Linked by David Adams on Fri 18th Jun 2010 19:17 UTC
Linux Linux Magazine has a profile of Daniel Fore and the Elementary project. Elementary is a Linux distro that's committed to a clean and simple user experience, but it's more than a distro - it's actually a multi-pronged effort to make improvements to the user experience for a whole ecosystem of components, including icons, a GTK theme, Midori improvements, Nautilus, and even Firefox. The work that elementary is doing isn't limited to their own distro, and some of their work is available in current, and perhaps future, Ubuntu releases. The results are really striking, and I think it's probably the handsomest Linux UI I've ever seen.
Thread beginning with comment 430629
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

I'm sorry but I don't think you've been reading this discussion very closely. The problem is endemic to the majority of popular, if not all, Linux distros in general. This is not a case of isolated issues, it's a problem with the methodology at a basic level really.

There are workarounds that are successful to various degrees but as highlighted in this thread - none of them completely, satisfactorily solve the issue.

Reply Parent Score: 2

siride Member since:

Yes, it is a methdological problem, more specifically, a policy problem. Most apps really don't need a base system upgrade to be upgraded. Distros just choose not do app upgrades because it's easier for them, or they are idiots (not sure which is true yet). If major system libraries do need to be upgraded, there is no reason why a distro can't have side-by-side installations of different versions of libraries. Windows does this. ELF certainly supports versioned libraries. The distros just don't do it. Why, I don't know. But it's definitely not a technical problem. It's an idiocy problem.

Reply Parent Score: 2

tupp Member since:

I'm sorry but I don't think you've been reading this discussion very closely.

Personal attack... okay.

I'll tell you what I am reading -- I see a lot of vague conjecture without any hard facts to back it up.

The problem is endemic to the majority of popular, if not all, Linux distros in general. This is not a case of isolated issues, it's a problem with the methodology at a basic level really.

I'm sorry but I don't think you know what you're talking about. There is a great variety in basic methodology of Linux distros.

Furthermore, I have noticed that the only supporting arguments that you provide seem to focus on Ubuntu, and even those assertions lack solid detail and links to actual forum complaints. It is a fatal flaw to assume that Ubuntu is the whole of Linux. Ubuntu and its derivatives make up only a small fraction of the many, varied Linux distros.

Ubuntu might have the few package manager problems that you mention (I wouldn't know, having never really used it that much). However, most other distros do not have such problems, and that includes the non-Ubuntu Debian-based distros.

I can tell you from first hand experience that the repository of my 2009-01 version of Sidux continually and actively updates its packages. I do an apt-get update every week or two, and I have to wait for it to finish updating. Never had any problems with an upgrade from the sidux repos.

In addition, I use non-sidux repositories, with almost no trouble. The independent Debian Multimedia repository ( ) is updated daily. Certainly, there will be occasional problems when changing builds on a daily basis, but I recall having only one upgrade problem with a package from this repository, using sidux, and it was automatically fixed when I upgraded the package a few days later.

Any distro base on Debian Sid will have very recent versions in the repo.

Also, there are plenty of other non-Debian, cutting-edge distros which have no problem upgrading packages to the latest version. Fedora, Arch, Gentoo immediately come to mind, but there are many others.

Reply Parent Score: 1

jtfolden Member since:

Actually, it wasn't a personal attack, it was an observation based on the fact you offered up an "answer" that did not, in any way, shape or form provide a solution to the issue discussed.

In fact, you just did the exact same thing *again* with this reply and proved my point in the process. Sidux is a HORRIBLE example to bring to the table as it's yet another "rolling-release" distro, based on the "unstable" branch of Debian.

So, it's not a matter of not knowing what I'm talking about, it seems you don't comprehend what I'm saying (or are intentionally ignoring the crux of the problem). Seeing as most of the other people I've been conversing with in this thread do "get it" - whether they consider it a detriment to their personal usage or not, then I can only suggest yet again that you start reading from the beginning. I'm not going to repeat myself and I've already provided clear real world issues with the way distros handle this. I don't need to link to forum complaints as I've experienced everything I've said first hand, time and time again, across multiple distros since I first began testing Linux in the 1990's. Other than band-aids here or there, it really hasn't improved that much since the advent of repositories.

When all Linux can offer up to this are PPA's and rolling releases, it's a mark of just how far behind "desktop Linux" really continues to be... If you're happy with that, more power to you, but it has made Linux unsuitable to my own needs or my clients.

Reply Parent Score: 1