Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 53

Thread: Ubuntu Looks To An SDK, Improved App Development

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jayrulez View Post
    Most of all the code you use in compiled form is copyrighted be it Linux, Qt, GTK, XCB etc... So your earlier statement doesn't make sense.

    Do you have some kind of insider information that the rest of us aren't aware of?
    How do you know what the SDK will contain?
    How do you know what languages it will offer?

    What are your suggestions to make your perception of the situation better?
    Which languages do you suggest?
    Which toolkit do you suggest?

    Do you just attack and belittle anything that isn't in line with "your" wants or do you have legitimate grievances?
    Do not feed the troll, one day he met a binary man written in Qt that punched his ass, from that day he is insulting Qt in every possible way.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,929

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jayrulez View Post
    So Ubuntu should be held back in order to be compatible with other distros that cannot provide what Ubuntu provides?
    No, they should contribute something back to the ecosystem which provided 99% of all the software that makes their distro.

    That's what decent and respected distributions do. Look at Fedora -- they wrote much of Ubuntu. It would be nice if Ubuntu wrote a piece of Fedora instead of coming up with new inovative business methods to exclude Fedora users.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kingston, Jamaica
    Posts
    313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    No, they should contribute something back to the ecosystem which provided 99% of all the software that makes their distro.

    That's what decent and respected distributions do. Look at Fedora -- they wrote much of Ubuntu. It would be nice if Ubuntu wrote a piece of Fedora instead of coming up with new inovative business methods to exclude Fedora users.
    It certainly would be nice wouldn't it? That doesn't mean one should act like Canonical or Ubuntu is obligated to do anything or that they owe anybody anything.

    Are you suggesting that the sole or fundamental purpose in Canonical providing an SDK for Ubuntu is to exclude others?

  4. #34
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    684

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    Uh huh. That extra second you spend launching the app obviously matters so much.
    the Ubuntu software center is horrifically slow in real-world usage.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,929

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jayrulez View Post
    Are you suggesting that the sole or fundamental purpose in Canonical providing an SDK for Ubuntu is to exclude others?
    No, and I don't think that they are "evil" in the sense SCO was, or that they are bad guys. But this isolationist course is quite annoying.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    No, and I don't think that they are "evil" in the sense SCO was, or that they are bad guys. But this isolationist course is quite annoying.
    This. To put it simply, there is no reason to make the SDK Ubuntu-specific. They should just make sure that it's modular, and one module is for Ubuntu integration. Then other distros could write their own to integrate into their distros. Then instead of one distribution winning, the whole system wins.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    This. To put it simply, there is no reason to make the SDK Ubuntu-specific. They should just make sure that it's modular, and one module is for Ubuntu integration. Then other distros could write their own to integrate into their distros. Then instead of one distribution winning, the whole system wins.
    When has Canonical ever done something for the linux community as a whole? They like operating in their own little world with little regard to the linux community or the projects they draw from.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    230

    Default

    This is another reason why I'm so glad for Arch. It's becoming increasingly, and amazingly, popular and it does it all under it's own steam.

    Whilst things like an SDK do benefit Ubuntu I do actually increasingly feel Canonical are trying to exclude others. Due to some great work, for example, some clever guys have Unity running in Arch and maintain repos for it but it was not easy for them; they had to deal with every Ubuntu-introduced hack and patch under the sun, to the point where you need to build/install Ubuntu-patched variants of packages like even Xorg components D: It's just crazy.

    .

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cologne, Germany
    Posts
    308

    Angry

    Quote Originally Posted by ElderSnake View Post
    This is another reason why I'm so glad for Arch. It's becoming increasingly, and amazingly, popular and it does it all under it's own steam.

    Whilst things like an SDK do benefit Ubuntu I do actually increasingly feel Canonical are trying to exclude others. Due to some great work, for example, some clever guys have Unity running in Arch and maintain repos for it but it was not easy for them; they had to deal with every Ubuntu-introduced hack and patch under the sun, to the point where you need to build/install Ubuntu-patched variants of packages like even Xorg components D: It's just crazy.

    .
    It is a rather shocking development driven by the fact that some companies like Canonical discovered the potential of exploiting the many years of hard work of Linux enthusiasts to make a lot of money from it.
    Canonical does not, in any way, contribute to the GNU/Linux-morality. It may focus on an easy-to-use operating system, but on the way, they leave free software behind and don't let other Linux distributions benefit from their strive.
    But to be honest, I really do not care about Unity. I actually hate it and it was a reason for me to switch to Gentoo (over Debian).
    We have to let the users decide, even though it might bring up Ubuntu as the winner for being the best walled garden.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frign View Post
    It is a rather shocking development driven by the fact that some companies like Canonical discovered the potential of exploiting the many years of hard work of Linux enthusiasts to make a lot of money from it.
    Canonical does not, in any way, contribute to the GNU/Linux-morality. It may focus on an easy-to-use operating system, but on the way, they leave free software behind and don't let other Linux distributions benefit from their strive.
    But to be honest, I really do not care about Unity. I actually hate it and it was a reason for me to switch to Gentoo (over Debian).
    We have to let the users decide, even though it might bring up Ubuntu as the winner for being the best walled garden.
    Yeah I don't really care too much about Unity either, but it was one of the more recent examples I could think of, of how they are doing things. I prefer being closer to upstream/source.

    Of course people could argue that their patches and work are necessary to make the software work better. But personally I've always found pure standalone Compiz to be much faster and more stable than the Unity/Ubuntu variant.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •