Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
hardy heron
-
24-04-2008 1:07pm#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
Pity you had a bad experience. The guides are pretty good on the forums. You're a lot more likely to find a guide for getting your card working under older verisons for now. When all else fails, you can use ndiswrapper and the Windows driver for the card.Slutmonkey57b wrote: »Have downloaded and installed using the Windows installer - booted fine, but I'm already getting bad impressions. The wireless network troubleshooter tells you to look for "hardware information" and "device manager" under the preferences menu.
Shame neither of them are there.
And the help docs don't turn up a result under either name.
Nor does the search function on the web forums (though it handily reformats my search terms into effectively the opposite of what I searched for without telling me.)
And yet again it doesn't enable wireless by default, nor does it say "hmmm no network connection, have you tried .... <whatever>, you moron?. Just sits there and say "erk! broken!".
And the default desktop and colour scheme are stomach turning.
I'll stop before I get ranty and see if it's in a better mood this time.
Can't say I've had that hassle with the forum and search terms. Have you tried using double quote marks around your terms to prevent any changes to your search terms?
The brown/orange colours are actually refreshingly different (polar opposite to Redmond Blue anyway
). 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Slutmonkey57b wrote: »Add/Remove programs and synaptic default to downloading things from internet respositorys instead of the install CD. This is both unecessary and, given Linux's spotty wireless support, brainless. AND, when they don't have a connection, they don't have the smarts to, oh, I don't know, maybe.... attempt a different install location? Ask for the CD maybe? Or give you the choice beforehand?.
It used to check the install CD first, but due to demand from the community they changed it to the internet. As a nerd you should appreciate, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/6483/
Your right though, it should look for other locations. What did you do about it though? You should have posted your message on the ubuntu forums not here. It can actually get fixed there! The guys at ubuntu are very good at listening to the community, as are alot of different distibutions.Slutmonkey57b wrote: »given Linux's spotty wireless support
Linux supports 100% of the wireless cards that manufactures have written drivers for. As support for linux grows, hopefully we will see actual drivers being written by manufactures.Slutmonkey57b wrote: »Last time, I couldn't believe kubuntu expected me to unlock highly secure areas of the system, like the mouse control panel (changing the mouse wheel scrolling speed being a notorious hacker trick). This time, I am apparently expected to enter a password to access my own f*cking hard drives in my own f*cking machine, on a system where I am the only registered f*cking user, and which is not connected to any network (not for want of trying mind you)
This is how linux / unix works. If you want access to everything login as root. Or change your access control in the control panel. FYI, largely the reason why windows is plagued with malware is because of this. If you use Vista, you will see pop up messages all the time asking you permission to install programs access areas etc. They are trying to rectify their ways!
The root accout is disabled by default in ubuntu. To activate it, at the command line type sudo root passwdSlutmonkey57b wrote: »Unlike kubuntu, the default video player actually knew when it didn't have a codec, and knew where to find it, and downloaded it. Something actually worked! Then I try and open the same mp3 in the default audio player... and it tells me I don't have the codec. I check the codec again. "packaged for <whatever>". At this point I really couldn't face looking it up to see if, as I suspected, each player wanted its own copies of the necessary codecs. I really wouldn't be suprised.
You have to remember that linux is free. They can't ship the codecs with the system. You also can't criticise lnux for one application. If you want system wide codec support, go into add/remove and click the codecs you want to install and they will be installed system wide.
The last operating system I used that wasn't linux /solaris was XP. It did not have the codecs installed from a fresh install and did not have the ability to install them manually as Ubuntu does. I am interested, does any one know does Vista or the Mac ship with them? ( They probably don't to save the euro or so per copy)
Linux is by no means perfect, just like all the other operating systems out there. but it is growing at a phenomenal rate. If you have issues with it, get them fixed yourself. That is what the whole thing is about. Go the forum of the distribution you use and post your complaint. If others agree it will be changed. I bet if we tried we could list 100 things wrong with any OS. Don't just say its f*cking brainless.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
stereo_steve wrote: »It used to check the install CD first, but due to demand from the community they changed it to the internet. As a nerd you should appreciate, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/6483/
Your right though, it should look for other locations. What did you do about it though? You should have posted your message on the ubuntu forums not here. It can actually get fixed there! The guys at ubuntu are very good at listening to the community, as are alot of different distibutions.
