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?
Thread beginning with comment 512840
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Guru Schmuru
by Orionds on Wed 4th Apr 2012 17:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Guru Schmuru"
Member since:

You make it sound as if Linux breaks using the hardware you listed. Now, this is truly puzzling because I have covered most of the stuff you listed installing Ubuntu and ... zilch problems.

I even had XP "identify" and install a sound driver that did not work. Booting up with the Ubuntu live CD produced sound.

However, the owner of the PC insisted on an install of XP, so the Ubuntu live CD came to the rescue once again. Installing (installing!) sysinfo after booting up with the live CD showed the correct sound driver which I downloaded while still in the live CD environment, rebooted into XP, removed the XP-suggested driver, installed the new one and ... presto, sound!

A year later, this said user once again called for help re:XP and this time he said:"Remove it and install Linux Mint for me." That was two years ago. No calls for help till now.

On what empirical evidence do you base your implied claim of Linux drivers that break on your list of hardware on "over 90% of PCs out there"?

Claim what you like. The fact is - for me, at least - Ubuntu has been more reliable, more stable and more compatible. I have installed, and still using, Ubuntu on computing devices that include 3 different brands of netbooks, several notebooks (belonging to friends), PCs with single-core Athlons, Celerons, Pentiums, several quad-core PCs with different display cards, with different chipsets, with NO problems to this day.

These users have had XP die on them two or three times without Ubuntu once failing. One by one, they have abandoned booting into XP except to play Windows games. For one user, he finally got so fed up with XP, he also gave up playing Windows games.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Guru Schmuru
by lucas_maximus on Wed 4th Apr 2012 17:39 in reply to "RE[3]: Guru Schmuru"
lucas_maximus Member since:

Yes because the latest version of Windows is Windows XP.

Windows 7 I have had installed on this PC since RTM, I have even replaced the motherboard with one of a different chipset, first boot wasn't pretty and slow .. but it came up, downloaded and installed the drivers and I was up and running within Minutes.

Reply Parent Score: 2