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 512846
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Re:
by lucas_maximus on Wed 4th Apr 2012 17:42 UTC in reply to "RE: Re:"
Member since:

Seriously shutup about this unstable ABI being okay.

It is bullshit. Every code change you make can introduce bugs ... so chopping and changing the Interface (btw interfaces aren't supposed to just randomly change) will introduce bugs and it shows.

An Interface is supposed to obscure what is happening behind it ... this is like OOP programming 101.

Reply Parent Score: 2