Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 8th Mar 2013 16:13 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Mark Shuttleworth: "I simply have zero interest in the crowd who wants to be different. Leet. 'Linux is supposed to be hard so it's exclusive' is just the dumbest thing that a smart person could say." He's right. Lots of interesting insights in this blog post - I may not agree with everything Ubuntu does, but at least it's doing something.
Thread beginning with comment 554892
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Comment by Laurence
by lucas_maximus on Sat 9th Mar 2013 19:35 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Laurence"
lucas_maximus
Member since:
2009-08-18

True, but on the other hand I'd honestly rather have more choices than a become dependent upon a single commercial entitee who's idea of a successful OS is vendor lock.


You guys don't know what lock-in really means. Lock-in is where you are dependent on a third party for supporting a bespoke application where all you data is tied up in and the company charges you £10000 for a bug fix which you know is only a few lines of code.

Sorry Windows is hardly lock-in compared to what I have experienced being on the other end.

At least with linux and open source in general one has a very practical hedge against monopolisation. That more than makes up for fragmentation in my opinion, but opinions will vary


It maybe, but fragmentation causes problems with software and hardware support. Microsoft try really hard with a few exceptions to keep things backwardly compatible.

Linux lacks kernel stability, which sucks, but I've found linux userspace application interfaces to be amazingly stable, do you have a real example we can try or are you just being hypothetical?


If it isn't open-source and doesn't bundle all the required libraries I suspect you would have problems getting an old program running because you tend to get into dependency hell.

You can symlink libraries etc, but you are relying on it having the same API as last time.

That's partly fair. But consider that the difference is that the hardware you've bought was manufacturer certified to run on your version of windows, while you probably failed to buy hardware certified for linux (right?). Still, as an engineer you should be *astonished* that you can even do this with linux and have a good chance that it will just work out of the box.


I understand the reasons why, which is fair enough. But I don't really care why when I am end user. I just got other shit to get on with. That is why I buy software that either provides the support or can easily emulate what i need to do.

It swings and roundabout. I use Linux quite a lot at home but I've seen people stuggle when things go wrong with any computing platform.

Android and Chrome OS will become the mainstream Linux on general purpose devices.

Edited 2013-03-09 19:35 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: Comment by Laurence
by Alfman on Sun 10th Mar 2013 02:13 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Laurence"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

lucas_maxiumus,

"Sorry Windows is hardly lock-in compared to what I have experienced being on the other end."


The other end meaning what? Linux? We know that's not true, but then I can't tell what you meant.

"If it isn't open-source and doesn't bundle all the required libraries I suspect you would have problems getting an old program running because you tend to get into dependency hell."

I'll wait for you to provide a realistic example from a decade ago that can be tested.


"But I don't really care why when I am end user. I just got other shit to get on with."

You know, if you were serious, then you'd have bought hardware and software that were linux certified. Most likely, like most people, your expectations of linux are so high that you download a free community supported distro, add arbitrary hardware and then expect it to work without any issues. It is a testament to linux that this works as often as it does, but if you want *guaranteed* results then you should be going to a linux vendor that *guarantees* results, otherwise you are taking the enduser supported route and you should be prepared to support your personal configuration.

If you are one to complain about self supporting your own personal configuration, that really means you should have gone with a vendor supported route. Next time you know, right?


I think you've already made up your mind here, but please consider what I've said seriously. It's reasonable to expect a linux certified system to run as well as a windows certified one. But it's also reasonable to expect some tinkering when you put together your own uncertified hardware.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by Laurence
by lucas_maximus on Sun 10th Mar 2013 09:37 in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Laurence"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

The other end meaning what? Linux? We know that's not true, but then I can't tell what you meant.


Didn't really read what I said did you? I was talking about being locked in on bespoke software is far worse than being locked into Windows or other Microsoft products.

I'll wait for you to provide a realistic example from a decade ago that can be tested.


Try compiling Latest Firefox on Ubuntu Warty.

You know, if you were serious, then you'd have bought hardware and software that were linux certified. Most likely, like most people, your expectations of linux are so high that you download a free community supported distro, add arbitrary hardware and then expect it to work without any issues. It is a testament to linux that this works as often as it does, but if you want *guaranteed* results then you should be going to a linux vendor that *guarantees* results, otherwise you are taking the enduser supported route and you should be prepared to support your personal configuration.

If you are one to complain about self supporting your own personal configuration, that really means you should have gone with a vendor supported route. Next time you know, right?


I think you've already made up your mind here, but please consider what I've said seriously. It's reasonable to expect a linux certified system to run as well as a windows certified one. But it's also reasonable to expect some tinkering when you put together your own uncertified hardware.



The point is that I am happy to ticker most of the time at work I am not (I don't use Linux at work).

People I know in IRL aren't nerdy enough to want to piss about with the computer. This goes back to fragmentation etc etc.

This really isn't hard to understand.

Edited 2013-03-10 09:38 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by Laurence
by Laurence on Sun 10th Mar 2013 12:34 in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Laurence"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

I think you've already made up your mind here

Oh he completely has. His arguments are cyclic, hypocritical and often completely misinformed. ie your typical fanboy.

Reply Parent Score: 2