What Do You Dislike or Hate About Ubuntu?
Phoronix: What Do You Dislike or Hate About Ubuntu?
When applying to become an Ubuntu developer, part of the application process asks "what [do you] like least in Ubuntu." This has provided Canonical with a lot of feedback about Ubuntu from potential developers. Only now though is a concise list of these negative items being made available publicly...
I can't stand Unity. 'nuff said.
aping the mac's UI brain damages
its plain damn wrong uninnovative and stupid
I definitely don't like Unity. I think that it was the worst thing they had done to Ubuntu.
I really can't understand why they lost time creating a new user interface, while there are plenty of people doing that in Gnome and KDE projects.
What we really need is better device drivers support, bug fixes in various parts of the system and free software replacements for CAD, Games and other software that are only found in Windows.
I dislike everything about it.
- it does a LOT of marketing, but does very LITTLE to progress
- it has marketing cult and tries to steal the focus from linux kernel, gnu, xorg on itself, claiming itself center of collaboration
- it has completely useless, unflexible in terms of modification, package system
- it implements worst most unstable versions possible
- canonical develops easily proprietary commercial software
- in the essence, it is as ignorant to users requests as microsoft
- it does not have any "linux" in its name
- the developers-users collaboration model is absent, instead users are animals to bugtrack for free. Good Lord, thanks for linux mint.
- it spoils the culture of foss and linux in particular with african theming. Foss is about choice! Not about unified marketing.
All-in-all, it was good starting distro, But not better than other around. It wasted so much attention from Debian! At current time it is one of the worst distros for starters.
This is my opinion.
Fedora and Debian don't have Linux in their name, either. Of course, you're free to tack that on, if you like (just watch out for the flamers!).
Unity and questionable hardware support
For the most part, I actually like Ubuntu pretty well but I really dislike Unity and their hardware support is spotty from release to release. Unity is awkward to use and incoherent so much of the time. I used Gnome 3 for a while and thought it was a _much_ better experience, a little rough around the edges here and there, but far better than Unity. The hardware support in Ubuntu has always been one of those things that has generally gotten better over time, but it's still to common that one release will work fine on a machine and the next one won't even boot. Even when the situation isn't quite that extreme, various other things may be broken such as my webcam (which now hasn't worked for a few years even though it worked great previously... filed bug reports and no one seemed interested in fixing it), sleep and hibernate (which has gotten much better but can still be iffy from release to release), 3d acceleration regressions (usually it's not completely broken, but may have seen some serious regressions in performance), and the list goes on and on. Oh and my one last gripe: I don't mind that gnome-display-properties can't pick up on the different resolutions that some of my monitors support (Windows doesn't pick up on that stuff from time to time too), but at least let me enter in the frequency settings manually in the GUI and set the resolutions that _should_ be available.
I dislike Unity. Unity might be good for some notebooks. but not for a pc that u use to work with imo.
I dislike that they removing good programs form base install and replace them with unstable/useless stuff.
I dislike that they trying to copy MacOSX
Debian does have "Linux", in fact "GNU/Linux" in its name.
Originally Posted by Nobu
But I really do dislike the people who speak of Ubuntu as "Ubuntu Linux". That's nearly as stupid as to call Android "Android Linux" or Apple iOS "iOS Unix"
And I'm not hearing a lot of "Android Linux" these days.
What's wrong with you people?
= Software =
(1) PulseAudio problems (in the process of being fixed)
I find that PulseAudio consumes too much CPU.
I had a basic PC (Athlon64 3200+) with Ubuntu 8.04 (using ALSA) that used 0% CPU for playing back sound. Skype was using 40% CPU.
Now I have a i5-2520M (2 cores, 4 threads) CPU, Ubuntu 11.04, and I see PulseAudio using between 2 and 6% CPU when playing back music. And when I use Skype I get 65% CPU usage (40% skype and 25% PulseAudio). I've tried all kinds of tweaks found online but none helped.
I wish ubuntu would make it easy to switch between pulse and alsa (ATM is a PITA to switch).
Tags for this Thread