net
Choke on it. Maybe you have two machines, or you don't use your computer enough to give a shit, but some of us need/want to be able to use our computers. Installing Gentoo with everything and compiling it all from source can take 2.5 days. Compare that to the 30 minutes most binary distributions take to install, and you have a whopping fuck off.
If you have two machines and don't need one of them for a long time, then maybe Gentoo is a good idea, but then you have to think about bandwidth. Some people have limited bandwidth. Things that take a day to download are generally going to be large. (the extra 1.5 day being compiling...)
Now you have an even bigger fuck off.
Compiling all this from source gets you what exactly? four seconds less than an average distribution to boot up, and a few milliseconds on opening an application? Not to mention it's unstable as shit.
Binary distributions are the way to go. I know Gentoo has a choice of using binarys during install, but then, why not use a binary distribution which is probably more stable?
Nice to know your operating system is the linux kernel, by the way. No GNU tools, no shells, just the kernel?
Really. Take your head out of your ass. "I'm using linux" "what version?" "linux 2.6" "which distribution?" "linux." is the conversation you'd be having if you referred to ubuntu as linux.
Take your zealotish shit and go fuck yourself.
Anonymous,
Jeez, don't hold back!
That was quite a rant. LOL!
JJMacey
Phoenix, Arizona
John Macey,
My bad, but it just pisses me off when someone types before thinking. ALWAYS, ALWAYS THINK BEFORE PUTTING YOUR FINGERS TO THE KEYS. Also, don't forget to proof read your crap before hitting submit. You'll start to sound like the dick that started this post.
Yea
Or you start posting such comments after 200 people a month ago already have said everything that was there to be said.
And you don't sign, which another way of hiding yourself.
I like these comments.
OK, that's enough.
Moderation is on.
Post a Comment