Linked by Howard Fosdick on Fri 30th Mar 2012 20:33 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Two years ago, Linux guru Caitlyn Martin argued that "Ubuntu is a Poor Standard Bearer for Linux" due to reliability issues. She said that "Other distributions have problematic releases but other major distributions do not have significant problems in nearly every release. Ubuntu does." In her follow-up piece "How Canonical Can Do Ubuntu Right: It Isn't a Technical Problem," she explained how "...the problem I am describing is probably rooted in policy or business decisions that have been made..." and she offered specific ideas on how Canoncial could address the situation. Are these criticisms valid today? Does Ubuntu offer good reliability? Does it deserve its mindshare as the representative of PC Linux?
Permalink for comment 512748
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: All of them
by agb242 on Mon 2nd Apr 2012 20:38 UTC in reply to "All of them"
Member since:

Well said my friend. I think you hit it on the mark. I have felt for a long time that the increased Ubuntu bad press because users do not like/understand Canonical and Shuttleworth. Maybe that is not what you meant, but that is how I understood it.

Reply Parent Score: 1