Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 1st Jun 2010 09:42 UTC
Google Google employees have always had a remarkable amount of freedom when it comes to what operating system they wanted to run on company computers - Linux, Windows, Mac OS X, it was all fine. Since the China attacks, however, this has changed: Windows is no longer welcome on Google computers.
Thread beginning with comment 427445
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Using Chrome OS
by Laurence on Tue 1st Jun 2010 12:22 UTC in reply to "RE: Using Chrome OS"
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

Google uses Ubuntu extensively; there are excellent coding tools in Ubuntu.


Actually no there isn't.

As of 6months ago, much of Android development required a version of Eclipse that's more recent than the latest copy in Ubuntu's software repositories.

This meant that Ubuntu users had to manually download and install Eclipse - ie configure their coding tools from sources outside of Canonical's distros.

Aside that, Ubuntu isn't really that much different from most other Linux distros in terms of development tools.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Using Chrome OS
by Windows Sucks on Tue 1st Jun 2010 12:47 in reply to "RE[2]: Using Chrome OS"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

"Google uses Ubuntu extensively; there are excellent coding tools in Ubuntu.


Actually no there isn't.

As of 6months ago, much of Android development required a version of Eclipse that's more recent than the latest copy in Ubuntu's software repositories.

This meant that Ubuntu users had to manually download and install Eclipse - ie configure their coding tools from sources outside of Canonical's distros.
"

Wow, Ubuntu users having to do what all other people on all other OS's have to do. Install apps manually. Man Ubuntu sucks. LOL!

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[4]: Using Chrome OS
by Laurence on Tue 1st Jun 2010 17:00 in reply to "RE[3]: Using Chrome OS"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26



Wow, Ubuntu users having to do what all other people on all other OS's have to do. Install apps manually. Man Ubuntu sucks. LOL!

You've missed the point of my post if that's all you've taken from it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Using Chrome OS
by flynn on Tue 1st Jun 2010 13:01 in reply to "RE[2]: Using Chrome OS"
flynn Member since:
2009-03-19

"Google uses Ubuntu extensively; there are excellent coding tools in Ubuntu.

As of 6months ago, much of Android development required a version of Eclipse that's more recent than the latest copy in Ubuntu's software repositories.

This meant that Ubuntu users had to manually download and install Eclipse - ie configure their coding tools from sources outside of Canonical's distros.
"
I wonder why more people aren't using rolling-release distros, where things like this never happen.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Using Chrome OS
by Neolander on Tue 1st Jun 2010 13:22 in reply to "RE[3]: Using Chrome OS"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

I wonder why more people aren't using rolling-release distros, where things like this never happen.

Because updates only endure little stress-testing in order to ship faster, so that a single update can break everything.

As an example, I stopped using Arch Linux because one day, they pushed a major update of packman, the package manager itself, in the "stable" repo with insuficient testing, and this totally broke package management on my system. I couldn't install a single package, not even the packman bugfix release that was delivered some weeks later.

Rolling release is not good for everyone, because it forces people to think and read changelogs before installing updates. Most people don't want that, they just want to fix security holes, and new stuff will wait until they decide to try out the newest release of their distro of choice.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Using Chrome OS
by MacMan on Tue 1st Jun 2010 13:28 in reply to "RE[3]: Using Chrome OS"
MacMan Member since:
2006-11-19

First off, before the flames start, I'd like to say that I love Linux, and use it everyday.

Software distribution is however SOOO FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED in Linux. Why do I have to wait for the distro packagers to deliver an app. Why can't I just grab a .app like OSX and JUST RUN IT?????

The .app in OSX is really a directory structure, which houses the executable, any libraries, an icon, config files, etc..., similar to a java jar.

It would be so freaking simple to have Gnome or KDE support such a system.

I've "installed" a newer version of Eclipse in Ubuntu that what came with the distro, and compared with OSX, its a nightmare. First, stick it somewhere, like /opt, get all the permissions straight, then starts the nightmare with editing .desktop entries to give me a menu item, or a desktop icon. This is crazy.

A user should be able to grap a .app from anywhere, stick it anywhere on their file system, and run it, or drag it to the desktop or toolbar to automatically create a launcher for it.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Using Chrome OS
by google_ninja on Tue 1st Jun 2010 18:41 in reply to "RE[2]: Using Chrome OS"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

Similar thing happens with ruby gems, specifically rails.

ruby libs have their own package management system (basically a CPAN clone called rubygems) that does a good enough job. But debian also tracks specific libs in its repo (one of which is rails), so if you do "apt-get install rubygems", you end up with a modified version that spits out an error if you try to install a debian tracked library through gem.

The reason this is retarded is that certain packages (like rails) move WAY faster then the debian repo maintainers. That means that if you install rails on ubuntu the supported way, you end up with an obsolete version that can't be upgraded until the next release. Replacing the crippled ubuntu rubygems install with one off of rubyforge is potentially a non trivial job as well. Finally, if rubygems is an existing system that does a better job then apt for ruby libraries, and is used exclusively by every rubyist, why the hell would you bother trying to fix something that isn't broken?

I think in a general way, apt is great for app installs, but terrible for dev tools, or anything where staying remotely up to date with upstream is desirable.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Using Chrome OS
by bert64 on Wed 2nd Jun 2010 21:20 in reply to "RE[3]: Using Chrome OS"
bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

It all depends on your usage requirements...

Business and other non technical users want stability, they want one version and to know it isn't going to change significantly or break, but they do want to receive security updates and be able to install them easily. Ubuntu and RHEL are aimed at users like this.

Technical users want to be on the bleeding edge and have all the latest stuff, and are generally clued up enough to deal with compatibility problems that the latest untested software might bring. Gentoo and Arch are aimed at users like this...

Reply Parent Score: 2