Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 5th Nov 2010 19:15 UTC, submitted by Debjit
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Finally. Finally the leader of a major distribution who has the guts to stand up and say what a lot of people have known for a long time, but didn't dare to say because it usually leads to a storm of criticism. Mark Shuttleworth has announced that Ubuntu will be moving away from X.org, opting to go with Wayland instead.
Thread beginning with comment 448922
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: programmer
by Quake on Sat 6th Nov 2010 20:13 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: programmer"
Quake
Member since:
2005-10-14

But sometimes, one needs to let go of the old technologies in order to innovate and be ready for the market place.

Take Apple for exemple. They had to let go from the old Mac OS and completely rewrite a Unix OS. If they hadn't so, the OS would just be a drag on the Company.

And now Ubuntu, we already know that Canonical want to do things differently from the others distro. Unfortunately, the Open-source community is afraid of innovations because consensus building will not lead to innovation.
Therefore, Canonical decided to be their own on developing technology that thing it will greatly benefit them on the long run.
Remember, Redhat is not meant for the average joes therefore their contribution is toned down on innovations.

Let see of things will work out for Ubuntu. And don't forget, Linux is only a kernel, so there are a lot of distros choices out there.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: programmer
by Jason Bourne on Sat 6th Nov 2010 20:37 in reply to "RE[5]: programmer"
Jason Bourne Member since:
2007-06-02

Let see of things will work out for Ubuntu. And don't forget, Linux is only a kernel, so there are a lot of distros choices out there.


There's more behind the curtain. I don't think Linux is just a kernel. The linux kernel can survive without a distro, whereas a distro can't survive without the linux kernel. So I don't think it's right for distros to remove the Linux word from their brand.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: programmer
by tuma324 on Sat 6th Nov 2010 21:21 in reply to "RE[6]: programmer"
tuma324 Member since:
2010-04-09

"Let see of things will work out for Ubuntu. And don't forget, Linux is only a kernel, so there are a lot of distros choices out there.


There's more behind the curtain. I don't think Linux is just a kernel. The linux kernel can survive without a distro, whereas a distro can't survive without the linux kernel. So I don't think it's right for distros to remove the Linux word from their brand.
"


Where did it all begin?

Linux was already established as an enterprise server platform in 2004. But free software was still not a part of everyday life for most computer users. That's why Mark Shuttleworth gathered a small team of developers from one of the most established Linux projects – Debian - and set out to create an easy-to-use Linux desktop, Ubuntu.

The vision for Ubuntu is part social and part economic: free software, available free of charge to everybody on the same terms, and funded through a portfolio of services provided by Canonical.


http://www.ubuntu.com/project/about-ubuntu

Isn't that enough? Do you also bitch at Android, etc? Sheesh.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: programmer
by phoenix on Sun 7th Nov 2010 01:08 in reply to "RE[6]: programmer"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

There's more behind the curtain. I don't think Linux is just a kernel. The linux kernel can survive without a distro, whereas a distro can't survive without the linux kernel.


With Debian running on a FreeBSD kernel, and Ubuntu running on an OpenSolaris kernel, it's most definitely possible for a distribution to survive without the Linux kernel.

It's just too bad more programmers don't realise there's more to the open-source OS world than just the Linux kernel.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[7]: programmer - Debian?
by jabbotts on Mon 8th Nov 2010 17:17 in reply to "RE[6]: programmer"
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

What about distributions like Debian?

Debian/Linux
Debian/BSD
Debian/Hurd

"Debian" is not dependent on the Linux kernel.. for example.

In general, I believe that distributions should be recognized as the product and referred to by distro name though too. Referring to anything that happens to use the Linux kernel as "Linux" only causes confusion. For example, consider solid distributions that get slammed and blamed for the faults in unstable distributions. Ubuntu "Linux" has a bug in XYZ so therefore, any "Linux" must have the same problems.

But, the key point here is that the kernel is indeed separable from the distribution as demonstrated by Debian which at least three distinctly different kernels available for use. (though, in the case of Hurd "usability" not suggested by "available for use". ;D )

Reply Parent Score: 2