nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The whole ubuntu thing...

elix

Maybe this isn't the best thread to post to start myself off here on boards.ie (just joined) but is it just me or everywhere you go where there is a linux or in the case of boards, a unix forum, there is posts about ubuntu.
Like, dont get me wrong, ubuntu has possibly changed the global perseption of linux, introducing it to a wider audience.
But it is not the definition of Linux. Its not he be all and end all. or is it?

What just annoys me is the whole perception that "linux is ubuntu".
when people have come to me complaining about how linux just doesnt work for them and going on about it, suprizingly failing to mention theyre running ubuntu, and then they don't understand when i reply, "thats not a linux issue it's an ubuntu issue, i dont use ubuntu." (Fedora atm, maybe moving to CentOS)

Other than that Is hard to go anywhere without ubuntu popping up in the conversation like this great quote from a debianforum

"Hey Susie, did you douche today"
"Yes Dolly I did, and I did it while using ubuntu. I love ubuntu."
"Susie, I hate ubuntu but I am glad you are fresh....even if ubuntu isn't"

Anyway, how do you feel about the ubuntu phenomenon?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Amalgam

Ubuntu is updated and covered well, I used to use Knoppix but it has gone a bit wobbly of late.. Linux users need support as much as Windows users do, I don't know why you wouldn't be happy for the coverage it gets. I can understand your post, but there will always be a point where one distro or another dominates the field for a bit. It's Ubuntu's turn at the moment.

I use Linux Mint on my netbook, Ubuntu on the main laptop, XP on the desktop.

Khannie

I think it's a good OS to introduce people to linux. Nice and user friendly. Nice interface. etc.

I use it in work on my dev box and xubuntu at home on my laptop (which is actually a work machine). I have gentoo on 2 boxes too. Each has its advantage / disadvantge. Honestly, I think even having people know that linux exists is a step in the right direction. Most people (in my experience) have never heard of linux.

merlin39

Having used ubuntu, centos and suse, i have to say that ubuntu as a desktop is the best.

Dartz

I use it because I think it's a Good OS.

I like how it responds. I like the Xfce environment. I like how you can grab it by the balls and tell it what to do sometimes, rather than wade through wizard after wizard only to be told 'A problem has been detected with no solution, please tell Microsoft'.

The installer is good for normal people... who don't understand a disk partition from a byte. They only drawback they have is that they assume all computers will behave like Windows.... because Windows == Computer. Once they get over that hump, they're fine. I gave an old laptop with it to a granny... never used a computer before in her life.... she sniffs around the web now. Hell, I even taught her how to pirate Vera Lynn!

I don't use it because it's Linux. or cool, or nerdy.... I use it because it bloody well works, does what I tell it to do, and doesn't get snitty about activation, reinstallation or just plain running. It gets on with the job at hand.

I started with 7.04. I have had in that time.. one Kernel Oops yesterday (the machine kept running), and one Kernel Panic.

That and 'sudo apt-get dist-upgrade'

It just sort of....works.

aidan_walsh

Anyway, how do you feel about the ubuntu phenomenon?

I like it far more than things were 5-10 years ago. That said, "hard core" Linux users were complaining then that it was too easy to use then too so I don't see that ending any time soon.

D4RK ONION

I use Ubuntu because it starts up quickly, it opens files quickly and efficiently, it's well supported and because it has wobbly windows. No, I have haven't the foggiest about how to properly use the terminal, or how to write a script, but does that make me some sort of "lesser" Linux user? If it does, I genuinely don't think I want to be part of that community.

People complain the linux doesn't get the recognition it deserves, but then come out and slam the best chance that linux has of breaking into the mainstream audience... make up your [other people, not OP

] damn mind!!

Naikon

I love using the command line and generally messing around with
Linux and other Unix-like systems. This does not mean new users
should not use Linux. D4RK ONION seems pretty happy with it.

Windows converts tend to be generally pretty happy with Ubuntu.
It's stupid to brandish Ubuntu as a "overblown" distro simply because the
experienced users dislike bloat. Many peope just want things to work.

