Linked by David Adams on Tue 3rd Aug 2010 16:05 UTC, submitted by sjvn
Linux As we mentioned in a previous article, Red Hat advocate Greg DeKoenigsberg claimed that due to the much larger amount of code it's contributed, Red Hat is a better open source citizen than Canonical, adding, "Canonical is a marketing organization masquerading as an engineering organization." A Computerworld blog retorts that that's no insult; and that marketing Linux could be just as important to the cause as contributing code. Updated
Thread beginning with comment 435243
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Ubuntu
by vivainio on Tue 3rd Aug 2010 20:31 UTC in reply to "RE: Ubuntu"
vivainio
Member since:
2008-12-26


I'm not convinced of this. I randomly test distros and I didn't find Ubuntu to be better than openSuse at detecting hardware and Ubuntu has a poor track record when it comes to updates.


Distros do a ton of stuff apart from hardware detection. My experiments with opensuse 11.3 indicate that it's quality is just not as good as Ubuntu 10.04.

Case in point: I was unable to get browser-originated sound (youtube) from my usb headset. I don't want to debug it, because in Ubuntu I don't have to. I guess I'll delete the opensuse partition and try Fedora. THEY should be able to configure PA ;-).

(My work machine is still happily running Ubuntu 10.04)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Ubuntu
by nt_jerkface on Wed 4th Aug 2010 01:31 in reply to "RE[2]: Ubuntu"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

Distros do a ton of stuff apart from hardware detection. My experiments with opensuse 11.3 indicate that it's quality is just not as good as Ubuntu 10.04.


Well that is your experience and mine is that neither distro is clearly ahead of the other.

Distros certainly do a ton of stuff like upgrades and Ubuntu required 8.04 LTS users to perform a major upgrade just to install OpenOffice 3.0. This is pretty pathetic when 8.04 LTS came out in 2008.

They have a lousy history when it comes to updates and that goes beyond anecdotal evidence. Purchasers of 8.04 Dell machines were told to keep their OS frozen so nothing breaks. Ubuntu also broke some 9.04 netbooks. Call me crazy but you would think that Dell machines pre-loaded with Ubuntu might be tested first before sending out updates.

So we can exchange anecdotal experiences all day but as it stands Ubuntu has very poor history when it comes to updates and on that alone I do not consider it to be "linux for humans" or other such non-sense. I sure as hell don't consider it to be "linux for admins" either.

Reply Parent Score: 3