Well, if that's what the community voted for, then that's what they're getting. Even given that, though, there's no reason why the change couldn't have been made to go <search internet> IF <no internet> THEN <ask for CD>. How many lines of code does that really involve? That's not "responding to the community", that's either plain brainlessness or plain bad coding. It doesn't even count as lazy coding, it's that trivial.Linux supports 100% of the wireless cards that manufactures have written drivers for. As support for linux grows, hopefully we will see actual drivers being written by manufactures.
Which doesn't change the issue that wireless support is not reliable. My problem wasn't even that wireless support isn't good. My problem is everyone knows wireless support isn't great, and yet the devs have a "head in the sand" approach to the whole issue and haven't set things up so that people with no net access can still fix problems or install basic software. Again, that makes no sense at all, unless you're either blind to your OS's failings, or making very stupid decisions.This is how linux / unix works. If you want access to everything login as root. Or change your access control in the control panel. FYI, largely the reason why windows is plagued with malware is because of this.
Windows is plagued with malware because users of closed-box machines are trying to access their own hard drives? Or because someone is trying to access the scroll wheel speed on their mouse? Give me a fuccking break.
Windows is plagued with malware because it's the hacker's #1 target.If you use Vista, you will see pop up messages all the time asking you permission to install programs access areas etc. They are trying to rectify their ways!
I used vista. It never asked me why I wanted to change my mouse settings, or asked for a password before it would let me access my own documents. I might do so before it let me delete system files though. That makes sense.The root accout is disabled by default in ubuntu. To activate it, at the command line type sudo root passwd
Why should I have to do that to change a mouse setting? Or get at my hard drives? Sure I should have to do it to install a kernel mode driver. But a mouse setting?You have to remember that linux is free. They can't ship the codecs with the system. You also can't criticise lnux for one application. If you want system wide codec support, go into add/remove and click the codecs you want to install and they will be installed system wide.
Oh, I have no issue with OS's not shipping with codecs. My issue is the default video player auto-installs codecs I need. But other default apps on the same machine can't use said codecs. That's just stupid. XP has the same problem - but if WMP downloads a codec, then Media Player Classic, or VLC can use it as well.
Blaming the apps rather than the OS dev's doesn't fly either - they have the choice to use whatever apps they want in their distro. How difficult is is to say "Hey - lets choose two apps out of the hundreds of open source alternatives that actually work together and don't require the user to install two copies of the same codecs? A) It isn't difficult - so it must be brainlessness.Linux is by no means perfect, just like all the other operating systems out there. but it is growing at a phenomenal rate. If you have issues with it, get them fixed yourself. That is what the whole thing is about. Go the forum of the distribution you use and post your complaint. If others agree it will be changed. I bet if we tried we could list 100 things wrong with any OS. Don't just say its f*cking brainless.
The OS itself isn't necessarily brainless. But some of the most basic, obvious choices that have been made in its setup and presentation are so stupid as to verge on the chewing-your-arm-off variety.
As pointed out above, Hardy (morelike Laurel and Hardy amirite) is supposed to be ubuntu's version of a stable, conservative, long-term-support release. Yet:- They've used a BETA internet browser as the default. The argument "V 2.0 won't be around in 3 years" only highlights the stupidity - neither will the f.cking BETA. And the BETA isn't supported officially anyway! What does this say about their ideas of stable, long-term code quality? Answer: A lot more than they'd like.
