Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 25th Apr 2013 14:56 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Ubuntu 13.04 has been released, with the Linux 3.8.8 kernel, a faster and less resource hungry Unity desktop, LibreOffice 4.0, and much more. Ubuntu users will know where to get it, and you're looking for a new installation, have fun. Also fun: UbuntuKylin.
Thread beginning with comment 559723
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Re: Re: Comment by kurkosdr
by kurkosdr on Thu 25th Apr 2013 18:33 UTC
kurkosdr
Member since:
2011-04-11

He exercised his right to install 3rd party software, which he wouldn't have gotten at all in a walled garden. The point was that the responsibility for 3rd party software quality assurance lies with you, the end user, or the 3rd party software vendor.


Theoretically, this is true. Practically, Linux Desktop doesn't care about API stability and backcompat, so, for the average user who doesn't want to do things "at his own risk" (aka see things getting broken), it has the effect of a walled garden.

I will bring Windows and OS X as examples again. You can run software outside their stores, and it works with remarkable back compat. For most users, such stability for software installed outside the repo (or store) is perceived as preferable to seeing some source code.

Just look at Android. Nobody mentions the ability to see the source as an advantage. They will mention the openness of the store compared to Apple's (emulators etc), the ability to sideload apps to buy directly from the dev, the hardware variety etc but not the source code. Even if they have an AOSP phone (Xperia Z, Nexus 4 etc)

Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.4; el-gr; LG-P990 Build/GRJ23) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1 MMS/LG-Android-MMS-V1.0/1.2

Reply Score: 1

RE: Re: Re: Comment by kurkosdr
by darknexus on Thu 25th Apr 2013 18:46 in reply to "Re: Re: Comment by kurkosdr"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Theoretically, this is true. Practically, Linux Desktop doesn't care about API stability and backcompat, so, for the average user who doesn't want to do things "at his own risk" (aka see things getting broken), it has the effect of a walled garden.

It's worse than that. Even things in the "stable" repositories will often break, e.g. GPU drivers and audio support. The latter is, in fact, something Ubuntu is rather famous for doing when they modify and customize Pulseaudio all to hell, breaking many of the ALSA drivers in the process even when they are not proprietary. One no sooner gets it working than a "stability update" breaks it again. I think the real problem is backward compatibility as opposed to the repository system. Repos can work well, as Android has demonstrated, but it has to be done correctly and backward compatibility must be maintained.

Reply Parent Score: 2

vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

Android doesn't really have a repo system (no dependency management)

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Re: Re: Comment by kurkosdr
by Alfman on Thu 25th Apr 2013 19:32 in reply to "Re: Re: Comment by kurkosdr"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

kurkosdr,

"Theoretically, this is true. Practically, Linux Desktop doesn't care about API stability and backcompat, so, for the average user who doesn't want to do things 'at his own risk' (aka see things getting broken), it has the effect of a walled garden."

The linux kernel has kept userspace backwards compatibility strong for ages. It's remotely possible an API regression occurred here, but it's far more likely that Wemgadge's explanation was the case since he indicates breakages are normal for vmware after OS upgrades. Vmware is very atypical in that it bypasses the *stable* userspace APIs all together. It is completely fair to criticize the lack of linux kernel space API & ABI stability for other reasons. However equating that to a walled garden is very...imaginative ;)

Edit: Look, I have no problem criticizing genuine linux distro breakages, they bother me too, but they all lack the most important attribute needed to call something a walled garden - the walls that block you from installing outside software.

Edited 2013-04-25 19:48 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

kurkosdr Member since:
2011-04-11

It is completely fair to criticize the lack of linux kernel space API & ABI stability for other reasons. However equating that to a walled garden is very...imaginative ;)


Well, the people behind Linux Desktop won't directly tell you "we don't want your proprietary app", they do it in a more subtle way. They will simply make it a PITA for you to ship your proprietary app on Linux. (same for proprietary GPU drivers)

Let's see: Ubuntu has like, 3 major proprietary apps, and during the last couple of releases, Ubuntu broke all 3 of them. VMWare, Steam ( http://tinyurl.com/bpbf6cv ) and Skype ( http://tinyurl.com/b8tnjmv ).

Am I the only one who doesn't get the dream of Linux Desktop? I mean, we are supposed to give up our Windows and OS X boxes, which are binary compatible to apps released in 2006 (to say the least), start using Linux, and confine ourselves to software found in the repos? And anyone who dares to dip it's pinky toe outside the repos will have to do things "at his own risk"?

I will get downvoted for this, but I will say it. There are lots of people in key positions in the Linux Desktop community with a downright hostile sentiment for proprietary software, who consider API and ABI instability a feature. This makes it impossible for proprietary ISVs and IHVs to target Ubuntu. If this hostile sentiment towards proprietary software didn't exist, I can easily imagine Linux Desktop having anywhere from 5% to 15% marketshare.

There are of course bright exceptions to this rule (Linux Torvalds and his insistence on API stability) but they are expections.

Edited 2013-04-26 09:02 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Re: Re: Comment by kurkosdr
by Kochise on Thu 25th Apr 2013 20:52 in reply to "Re: Re: Comment by kurkosdr"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Aaah, Fedora, the most advanced unstable distro :-) Shouldn't be called Fedora Core but Fedora pre-alpha.

Kochise

Reply Parent Score: 4

SeeM Member since:
2011-09-10

Aaah, Fedora, the most advanced unstable distro :-) Shouldn't be called Fedora Core but Fedora pre-alpha.


You're just jealous, because you still didn't switch from Ubuntu. >:)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Re: Re: Comment by kurkosdr
by Delgarde on Fri 26th Apr 2013 02:22 in reply to "Re: Re: Comment by kurkosdr"
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

Theoretically, this is true. Practically, Linux Desktop doesn't care about API stability and backcompat, so, for the average user who doesn't want to do things "at his own risk" (aka see things getting broken), it has the effect of a walled garden.


Can you give an example of that? Because while the *kernel* doesn't care much for backward compatibility, the desktops are pretty good at it.

Prior to the Gnome 3 release, those guys had been maintaining not only API but also ABI compatibility going back many years, and even with Gnome 3, they made sure the old libraries could be parallel-installed. So if by some chance you have some ten-year-old Gnome app you want to run, odds are you still can.

Reply Parent Score: 4