The biggest potential for Linux as a desktop operating system is to allow
both standard and power users alike to use the system and benefit from it's
speed and control over competing operating systems like Windows.

Seriously, the more "non techie" people I see using Linux, the better:)
Everyone just wants things to work smoothly. Ubuntu is moving in the right
direction where most other distributions are failing.

Other Unix(cept OSX)systems failed at getting a high desktop penetration
because the communities were user hostile. Linux has the chance to fix this.
Ubuntu has the intention of allowing the standard user to use Linux effectively.

For me, I like the flexibility of Linux. The end user should find Ubuntu less of
a hassle than Windows. It's only going to get better, now that IBM is on the
Ubuntu bandwagon.

Eliot Rosewater

I think there exists a bit of snobbery about Ubuntu from techie-users. For example the quote: "Ubuntu means 'Debian for those too stupid to configure it.'" The premise is that an OS should be hard to use, and should be reserved for the tech-savvy. Its an absolutely silly premise, especially when the same users will then moan about how little user share Linux distros have.

I use my computer for real world stuff, not just computer masturbation (although theres a bit of that too :pac:). I dont have the computers to try different distros, or mess with things etc. Ubuntu works pretty well "out of the box," once the restricted extras are installed. And thats why it popular. Because it works. Because to start browsing the net and typing letters You dont have to hit the command line or edit config files.

The Linux=Ubuntu fog is unfortunate. If Im at command line and I want to do something typing what I want to do adding "Ubuntu" to my search yields more results than adding "Debian." Because Ubuntu is more popular. And the more popular it becomes the more this will happen. But it really has no negative impact on your life unless you let it have.

Ubuntu users may take up more space on internet forums, but they certainly dont detract. Ubuntu users dont delete Fedora threads. The Ubuntu discussion is really just an addition to discussion that would already be there. Because being realistic, how many Ubuntu users would be using a Linux Distro if it werent for Ubuntu? Very few.

Dartz

Add to that the fact that I was at one stage running 8.04 on:

1: A Dell XPS M1530 with a 2.5ghz Core2Duo, 4 Gig of RAM and an Nvidia 8600GT

2: A Toshiba Satellite L10.. with 1.6Ghz Pentium M, 256 Meg of RAM, ****all graphics.

3: An IBM X20, with 600Mhz Pentium 3, 192 Meg of RAM, not much else.

The only problems I had were with shutdowns, and the media buttons on my XPS. But they worked just by configuring them as shortcuts. It has literally given me less problems that Windows ever did.

And when it has gone wrong, 9/10, it was me mucking around with things I shouldn't have.

Leman_Russ

I would use ubuntu instead of windows tbh, but the Wireless card I use is not supported, even though Ubuntu supposidly had Broadcom 43xx support in the kernal.

So, in order to get the drivers for me to connect to the internet, it wants me to connect to the internet.

Charming.

Naikon

Leman_Russ wrote: »

I would use ubuntu instead of windows tbh, but the Wireless card I use is not supported, even though Ubuntu supposidly had Broadcom 43xx support in the kernal.

So, in order to get the drivers for me to connect to the internet, it wants me to connect to the internet.

Charming.

Your hardware manufacturer is at fault I am afraid.

Bitch to broadcom about it. It's not the Linux communities fault they
had to reverse engineer a set of drivers with no help from broadcom.

Are you sure you configured it properly? If it's in the mainline kernel
it tends to work out of the box. Broadcom tend to be bastards though.

Atheros tends to be very friendly with OSS. Broadcom is not.
Besides, your ethernet card works out of the box. Try that first.

The number of times I tried to get a basic ethernet connection in XP/Vista
where the basic driver was not compiled into the kernel is measurable:)

Dartz

Leman_Russ wrote: »

I would use ubuntu instead of windows tbh, but the Wireless card I use is not supported, even though Ubuntu supposidly had Broadcom 43xx support in the kernal.