- They're advertising a brand new way of installing - Wubi - and making a big noise about how it's the "safe" option. Which is so new.. it's unreliable. It might be a great bit of coding, and a wonderful tool. But a new, relatively untested install method that (in my case) could **** up your machine is NOT something that should be part of an LTS release that you're hoping to sell as an enterprise-ready desktop.
- The most basic documentation is either unreliable, or relies on internet-connected community-run forums. TechNet and DevNet are the prime examples of what conservative industry buyers want and expect from OS support. Hate or love MS, they know how to keep devs and mass-license buyers appeased. Forums are a great option. They shouldn't be the only option, at least not for the market ubuntu are aiming at.
See, none of the above problems is a "Sale killer" if you like, all on its own. None of the problems are insurmountable, in most cases they're obvious and trivial to solve. The problem is that when you sit back and look at it, you start to see glaring examples of very very bad, stupid, or lazy planning and execution that has gone into it over the whole project.
Choices like the ones above all have the same ring to them: "Eh, whatever, good enough, slap it in, we'll fix it in the next release six months down the line." That's fine for an app. It's entirely the wrong way to think about an OS.
Windows, of course, has the opposite problem: "Whoa! Don't take that out! Some useless **** is still using that feature from 30 years ago! You'll break it!"0 -
-
-
-
I'm after trashing my brand new Hardy upgrade by accidentally removing my modules dir like a spanner
so I might reinstall from scratch tonight. It'll be interesting to see if there's any difference with a fresh install (seemed fine after the upgrade from Gutsy (actually, better - my graphics card was fully supported, so now I'm running full Gnome graphical effects)) 0 -
-
You know for a while there , i considered not replying to your post. Not because of what you said, just the sheer length of it!Slutmonkey57b wrote: »Well, if that's what the community voted for, then that's what they're getting. Even given that, though, there's no reason why the change couldn't have been made to go <search internet> IF <no internet> THEN <ask for CD>. How many lines of code does that really involve? That's not "responding to the community", that's either plain brainlessness or plain bad coding. It doesn't even count as lazy coding, it's that trivial.
Yeah I agree here, although it doesn't really serve much of a point at the moment. Maybe later when there are DVD's with with loads of different packages on it. I think there are ubuntu DVD's now with different gui's?? Everything on the CD is installed during the installation. I can't think if a reason why you would need to read off the CD. Unless you purposely removed a package and wanted to reinstall an older version at a later date?Which doesn't change the issue that wireless support is not reliable. My problem wasn't even that wireless support isn't good. My problem is everyone knows wireless support isn't great, and yet the devs have a "head in the sand" approach to the whole issue and haven't set things up so that people with no net access can still fix problems or install basic software. Again, that makes no sense at all, unless you're either blind to your OS's failings, or making very stupid decisions.
What can they do here though? Change Ubuntu from a CD to a DVD that includes loads of windows drivers and have a script to use them with ndiswrapper? Could be an option although they probably would need permission from the writers of the proprietary drivers and its messy.
If we look at windows, how do they do it any better? When was the last time you saw windows install and it found every driver? Sure you can buy a windows PC with all the drivers in place but the same is true for Ubuntu.
I don't understand what you mean, they have not setup a way for people to get basic software? Is it not the same as other operating system? You go to the website of the program you want (on a pc with net access) copy the .deb on a mem stick and put it in your pc with no net access. Double click the deb. I don't mean to sound rude but do you want the ubuntu dev's to come over to your house and do it?? Maybe you want a CD with loads of debs on it? I don't think there is demand for one, but you could create it?Windows is plagued with malware because users of closed-box machines are trying to access their own hard drives? Or because someone is trying to access the scroll wheel speed on their mouse? Give me a fuccking break.
Windows is plagued with malware because it's the hacker's #1 target.
No doubt its the number one target. I definitely agree but its the way its setup that makes it so easy for attacks. In windows you are the administrator when you log on. If a website tries to run a bit a code, through a flaw in IE , firefox etc windows will permit it to run. The same is not true linux, unix etcI used vista. It never asked me why I wanted to change my mouse settings, or asked for a password before it would let me access my own documents. I might do so before it let me delete system files though. That makes sense.
Why should I have to do that to change a mouse setting? Or get at my hard drives? Sure I should have to do it to install a kernel mode driver. But a mouse setting?
When you go to the system menu. There is the preferences and administration tab. I pretty sure everything the preferences tab requires no password, which includes mouse configuration. Am I wrong? It doesn't prompt me when I try to change a mouse setting. So you need to enter a password for system options, things which would affect all users on the system and again you are not the administrator. From a quick look this includes Hardware drivers, language options,system time, addition of users etc.
It doesn't let you access your harddrives? I don't understand. Do you mean the system files? Once again your not the administrator. Log in a the administrator if it bothers you.
If your refering to other harddrives in your computer then you didn't mount them when you were installing Ubuntu. Did you install Ubuntu with your harddrives unplugged because you were worried ubuntu might mess them up? Or possibly you just didn't mount them.
This is just a matter of saying were you want them to be on your system. For example, if you mounted them to /home/yourname/Desktop/harddrivename then thats were they will be added to the file system on boot up. No password to be entered ever when you access them as a user.Oh, I have no issue with OS's not shipping with codecs. My issue is the default video player auto-installs codecs I need. But other default apps on the same machine can't use said codecs. That's just stupid. XP has the same problem - but if WMP downloads a codec, then Media Player Classic, or VLC can use it as well.
I have never experienced this. Not saying your wrong, its just the first thing I do after an install is click about 30 things in the add/remove panel and walk away for an hour. I agree codec support should be system wide. Can't debate this though because I never experienced it.
By the way I'm pretty sure VLC uses its own codecs irrespective of whatever codecs are on a system no matter what operating system its on. VLC is not brainless! Could be wrong about this paragraph though.Blaming the apps rather than the OS dev's doesn't fly either - they have the choice to use whatever apps they want in their distro. How difficult is is to say "Hey - lets choose two apps out of the hundreds of open source alternatives that actually work together and don't require the user to install two copies of the same codecs? A) It isn't difficult - so it must be brainlessness.
Assuming your correct, I think its excessive to call the whole thing brainless over that issue. Again can't argue, never experienced this.[*]They've used a BETA internet browser as the default. The argument "V 2.0 won't be around in 3 years" only highlights the stupidity - neither will the f.cking BETA. And the BETA isn't supported officially anyway! What does this say about their ideas of stable, long-term code quality? Answer: A lot more than they'd like.
Is it ideal? No. But I believe its the best of a bad situation. Many agree that Firefox 3b5 is far better already than firefox 2 ever was. You would have a hard time finding people to disagree. Aside from the extensions, which coming out very fast. Not really ubuntus fault. I have my two working now. Adblock plus and greasemonkey.
Firefox 3 is out in a month. This ubuntu release is being suppoted for 3 years. To roll out Firefox 2 just for the sake of one month is not good. It would make for much more unstable system. FWIW there is a new ubuntu release in a month 8.4.1 only difference being the firefox change. Something to consider is that the owners of the systems that use firefox are the ones with net access. It means that their firefox will be updated automatically.[*]They're advertising a brand new way of installing - Wubi - and making a big noise about how it's the "safe" option. Which is so new.. it's unreliable. It might be a great bit of coding, and a wonderful tool. But a new, relatively untested install method that (in my case) could **** up your machine is NOT something that should be part of an LTS release that you're hoping to sell as an enterprise-ready desktop.
I've never used it I don't know what its like. What exactly did it do to your computer? I'm not going to say anything about it, cos more than likely it would be inaccurate But just because its new isn't a problem, if its buggy that is an issue. Other than you though I haven't heard any issues with it.[*]The most basic documentation is either unreliable, or relies on internet-connected community-run forums. TechNet and DevNet are the prime examples of what conservative industry buyers want and expect from OS support. Hate or love MS, they know how to keep devs and mass-license buyers appeased. Forums are a great option. They shouldn't be the only option, at least not for the market ubuntu are aiming at.
