Didn't they popularize the 6 months release schedule? I am asking not being ironic.
Well Unity from the netbook edition was before GS. Don't know maybe GS was first with the idea but took them longer to actually release?
Wayland has been in development for many years now and they still have major issues. I understand Canonical not wanting to have anything to do with them. They look really amateurish. They don't have a minimize button for christ.
RHEL vs Ubuntu I am not getting what you're trying to say. RHEL costs money and Ubuntu is free from what I know.
I don't get how they are not heavy contributors. Hell they created a new interface called Unity. They employ a lot of people that work on open source software. They try to integrate all of that into a distro for the masses. Ok not everything goes upstream but that is because of lack of manpower. They are not Red Hat you know, not in terms of profits or number of employees....
the last two people to I which install ubuntu, they asked me to remove ubuntu, because it is not user friendly and so slow on their computers(compiz), they was windows xp users, finally I installed chakra linux with kde on their pc, and they sill use chakra after one year, without problems .
not all people in the world, are lazy and forever noob
why don't you lay out the exact same argument regarding incompetence, desperation, etc - but instead of applying to Ubuntu/Canonical you apply it the car manufacturer whom's vehicle you may be potentially buying ~ does 'desperation' sound appealing??? how about incompetence?? - would you feel safe in that vehicle?? (no!).
they don't have specific needs, really, not deal breakers anyway. this is about control.
So i am curious - which do you really think takes longer? -> developing a few odds and ends for a pre-existing desktop (gnome2 + compiz) vs. Developing an entire new desktop (which entails everything from WM, compositor, a slerw of applications, etc). If you can sit here with a straight face and say Ubuntu/Canonical slapping a few components on top of Gnome is somehow much more work - all i can do is laugh at you - you have ZERO concept of the work that goes into this kind of thing.
What i was saying is that Mark Shuttleworth was trying to make it look like Ubuntu was a bigger deal in the industry, compared to RHEL - the part that he left out; he was including ALL ubuntu stats against RHEL - which is silly, since one is purely enterprise, while the other is free and has some undisclosed amount of companies paying for support. This essentially means Mark has painted a bogus picture by including all ubuntu stats, rather than comparing just the enterprise stuff - note: many IT professionals won't even purchase services from RedHat or Canonical, if they are capable of taking care of their servers/workstations themselves. - so mark's numbers are conflated junk.
BTW, thanks for pointing out the obvious; you are correct, Canonical is no RedHat. ~ at least, you recognize that
Last edited by ninez; 05-14-2013 at 10:20 PM.
Don't know. It also depends on how many people are working on it don't you think? And for the record I consider the whole gnome shell just an a programming exercise for people with nothing better to do. Gnome 2 was good enough. No need to throw everything out and 'revolutionize' the desktop.So i am curious - which do you really think takes longer? -> developing a few odds and ends for a pre-existing desktop (gnome2 + compiz) vs. Developing an entire new desktop (which entails everything from WM, compositor, a slerw of applications, etc). If you can sit here with a straight face and say Ubuntu/Canonical slapping a few components on top of Gnome is somehow much more work - all i can do is laugh at you - you have ZERO concept of the work that goes into this kind of thing.
Yes they do. Right now no DE on linux is actually ready for the masses. Unity is the closest there is. KDE would be the most familiar to windows users but it has its problems.they don't have specific needs, really, not deal breakers anyway. this is about control.
They're bad at talking with the community. That doesn't mean that the product is shit.why don't you lay out the exact same argument regarding incompetence, desperation, etc - but instead of applying to Ubuntu/Canonical you apply it the car manufacturer whom's vehicle you may be potentially buying ~ does 'desperation' sound appealing??? how about incompetence?? - would you feel safe in that vehicle?? (no!).
I don't care about how hard it was to make but how useful it was to people. There are a lot of projects that contain some hardcore code that no one uses. I don't care about the LOC or any other metric except what the masses think about it. That is the purpose of Ubuntu. Linux for the masses. If I could write 10 LOC and cure cancer it would be pretty cool don't you think?"hell they created Unity"??!?!?! ROFL... Unity is not some amazing feat, dude and it's not a freedesktop standard, either - they've 'contributed' to themselves here, not the larger community, which isn't surprising. - You seem quite delusional as to the complexity of Unity vs. other software... it's not some crazy engineering feat and it's not a big contribution to anyone but themselves... and i have no problem with them trying to be "a distro for the masses" - that's just great - but then in turn, don't sh*t on other developers, projects, companies, etc that do circles around you (canonical) in terms of what they contribute. (which is typically what Mark Shutteworth and Canonical like to do - talk sh*t, spread FUD, etc). They employ some people that work on open source, sure. but not as broad and equally significant of contributions, as you think.... sorry, random user on launchpad contributing a patch, that ends up being upstream'd isn't a Canonical employee contribution.
Shutting down domain names doesn't imply an internet blackout, domains are simply aliases. All previously crawled web content would be easily accessible, you only need to know the IP address of your favourite search engine. I think P2P networks like bittorrent would not even notice the change (implying trackers are reached via IP addresses). Perhaps email would be a bit harder to work around.
It's great to see that popularity is the driving factor in your thought process. I assume you only value top40 music, as well?
i don't think that you are qualified to call any DE a "programming exercise" based on your previous comments about Unity being some huge contribution to open source, and it's development pace vs. Gnome 3... you're laughable dude. no clue at all. just a fanboy grasping at straws..
....and if the only metric you care about is what other people think about something - you're pathetic. Those other metrics ALL matter, to some degree or another...and being as you are ignorant on everything except 'what the masses, think' (well, your interpretation of that, anyway.), your uninformed (and ill-formed) opinions mean absolutely fsck all... I hate to have to explain this to you, but you are 1 person NOT the entire planet, pal. - thus, you do not speak for all of them, you just claim to...
Last edited by ninez; 05-15-2013 at 12:50 AM.
By the way, don't giving a shit about your system actually makes everything harder. We at Arch think that less means more and the reverse is also true when it comes to simplicity, involvement and newbie friendliness. Relying on graphical tools and bloat whose only purpose is to hide inherent complexity effectively increases complexity. And that's exactly what I witness with the vast majority of college mates running Ubuntu (just as average Windows and Mac users). They struggle to make Ubuntu do the limited things they can imagine, even minimal ones like modifying files outside their home folder, and often come to me when Ubuntu fails to install drivers for their Wi-Fi cards and stuff. All these bells and whistles are just because they don't give a damn about UNIX and FOSS.
Ignorance leads to problems, problems you won't be able to solve unless you leave mediocrity.