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 554914
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Comment by Laurence
by Alfman on Sun 10th Mar 2013 02:13 UTC 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[8]: Comment by Laurence
by Alfman on Sun 10th Mar 2013 15:19 in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by Laurence"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

lucas_maximus,


"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 did, it was just out of context in our discussion on OS based vendor lock, but it looks like you meant it that way.



"Try compiling Latest Firefox on Ubuntu Warty."


So in other words, you were bluffing when you made this statement "* Backwards Compatibility (I mean for large programs released 10 years ago, not 'I can compile the version of screen from 15 years ago'"

We can all make up hypothetical examples, but if you had actually experienced a real backwards compatibility issue that effects real end users in practice, I'd have been curious about it.


"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)."

So when you complained about getting shit done earlier, that was being facetious? Haha, there's no way to win with you. ;)


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

People like this aren't always open to trying a new OS in the first place, but if they are you could point them to supported hardware that should get them up and going with minimal fuss:

http://www.ubuntu.com/certification/desktop/

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

RE[8]: Comment by Laurence
by lucas_maximus on Sun 10th Mar 2013 13:35 in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by Laurence"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

When are they any of those?



Making cheap shots is what you are good at. Missing the point when you know what the other person is saying is another thing. Having your head up your own arse and making snarky comments is another.

Canonical have pretty much killed any chance of Linux as a gaming platform because they aren't going to include Wayland and instead work on their own display server.

I like Microsoft's stuff. It works for me, but every criticism I made about Linux is the one reason why it doesn't get anywhere as a desktop OS for the masses.

I even quite like using Linux when I get the chance to tinker.

Every fork of Linux that is commercially successful is always either embedded or tightly controlled by one company (Android, Chrome OS) or is used used in "Enterprise" scenarios (Redhat, Suse).

MacOSX is the desktop *nix, like it or not.

Edited 2013-03-10 13:45 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2