[/LIST]
I haven't looked for documentation on ubuntu so I have nothing to say about it. Other than the fact I googled ubuntu docs and got this http://doc.ubuntu.com/ It looks like they are working on it alright. Once again linux is a community, it needs people like you and me to contribute to it. Whats the windows documentation like? I'm sure its good but something I also never looked at while I was a windows user.See, none of the above problems is a "Sale killer" if you like, all on its own. None of the problems are insurmountable, in most cases they're obvious and trivial to solve. The problem is that when you sit back and look at it, you start to see glaring examples of very very bad, stupid, or lazy planning and execution that has gone into it over the whole project.
Choices like the ones above all have the same ring to them: "Eh, whatever, good enough, slap it in, we'll fix it in the next release six months down the line." That's fine for an app. It's entirely the wrong way to think about an OS.
Windows, of course, has the opposite problem: "Whoa! Don't take that out! Some useless **** is still using that feature from 30 years ago! You'll break it!"
Alot of the stuff you have complained about I have no issue with and disagree on many things you see as troublesome.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
stereo_steve wrote: »You know for a while there , i considered not replying to your post. Not because of what you said, just the sheer length of it!
Good point. You probably won't like the length of this one then!I can't think if a reason why you would need to read off the CD.
Because your net access isn't working?What can they do here though? Change Ubuntu from a CD to a DVD that includes loads of windows drivers and have a script to use them with ndiswrapper? Could be an option although they probably would need permission from the writers of the proprietary drivers and its messy.
I'm not proposing that they include every driver on the install disk. My point here was that they made a decision whereby NDISwrapper (one of the most useful and necessary tools in linux) isn't part of the default install, but PalmOS device support is. What kind of lunatic logic is that? Who thinks to themselves "Hey, we've got 300 million users who need NDISwrapper, vs 500 that need Palm sync support. Let's leave Palm support in and bugger the wifi drivers"??
Answer: Someone who shouldn't be designing an OS.It doesn't let you access your harddrives? I don't understand. Do you mean the system files? Once again your not the administrator. Log in a the administrator if it bothers you.
The problem we're talking about is mounting hard drives after a clean install. The mouse issue is from kubuntu and I didn't have it with Laurel (on the other hand kubuntu had a full logitech driver). While not defaulting to administrator access is admirable, asking me for a password to access my own drives is something that the designers and I profoundly disagree on.Alot of the stuff you have complained about I have no issue with and disagree on many things you see as troublesome.
Maybe we're approaching this from different angles. You're quite right that none of this issues is "big". I don't expect the devs to come round to my house and fix everything for me, and it's not that I'm not prepared to fiddle.
I am choosing to look at this not from the perspective of "look how far they've come" or "how can I contribute?", and there's a simple reason for that - Canonical is making a big noise about how Ubuntu is up to the standard of being a replacement for windows - not just an "advanced Linux distro". It's touted not only as a viable alternative, but as a potential sale to mass corporate users and volume licenses. From that perspective, I am looking at it as follows: Are they right, or are they full of shi.t? After my kubuntu install, I came to the conclusion that their idea of "stable release" and mine were very different. The blurb about Laurel'n'Hardy is that is an LTS "very stable" release. Having viewed it, one thing is clear - clearer than it was with the last version:
They are nowhere near being able to design a windows replacement.
Not because the driver support's not there, not because they need more members of the community to muck in, and not because they need more co-operation with closed software and hardware vendors.
