Ubuntu among list of dissapointing technolgies

EKRIUQ

Although I like using Ubuntu I have to agree with the comments

source: http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2242379/top-disappointing-technologies

Deep down even the hard-core evangelists will agree that Ubuntu has thus far been something of a disappointment. While Linux has definitely caught on in the enterprise server and database markets, the open-source OS has never really been able to move into the greater market.

Those who do use Linux as the primary OS for their home or work PC are still, by and large, tech-savvy users who comprise what used to be known as the 'hobbyist' market. The larger end-user crowd has not been able to warm up to Linux.

Ubuntu was supposed to change that. When the OS was launched, I remember all my Linux-advocate friends predicting that this would be the product to make the jump and challenge Microsoft in the consumer and workstation spaces. Nearly five years after its release, Ubuntu remains popular among Linux users, but has yet to really pick up any sort of real momentum in the greater desktop OS market.

Yes, getting rave reviews from the Linux community is nice, but get back to me when the housewives and pensioners, not just the IT pros and college students, start dumping Windows for Ubuntu.

ntlbell

Linux in not ready for mainstream shocker.

aidan_walsh

Usual reasons. The greater desktop market are more resistant to change than many people expect. Also, for many, Windows is their computer - they simply don't know about alternatives, or if they do they aren't "Windows enough" and can't be bothered learning how to change.

ntlbell

to be fair there's an awful lot of retards running linux now thanks to ubuntu who wouldn't have been able to do so otherwise.

they previously failed at install and for the rare one who got past that gave up after trying to configure PPP dial up scripts. now most of them can get to the desktop.

that's pretty impressive.

EKRIUQ

But Ubuntu is supposed to convince users that it's just as good as windows. I was trying the other day to show a friend the Ubuntu system and they were more baffled and couldn't see the benefits except it's won't get a virus. I guess most people just want a plug and play type OS with out any hassle and Ubuntu still doesn't live up to the expectations yet and hardware manufacturers seem to be ignoring it as well.

Guess I'll just keep trying to customise more

ntlbell

EKRIUQ wrote: »

But Ubuntu is supposed to convince users that it's just as good as windows. I was trying the other day to show a friend the Ubuntu system and they were more baffled and couldn't see the benefits except it's won't get a virus. I guess most people just want a plug and play type OS with out any hassle and Ubuntu still doesn't live up to the expectations yet and hardware manufacturers seem to be ignoring it as well.

Guess I'll just keep trying to customise more

you're making an assumption that they want/look for a replacement

most don't give a f*ck and have no idea why you would.

for the vast majority windows is a perfectly acceptable usable OS

28064212

aidan_walsh wrote: »

Usual reasons. The greater desktop market are more resistant to change than many people expect. Also, for many, Windows is their computer - they simply don't know about alternatives, or if they do they aren't "Windows enough" and can't be bothered learning how to change.

^ This tbh.

Windows 2000 has a larger market share than Linux, because it came with their computer, and they have no need (at least as far as they know) to change. Where Ubuntu is making inroads is with the likes of Dell who actually offer it as an initial install option. It's the only way Linux will ever have a chance to gain any kind of decent market share

towel401

The article isn't all too dissimilar to the 1999 YoLD phenomeon

Ubuntu is disappointing, what i'm waiting for is someone to make an oversimplified touch-screen based window manager for linux, very 2.0 and iphony with an app store and it might just bring linux to the desktop (and save client-side computing at the same time). down with this cloud based stuff.

An Fear Aniar

towel401 wrote: »

. down with this cloud based stuff.

+1.

So who's disappointed by Ubuntu's failure to break Linux into the big-time? I think most Linux users are quite happy to be "different". I'm not sure if I'd want Linux to go over 5%, might have to start checking out BSD.


.

TeaServer

28064212 wrote: »

^ This tbh.

Windows 2000 has a larger market share than Linux, because it came with their computer, and they have no need (at least as far as they know) to change. Where Ubuntu is making inroads is with the likes of Dell who actually offer it as an initial install option. It's the only way Linux will ever have a chance to gain any kind of decent market share

+1

I think a few more years of netbooks running Linux will see a shift in direction for Linux. Once you can buy something off the shelf with Linux, the HW manufacturers will take more notice. Simple as...

velocirafter

You may have seen this already but he goes through all the problems he sees with linux at the moment, fairly intersting

EKRIUQ

velocirafter wrote: »

You may have seen this already but he goes through all the problems he sees with linux at the moment, fairly intersting

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoYL4R3Te2s

You tube link fixed :pac:

velocirafter

cheers, I'm at work and youtube is blocked so I have no way of knowing if its working

ntlbell

TeaServer wrote: »

+1

I think a few more years of netbooks running Linux will see a shift in direction for Linux. Once you can buy something off the shelf with Linux, the HW manufacturers will take more notice. Simple as...

Asus have recently ran adverts with things like

"now runs better with windows"

the only reason it got on to netbooks imo was the hardware wasn't up to it, now the hardware has caught up with your average laptop they're moving away from it.