So, in order to get the drivers for me to connect to the internet, it wants me to connect to the internet.

Charming.

To be frank, that's not just a Linux problem. I had the same problem with Win2k... made worse by the simple irritation that not only did the Wireless driver require an internet connection to install, but so did the LAN and built in Modem... sorting that was fun.

It got a virus within 5 minutes of first web connection.

Naikon

Dartz wrote: »

It got a virus within 5 minutes of first web connection.

Ah come on now, it wouldn't be a genuine Windows(tm) experience
without that:D

Old but good

Dartz

Ah yes. Speech recognition. *humans* can barely understand what I say, I'm just not good at speaking. It's always funny. Or the Windows 98 BSoD on launch. Or that Wine has better program compatibility than Vista.

It seems silly to say, but I do find it easier to use than Windows. Really... I mean that. Ubuntu linux is more convenient than Windows. Somehow, even the 'administrator' prompts and the like seem less intrusive.... Why is that?

ntlbell

I tend not to pay too much attention to what other people are doing or thinking.

I always use whatever works for what i want it to do.

sometimes it's windows. sometimes it's Solaris, sometimes some linux variant, sometimes one of the BSD's.

why do you care what other people are using?

use what works for you and let others get on with what works for them

Johnboy1951

But it is not the definition of Linux. Its not he be all and end all. or is it?

No it is not ....... but it would be difficult for someone new to Linux to believe me, and that is what I dislike most about the hype around Ubuntu.
The OS is fine. The hype is annoying, and the presumption these days that if you are using Linux that means Ubuntu.

Seems at times that the herd mentality is migrating ....

ntlbell

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

No it is not ....... but it would be difficult for someone new to Linux to believe me, and that is what I dislike most about the hype around Ubuntu.
The OS is fine. The hype is annoying, and the presumption these days that if you are using Linux that means Ubuntu.

Seems at times that the herd mentality is migrating ....

this gets back to what i was saying

why on earth would what other people percive/think/use have any relevance to you?

it's an OS, you turn it on do what you need to to and turn it off.

it's not some sort of lifestyle choice.

Johnboy1951

ntlbell wrote: »

this gets back to what i was saying

why on earth would what other people percive/think/use have any relevance to you?

it's an OS, you turn it on do what you need to to and turn it off.

it's not some sort of lifestyle choice.

Quite simply because I communicate with people and am getting tired of hearing what I have described above related to me.

...... conversations ......

ntlbell

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Quite simply because I communicate with people and am getting tired of hearing what I have described above related to me.

...... conversations ......

when having "conversations" on what up until very recently is somewhat a "specialist" subject you have to higher your tolerance level for what you might perceive as ignorance.

I think it's great that the person in the street is starting to hear about linux and starting to use it even if that means them not fully understanding every single last finer detail of every distro ever released.

the fact that these people are now having conversations shows the success that has been ubuntu.

Leman_Russ

So can someone recomend a card that will work out the box and doesn't need a loan to buy?

kierank01

here is a non ubuntu thread in this forum.

Johnboy1951

ntlbell wrote: »

the fact that these people are now having conversations shows the success that has been ubuntu.

You may see it like that ...... I don't.

I see it as an indication of the success of Linux ........ and Linux does not equal Ubuntu ..... not that most Ubuntu advocates would believe that I suppose ....

ntlbell

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

You may see it like that ...... I don't.

I see it as an indication of the success of Linux ........ and Linux does not equal Ubuntu ..... not that most Ubuntu advocates would believe that I suppose ....

A kernel cannot be a "success" in usability terms of bringing a distribution to the masses.

Ubuntu single handedly brought an OSO to the masses, not "linux"

No other distribution had the sort of penetration that ubuntu has had.

so as far as a "linux" based OS on the desktop, ubuntu is the success, not the "kernel" not "linux"

moaning about how people define "linux" when you yourself use the term in the wrong context.

ironing?

Johnboy1951

ntlbell wrote: »

A kernel cannot be a "success" in usability terms of bringing a distribution to the masses.