It's because some of the decisions they've made in the architecture, and the design choices they've made in the way the OS is structured, are beyond poor. They're not amateur, either. It's as if they've looked at the OS's shortcomings, held a very simple solution in their hands, and stuck their heads right in the sand with their fingers in their ears singing LAA LAA LAA. Windows devs have done this as well. But the difference is that the windows devs don't have to persuade people to switch (unless they're one of the unfortunates trying to flog retail copies of Vista). The three examples I highlighted at the end of my last post are all pretty small issues. Nothing life threatening. What's worrying about them is not that they're there, it's that Canonical don't see them as a problem. They should, because those decisions are telling the outside world a lot about how and why architecture decisions are being made, more than Canonical seem to realise. They're telling the world "Hey, we've slapped in a lot of stuff here, some of it's pretty cool, check it out", then when the "Ehh.. but it doesn't work" problem rears its ugly head, the logic is "Meh, whaddya gonna do, it'll be fixed a few months down the line, fuggedaboudit."
I'll go back to my favourite example to highlight how that thinking is exposed; Firefox Beta. Here's what it tells us:- They had a release schedule set.
- One of their most important release apps wasn't going to be ready on time.
- Rather than delay the release, they slapped in the Beta version and told everybody they'd upgrade the release in a month.
Here's what it actually tells us: "If it's not ready, or it's not working right, we'll whack it in anyway and maybe we'll fix it later. Fu.ck it, it's your problem now, you don't like it make your own, why should we delay the release just because it doesn't work/isn't finished/hasn't been tested?"
That's not going to sell well to volume licensers or corporate server admins. Red Hat and other corporate Linux distros made sales because they've learned that. Ubuntu is getting a lot of goodwill changeovers, particularly playing the "free vs. microsoft tax" arguments with local government/education buyers. But that will only take them so far, and it won't allow them to get away with some of the frankly shoddy work they're doing on the OS.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Slutmonkey57b wrote: »Good point. You probably won't like the length of this one then!
The problem we're talking about is mounting hard drives after a clean install. The mouse issue is from kubuntu and I didn't have it with Laurel (on the other hand kubuntu had a full logitech driver). While not defaulting to administrator access is admirable, asking me for a password to access my own drives is something that the designers and I profoundly disagree on.
Sigh, just add them to your fstab and stop complaining! We are not talking about Kubuntu in this thread. We are talking about Ubuntu the primary operating operating system of Canonical. I have Ubuntu and never have to put in passwords to access my drives.Canonical is making a big noise about how Ubuntu is up to the standard of being a replacement for windows - not just an "advanced Linux distro". It's touted not only as a viable alternative, but as a potential sale to mass corporate users and volume licenses. From that perspective, I am looking at it as follows: Are they right, or are they full of shi.t? After my kubuntu install, I came to the conclusion that their idea of "stable release" and mine were very different. The blurb about Laurel'n'Hardy is that is an LTS "very stable" release. Having viewed it, one thing is clear - clearer than it was with the last version:
They are nowhere near being able to design a windows replacement.
Eh ... it is. I find it vastly superior than anything I have used before. The majority if things you are saying are completely untrue.
1. You need passwords to access your harddrive. False
2. You need a password to change a mouse setting . False
3 When totem installs a codec it is not system wide. False (tested this on a new install I did yesterday.)
4. You complain about Ubuntu not looking on the install CD before checking on the internet. Why , why, why would it do this? Everything is installed from the CD. There is not reason to install anything from it later???
5 The "jags" when using firefox I experienced this for week when hardy as still in Alpha. It was fixed with an updated video driver through the repositories.stuck their heads right in the sand with their fingers in their ears singing LAA LAA LAA.....I didn't have it with Laurel
These kind of comments really don't help your argument, even when you put them in bold.aexamples I highlighted at the end of my last post are all pretty small issues. Nothing life threatening. What's worrying about them is not that they're there, it's that Canonical don't see them as a problem. They should, because those decisions are telling the outside world a lot
I don't see the problem either? Aside from a couple of things I agreed on, eg documentation.I'll go back to my favourite example to highlight how that thinking is exposed; Firefox Beta. Here's what it tells us:- They had a release schedule set.
- One of their most important release apps wasn't going to be ready on time.
- Rather than delay the release, they slapped in the Beta version and told everybody they'd upgrade the release in a month.