EKRIUQ

velocirafter wrote: »

cheers, I'm at work and youtube is blocked so I have no way of knowing if its working

Just after watching that video, and it seems to be a case that Linux needs a wheelbarrow load of money to advance the project and improve the current systems. At the moment it needs years to development to even come close to the mainstream market.

ntlbell

EKRIUQ wrote: »

Just after watching that video, and it seems to be a case that Linux needs a wheelbarrow load of money to advance the project and improve the current systems. At the moment it needs years to development to even come close to the mainstream market.

it doesn't _have_ to come to the main stream tho.

There's perfectly good main stream OS's that do the job perfectly.

It does what it does best in the server/DC market and it rocks.

There's no _need_ for it to go mainstream

kinesthetic

I disagree that GNU/Linux, in the form of Ubuntu, is not ready for the mainstream. I've had just as many problems with Windows (way more with Vista) as I have with Linux.

The issue as I perceive it is people don't want to change. There need to be a killer application thats Linux only and people will move. Take my housemate for example, she's been slagging me for using Linux for years but when the wifi drivers corruped and XP ground to a halt from krudd she was more than happy to jump ship when I waved an Ubuntu disk infront of her.

Yea there are a few hardware things that don't work, but more hardware will work under Linux than Mac.

Grudaire

I have to agree that Ubuntu was a slight disappointment when I tried it.

I have just yesterday installed Mint in my half hearted attept to become linux litterate, and I must say that it has (so far*) been easier then Ubuntu. One of the most annoying things about Ubuntu was that even youtube didn't work without downloading stuff and typing sudo a few times.
I must admit that it is really very very easy to get new programs that are compatible using the package manager.

I have to agree though. It takes willpower to change. Especially because it does take a bit of getting used to. The killer app would be cheaper PC's - IF it was promoted.


*if anyone has an up to date explaination of how to get an atheros wireless card going I would appreciate a PM

Capt'n Midnight

Cliste wrote: »

I have to agree that Ubuntu was a slight disappointment when I tried it.

I have just yesterday installed Mint in my half hearted attept to become linux litterate, and I must say that it has (so far*) been easier then Ubuntu. One of the most annoying things about Ubuntu was that even youtube didn't work without downloading stuff and typing sudo a few times.
I must admit that it is really very very easy to get new programs that are compatible using the package manager.

I have to agree though. It takes willpower to change. Especially because it does take a bit of getting used to. The killer app would be cheaper PC's - IF it was promoted.


*if anyone has an up to date explaination of how to get an atheros wireless card going I would appreciate a PM

you have to use sudo only because the codecs are patented and are not free to use in all countries, if it were free they would be in there already. Yeah it's just as annoying as knowing that a DVD player costs less than a DVD and the most expensive part in the DVD is probably the license to use the decoding technology. Pity they can't offer to integrate them for the cost that Microsoft or Apple pay per copy to use them

atheros - 9.04 picked my AR242X straight away - ath5k

cheaper PC's , look at the price of netbooks and entry level laptops, €350 will get you one , far cheaper than some full retail licenses.

velocirafter

the price of laptops running linux are not that much cheaper than ones that run windows because microsoft charge the manufacturer hardly anything to include it in the package. Once you get used to windows you're hooked!!

velocirafter

Just checked dell.com there is $50 in the difference between the same laptop running ubuntu or windows

ntlbell

kinesthetic wrote: »

I disagree that GNU/Linux, in the form of Ubuntu, is not ready for the mainstream. I've had just as many problems with Windows (way more with Vista) as I have with Linux.

The issue as I perceive it is people don't want to change. There need to be a killer application thats Linux only and people will move. Take my housemate for example, she's been slagging me for using Linux for years but when the wifi drivers corruped and XP ground to a halt from krudd she was more than happy to jump ship when I waved an Ubuntu disk infront of her.

Yea there are a few hardware things that don't work, but more hardware will work under Linux than Mac.

one house mate converted.

you should mail the author and tell him of the triumph.

Grudaire

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

you have to use sudo only because the codecs are patented and are not free to use in all countries, if it were free they would be in there already. Yeah it's just as annoying as knowing that a DVD player costs less than a DVD and the most expensive part in the DVD is probably the license to use the decoding technology. Pity they can't offer to integrate them for the cost that Microsoft or Apple pay per copy to use them

atheros - 9.04 picked my AR242X straight away - ath5k

cheaper PC's , look at the price of netbooks and entry level laptops, €350 will get you one , far cheaper than some full retail licenses.