Ubuntu single handedly brought an OSO to the masses, not "linux"

No other distribution had the sort of penetration that ubuntu has had.

so as far as a "linux" based OS on the desktop, ubuntu is the success, not the "kernel" not "linux"

moaning about how people define "linux" when you yourself use the term in the wrong context.

ironing?

So I did not bother to use GNU/Linux ... so what! Are you attempting to tell me I was not understood?
No, I don't think so. In that case what the heck does it matter?
Maybe you should follow your own code before raising such a response:-

sometimes it's windows. sometimes it's Solaris, sometimes some linux variant, sometimes one of the BSD's.

You exhibit all the traits I dislike about Ubuntu users and no I did not "moan" about it, I clearly expressed an opinion. So that opinion differs from yours .. big deal! Get over it and stop trying to nit-pick and pretend I said something I did not say.

Ubuntu spending millions has made its user base large, it has not made it anything else ..... heck it has not even made it any better than many small distros who do not have a fraction of the money to spend. In fact it is much worse than many, from a new user experience point of view.

Ubuntu fan boys might like to believe their OS of choice is the only real true (GNU/)Linux but quite a large number of people do not fall for that.

IMO it is unfortunate that Ubuntu has had such monetary support as it has been used to totally skew the perception of (GNU/)Linux in the general populace.

If numbers mattered then everyone would agree that MS Win is the absolute greatest and best OS available. Yeah right!

ntlbell

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

So I did not bother to use GNU/Linux ... so what! Are you attempting to tell me I was not understood?
No, I don't think so. In that case what the heck does it matter?
Maybe you should follow your own code before raising such a response:-

I think your just proved my point, you understand what they mean by "linux" "ubuntu" as i understood you, see?

The difference is I'm not whining about people with little technical knowledge getting it wrong

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

You exhibit all the traits I dislike about Ubuntu users and no I did not "moan" about it, I clearly expressed an opinion. So that opinion differs from yours .. big deal! Get over it and stop trying to nit-pick and pretend I said something I did not say.

I do?, I rarley have any use for "ubuntu" so I'm not sure what box you can put me into to try and define and dislike me? I'm tea drinker too, you could go with that? maybe it's tea drinker traits?

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Ubuntu spending millions has made its user base large, it has not made it anything else ..... heck it has not even made it any better than many small distros who do not have a fraction of the money to spend. In fact it is much worse than many, from a new user experience point of view.

So what's your point? I'm failing to see one, just some sort of strange bitterness than they spend money? it's not like they're asking you for any to use it?

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Ubuntu fan boys might like to believe their OS of choice is the only real true (GNU/)Linux but quite a large number of people do not fall for that.

I have never came across this, maybe you need to find a different social circle?

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

IMO it is unfortunate that Ubuntu has had such monetary support as it has been used to totally skew the perception of (GNU/)Linux in the general populace.

How has it skew'd it exactly? people are now using "linux" based OS's more than ever before, one of them is Ubuntu and it was ubuntu who brought "linux" based os's to your granny. Why is it a bad thing?

maybe you prefer a red hat approach, where they give you the two fingers?

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

If numbers mattered then everyone would agree that MS Win is the absolute greatest and best OS available. Yeah right!

What has numbers got to do with it?

As has been stated the thread numerous times, the one that's the "greatest" is the one that works for you, to do the job you need to do.

be it free, paid, subscription or otherwise, that's the "best" for you.

Your OS of choice doesn't define you, it's not who you are, it's not a lifestyle choice.

Be you a NetBSD ninja or an ubuntu "fan boy" you turn it on do your work and turn it off.

there's nothing more to it.

Anyone who thinks there is, seriously needs to look at what's going on in their own lives, or more importantly what's not.

Johnboy1951

ntlbell wrote: »

I think your just proved my point, you understand what they mean by "linux" "ubuntu" as i understood you, see?

The difference is I'm not whining about people with little technical knowledge getting it wrong

I am neither 'whining' nor complaining about people getting it wrong. I have expressed my dislike of the misinformation which causes those people to believe that Ubuntu and Linux are the same thing.