Here's what it actually tells us: "If it's not ready, or it's not working right, we'll whack it in anyway and maybe we'll fix it later. Fu.ck it, it's your problem now, you don't like it make your own, why should we delay the release just because it doesn't work/isn't finished/hasn't been tested?"
Firefox 3 in its current state is extremely stable and far far better than Firefox 2. I remember reading that there were 700,000 users of it about a month ago prior to the hardy release. I don't think its a problem. If there was/is a security flaw it will be patched as soon as its found. If there were issues with Firefox 3 then the LTS version probably would have not been released.That's not going to sell well to volume licensers or corporate server admins. Red Hat and other corporate Linux distros made sales because they've learned that. Ubuntu is getting a lot of goodwill changeovers, particularly playing the "free vs. microsoft tax" arguments with local government/education buyers. But that will only take them so far, and it won't allow them to get away with some of the frankly shoddy work they're doing on the OS.
Again, shoddy? Seriously! Most people, definitely myself wouldn't see it as free vs MS sales tax. Microsoft made their product they can certainly charge what they want for it. I see it as caged vs freedom. Just one example this is brainstorm.ubuntu.com If people ask for something in enough numbers it happens.
I'm gonna have to exit this thread aswell. Its taking far to much time to write this. I'm sure you'll agree! I do love linux though and I use Ubuntu because of the various versions of linux I've used, I find Ubuntu to be the best and it has a fantastic community!0 -
-
stereo_steve wrote: »Eh ... it is. I find it vastly superior than anything I have used before. The majority if things you are saying are completely untrue.
How is it superior? Is it faster? Smoother? More stable? Less bloat? Looks prettier? What functionality does it provide that other OS's don't? I couldn't find a single (positive) unique, interesting, or more importantly, useful thing about it. It doesn't allow me to do anything I haven't already been doing on some other OS for several years now.1. You need passwords to access your harddrive. False
What? I must have been hallucinating when I saw a box pop up and ask me for the administrator password when I wanted to open the hard drive then?
Disagree with me if you want, but don't call me a liar.2. You need a password to change a mouse setting . False
Again, I must have been seeing things? And seeing as I made a point of saying that this happened in kubuntu, not ubuntu, you're accusing me of lying based on a deliberate misconception.3 When totem installs a codec it is not system wide. False (tested this on a new install I did yesterday.)
That did not happen with me. Again, were you looking over my shoulder? Don't call me a liar.4. You complain about Ubuntu not looking on the install CD before checking on the internet. Why , why, why would it do this? Everything is installed from the CD. There is not reason to install anything from it later???
Because, as I so carefully pointed out, IF you don't have net access, you can't
A) get help to fix your problem;
install NDISwrapper which would enable you to get online in the first place. A less brainless designer would have thought of that, and made them part of the default install, or put out a DVD image with optional popular (even voted by the community) apps, drivers, and tools on it.
Ubuntu would have every right to not bother looking at the install disk and jump straight to searching the net, IF it didn't have such a well-deserved reputation for incomplete wireless support. It doesn't, so it has no business assuming that the internet is its first port of call.5 The "jags" when using firefox I experienced this for week when hardy as still in Alpha. It was fixed with an updated video driver through the repositories.
Other people (on the forums, not just me) are not experiencing the same performance. Again, they are not liars just because you don't agree with them. Just because your specific hardware is working, does not mean everyone's is.I don't see the problem either? Aside from a couple of things I agreed on, eg documentation.
Then you're missing the whole point of what I was arguing about.Firefox 3 in its current state is extremely stable and far far better than Firefox 2. I remember reading that there were 700,000 users of it about a month ago prior to the hardy release. I don't think its a problem. If there was/is a security flaw it will be patched as soon as its found. If there were issues with Firefox 3 then the LTS version probably would have not been released.