I understand why they don't work straight off - but it's still more work in getting the computer to what I would consider basic working level. It seems a bit pointless because we all know that everyone just goes ahead and adds them in anyway (Or at least a significant number do)

The cheaper price really needs to be shown, not a hidden treasure to be found by people who know what to look for


(Mine's AR5007 - I came across this, but am nervous to try it after last time I tried with madwifi (There was tears!))

velocirafter

Cliste wrote: »

I understand why they don't work straight off - but it's still more work in getting the computer to what I would consider basic working level. It seems a bit pointless because we all know that everyone just goes ahead and adds them in anyway (Or at least a significant number do)

Surely the manufacturers could install a tweaked version of ubuntu with the restricted extras installed

ntlbell

velocirafter wrote: »

Surely the manufacturers could install a tweaked version of ubuntu with the restricted extras installed

is that not what dell do on the mini's etc?

velocirafter

ntlbell wrote: »

is that not what dell do on the mini's etc?

possibly well then pretty much everything should be working straight away

ntlbell

velocirafter wrote: »

possibly well then pretty much everything should be working straight away

AFAIK it does.

I'm not sure what problem it solves tho.

bushy...

EKRIUQ wrote: »

Although I like using Ubuntu I have to agree with the comments

Deep down even the hard-core evangelists will agree that Ubuntu has thus far been something of a disappointment. While Linux has definitely caught on in the enterprise server and database markets, the open-source OS has never really been able to move into the greater market.

You're mixing up Distro s , OS's and everything else.

Ubuntu is a Distro that uses the Linux kernel as its core.
Ubuntu sell support for their "server version" (afaik) .
It'd be well in their interest to get as many people using it as possible . Important things have sometimes been overlooked because of the rush to deliver the promised "user-friendlyness" when they hadn't ability/resources to do so.

Their powerful marketing is obviously works from the next bit of your post:

EKRIUQ wrote: »

Those who do use Linux as the primary OS for their home or work PC are still, by and large, tech-savvy users who comprise what used to be known as the 'hobbyist' market. The larger end-user crowd has not been able to warm up to Linux.

Most people just want something that works.

EKRIUQ wrote: »

Ubuntu was supposed to change that.

Who cares ? I'd only want people i know to use what works/suits them best .

EKRIUQ wrote: »

When the OS was launched, I remember all my Linux-advocate friends predicting that this would be the product to make the jump and challenge Microsoft in the consumer and workstation spaces. Nearly five years after its release, Ubuntu remains popular among Linux users, but has yet to really pick up any sort of real momentum in the greater desktop OS market.

Because for "the greater desktop OS market " , its sh*t*

"challenge Microsoft in the consumer and workstation spaces" - hardly

Microsoft will just release a new version to draw people back. Pushed enough , they'll release a version that will run linuxy stuff within it easily. They already have.

EKRIUQ wrote: »

Yes, getting rave reviews from the Linux community is nice, but get back to me when the housewives and pensioners, not just the IT pros and college students, start dumping Windows for Ubuntu.

Best thing "housewives and pensioners" could have done is got a Mac originally - its based on BSD stuff
Few viruses , things just work , don't need painful trawls though www.forums.ubuntu.broken.again

velocirafter

Cliste wrote: »

I understand why they don't work straight off - but it's still more work in getting the computer to what I would consider basic working level. It seems a bit pointless because we all know that everyone just goes ahead and adds them in anyway (Or at least a significant number do)
this, but am nervous to try it after last time I tried with madwifi (There was tears!))

ntlbell wrote: »

AFAIK it does.

I'm not sure what problem it solves tho.

The point I was trying to make was in relation to the first quote above. If the restricted extras are included on a preinstalled ubuntu laptop then you have a more functional OS that you would with windows.

The only time you have to do tweaking is if you're doing a fresh ubuntu install and god knows you will have a cart load of issues doing a fresh install windows aswell.

timmylew

the good thing is its free too download

Capt'n Midnight

velocirafter wrote: »

The only time you have to do tweaking is if you're doing a fresh ubuntu install and god knows you will have a cart load of issues doing a fresh install windows aswell.

you don't need to tweak it too much apart from the non-free components.

Windows
install office suite
install AV
install anti-malware
install pdf reader
and while the OS will patch itself and some microsoft products , you have to patch the other stuff your self Depending on how much you value your time this makes windows even more expensive.

it takes a long time to get a brand new pre-installed windows machine up to the level of functionality of a Knoppix Live CD , and that's for the normal everyday stuff that the average user would do , not the fancy stuff

marco_polo

Been putting together a new PC for the past few days.

I had to use Ubuntu, which automatically detected my DLINK PCI Wireless card, to download the drivers for said card for my new Vista install :pac:. 1-0 so far.

velocirafter

marco_polo wrote: »

Been putting together a new PC for the past few days.

I had to use Ubuntu, which automatically detected my DLINK PCI Wireless card, to download the drivers for said card for my new Vista install :pac:. 1-0 so far.

point in case!!

turgon

You cant play mp3 files or some video off ubuntu without downloading codecs. Now I dont mind, and the process is extremely quick, but the problem lies if you dont have internet.

velocirafter

you cant play alot of codecs in windows without downloading them either.


I do think they should include the restricted formats and that sort of stuff in the distro as standard though. Even if they made a point of calling it restriced ubuntu (rubuntu maybe even ) and then have a regular version of ubuntu without the closed source stuff for the hardcores.