Apparently you prefer to try to twist what I am saying ... so have it any way you wish.

Originally Posted by Johnboy1951 View Post
No it is not ....... but it would be difficult for someone new to Linux to believe me, and that is what I dislike most about the hype around Ubuntu.
The OS is fine. The hype is annoying, and the presumption these days that if you are using Linux that means Ubuntu.

For clarity I post the above to show exactly what I said about it.
Twist it whatever way you wish, at this point I could not care less.

woop

Dartz wrote: »

Add to that the fact that I was at one stage running 8.04 on:

1: A Dell XPS M1530 with a 2.5ghz Core2Duo, 4 Gig of RAM and an Nvidia 8600GT

2: A Toshiba Satellite L10.. with 1.6Ghz Pentium M, 256 Meg of RAM, ****all graphics.

3: An IBM X20, with 600Mhz Pentium 3, 192 Meg of RAM, not much else.

The only problems I had were with shutdowns, and the media buttons on my XPS. But they worked just by configuring them as shortcuts. It has literally given me less problems that Windows ever did.

And when it has gone wrong, 9/10, it was me mucking around with things I shouldn't have.

could you explain how you made the xps media buttons shortcuts? please:D

it would be very handy for me, Ive got a m1330

Herbal Deity

It's better people thinking Ubuntu is synonmous Linux than never having heard of or been exposed to Linux.

On the other hand, one does have to question whether Ubuntu is really ready to be exposed to the average computer user. IMHO, it's not quite there yet and shouldn't really be promoted to the average person as an alternative to Windows. That said, I don't think it really is officially (though there do exist those who exaggeratedly evangelize it unofficially). Who it really is good for is the person who's reasonably proficient at computers, would have an interest in trying out linux, but would have found it just that bit too difficult with another distro. Not that there aren't distros besides Ubuntu that can serve the same purpose, but it's the easiest one to get into which I've tried. It's forgiving, and it's popularity means there's plenty of support available.

Dartz

woop wrote: »

could you explain how you made the xps media buttons shortcuts? please:D

it would be very handy for me, Ive got a m1330

Xfce does it simply:

Applications >> Settings >> Keyboard >> Application shortcuts.

Should be simple from then on in. Set them to whatever you want.

ntlbell

Herbal Deity wrote: »

It's better people thinking Ubuntu is synonmous Linux than never having heard of or been exposed to Linux.

On the other hand, one does have to question whether Ubuntu is really ready to be exposed to the average computer user. IMHO, it's not quite there yet and shouldn't really be promoted to the average person as an alternative to Windows. That said, I don't think it really is officially (though there do exist those who exaggeratedly evangelize it unofficially). Who it really is good for is the person who's reasonably proficient at computers, would have an interest in trying out linux, but would have found it just that bit too difficult with another distro. Not that there aren't distros besides Ubuntu that can serve the same purpose, but it's the easiest one to get into which I've tried. It's forgiving, and it's popularity means there's plenty of support available.

I only had the same conversation very recently.

and in some ways I agree with you, there was an example last week (you probably read about it)

where a bbc technical correspondent did a piece on windows 7 and mentioned ubuntu in passing and made some comment about being created by a few hobbiest's, so some ubuntu fanatics got up in arms and got in touch with the guy.

so he agreed to trial it for 24 hours and do a story on it basically comparing it to windows 7 and even tho he was some what technical he came across a lot of pit falls which most people do

so instead of getting a write up on how ubuntu is ready for main stream they got a high profile write up on the problems.

I was trying to think of away to get around and the only thing i could think of was some form of code freeze and follow a more debian like release schedule (one of the main reasons it forked off in the first place) so there can be some better QA and testing done on each release and the concentration goes into making to a more stable OS instead of concentrating on trying to get every little feature/eye candy working.

making windows wobble is no interest to me, being able to do my work as quickly as possible is.

It's hard to knock there penetration and success tho.