Again, you're missing the point I was making. As to whether the LTS would "probably" not have been released, that depends on how much faith you have in Canonical's commitment to Quality Control. I have very little.Again, shoddy? Seriously! Most people, definitely myself wouldn't see it as free vs MS sales tax. Microsoft made their product they can certainly charge what they want for it. I see it as caged vs freedom. Just one example this is brainstorm.ubuntu.com If people ask for something in enough numbers it happens.
Yes, shoddy. Not up to standard. Not good enough.
Useful requests on the front page of brainstorm, then:Integrated Compiz-Check
Written by artir the 2 May 08 at 11:53. Category: Look and Feel. New
Compiz-Check(http://forum.compiz-fusion.org/showthread.php?t=8167) is a script that checks your system and sees why you cant run compiz. So, with this script, Ubuntu will say: "Desktop effects couldnt been enabled because X" instead of just "D.E. couldnt been enabled."Migrate settings like on a Mac
Written by terra the 2 May 08 at 04:18. Category: Installation. New
There should be a way to duplicate settings from one installation to another. Mac can do this...Have a device manager
Written by ToSsMaStR the 1 May 08 at 21:33. Category: Look and Feel. New
Have a device manager, similar to windows, where one can see what devices are functioning properly and what needs to be installed and what not.Undo when renaming files
Written by bdamer the 1 May 08 at 21:43. Category: Accessibility. New
When renaming a file in nautilus, there is no way to undo changes made while typing. Just as in most other applications, the last changes should be reverted when the user hits CTRL+Z.apt-get from install CD should use the CD when useful
Written by tgape the 1 May 08 at 22:18. Category: Installation. New
Install CDs which are not full live filesystems generally have many of the install packages on them. However, apparently apt-get prefers getting them from online, because the install I just initiated a couple hours ago is fetching *everything* from the net, despite the fact that many of the packages are on the CD, and at least some of those are the latest version.
IMHO, if a version of a package exists on a CD, it should use that package, and only download a patch file, if that saves any time. If the version on the CD is the latest, it should certainly not download from the net - doing so wastes ubuntu.com bandwidth and consumes additional time.Ubuntu pre-installed on the usb drives
Written by eyerouge the 2 May 08 at 04:06. Category: System. New
Canonical store is already selling 1 GB usb flash drives. Why not start selling 2, 3 or 4 GB drives with latest Ubuntu pre-installed on them?
It's actually quite astonishing this isn't in the store already.
For the record, I chose from only the most popular items on the frontpage (~50 votes+), with the exception of the CD install issue, which I included because of its humorous value (and technical discussion) and I didn't go out of my way to make ubuntu look bad.
What do we have?
People want an equivalent to DxDiag.
People want an equivalent to "Files and Settings Transfer Wizard"
People want an equivalent to device manager. (as opposed to a help file that claims there is one when there isn't)
People want the file navigator to support Undo. (Like explorer does).
Someone thinks that defaulting to install off the net is a waste of time and bandwith considering the up-to-date files he's downloading are already on the install CD!
http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/usb.html - Pity nobody else thought of selling pre-installed linux pen drives....
People want features that other OS's have been sporting for years!I'm gonna have to exit this thread aswell. Its taking far to much time to write this. I'm sure you'll agree! I do love linux though and I use Ubuntu because of the various versions of linux I've used, I find Ubuntu to be the best and it has a fantastic community!
I understand I'm coming across as a big negative basher. I wish that was because I wasn't! But this install was my "second chance" for ubuntu to prove itself. Not only did it not prove itself, I found the whole experience more dissapointing this time.0 -
Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 93,596 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 91834
selling ? , you can request a free ubuntu CDSlutmonkey wrote:http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/usb.html - Pity nobody else thought of selling pre-installed linux pen drives....
almost every live CD can be run from a USB key
not just linux free dos and solaris clones also run from usb
you can cheat and have a dos format usb key + loadlin
0 price tagPeople want features that other OS's have been sporting for years!
security
no restrictions on number of processors / clients / services they can run without purchasing additional licenses0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
Advertisement