MEPIS, one of the more popular Debian-derived distributions, may be moving in a new direction soon. MEPIS founder Warren Woodford is considering building future MEPIS releases from Ubuntu sources rather than from Debian. SimplyMEPIS 3.4-3, which is scheduled for release today, has been quite a challenge to build, according to Woodford. “It’s taking up all my time, fighting the Etch pool… We’ve had a lot of trouble, because the Debian community has become so active, it’s been difficult to get this out, so I’m looking at alternatives to getting out stable releases.”
MEPIS May Be Going Ubuntu
68 Comments
2006-02-10 12:45 pm
2006-02-10 5:07 am
-
2006-02-10 9:51 am
2006-02-10 5:47 am
-
2006-02-11 8:08 am
-
2006-02-11 12:06 pm
-
2006-02-10 8:49 am
2006-02-10 9:54 am
2006-02-10 12:17 pm
2006-02-10 5:41 pm
2006-02-10 7:55 pm
2006-02-11 12:30 pm
leech
Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that he wants to have the OSNews staff remove his account? It’s as if the fact that he has an account here forces him to read the site and post to it.
I will admit that I use Ubuntu, in fact I’m one of those crazy bleeding edge people that use the development cycle most of the time. I am also an extreme fan of Debian. In many ways I like Debian more. They have far less breakage in Sid than Ubuntu’s Dapper has.
Here is a quick run down of the difference between Ubuntu and Dapper;
1) Package priority. Debian tends to have newer packages for the underlying OS faster. Example of this is mysql version 5 (packaged at least a month before Ubuntu), udev (0.84 vs 0.79). Ubuntu usually has newer desktop oriented packages, such as Gnome, X.org, etc.
2) Packaging is much better in Debian. I know that a lot of the package maintainers are the same for Debian/Ubuntu, but the Debian packages break a whole lot less. Especially since Debian is more encompassing for it’s library of supported packages, whereas Ubuntu has a limited set (these will generally all work great, but Breezy had quite a mess of broken packages that just won’t install from the universe/multiverse repositories)
3) Philosophy. Ubunut is free free free. Debian is more about Stable stable stable.
4) This is the most obvious, Release schedule. Ubuntu is fairly new and started much later than the major DEs, so they could tune their release schedule to Gnome, which is every 6 months. Debian on the other hand was there long before KDE was ever around, let alone Gnome. Debian has always been a fully volunteer project.
Ubuntu does give back some patches to Debian, if it weren’t for Debian, Ubuntu (not to mention many other linux Distributions (not to mention Mepis which is the topic) are based on Debian.
My question to this is, HOW THE HELL COULD UBUNTU KILL OFF DEBIAN? It’s impossible, because if all the Debian developers stopped producing packages for it, Ubuntu would also die off, since as stated in the Ubuntu release schedule, they take software packages from Debian Sid, stabilize them and then do a feature/version freeze, then release. They do it every 6 months. If Debian disappeared, where would they grab new packages from? So even if Mepis starts using Ubuntu (which just means most of the newer packaging is done for them) then it is still in essence basing their distro off of Debian.
If anyone really thought about it, the only true way to kill off Debian would be to have a conference of all the Debian developers and then have the place nuked. Oops, I shouldn’t give MS any plans 
How could it be possible that Ubuntu could be a monopoly? I seriously wonder? If they started charging for it (which they could, under the license of GPL, BSD, etc.) then people would either pay, or they wouldn’t and go with something that is still free. It is stated in their mission that they will ALWAYS remain free. Of course they could change that, but it’d be like shooting themselves in the foot. Most people would just say screw you (including their developers!) and go to straight Debian, or some other Distro like Mepis, Kanotix, Fedora, etc. It’s not like there aren’t a 1000+ distributions to choose from.
I’m not sure how Ubuntu is a Fad either. Gentoo wasn’t even a fad, it’s just what people who want to feel like they’re bad ass hackers install. I know a few people that got into Gentoo. All I said to them was “Cool, I have been down that road already back when I first ran linux and had to compile XFree86 by myself and just about every application. Sorry, just don’t have the patience to watch GCC outputs anymore.” Ubuntu is popular for several reasons. 1) It uses apt/dpkg, 2) Comes on 1 CD (not many Distros do anymore), 3) Easy to install for just about everyone, 4) Free CDs shipped directly to your house (I think this is one of the biggest ones), 5) The newest Desktop software out there.
Really I think the last two are the biggest reasons. It’s not a fad, otherwise you could say Debian is a Fad. Look at Distrowatch.com, out of the top 10 distros on there 5 are Debian based, 3 are rpm/redhat based, and then there is Slackware and Gentoo.
Guess I’ve ranted enough, some people are just spreading FUD here and have no idea what they’re talking about.
For Mepis, I think it could be a good move to move to using Ubuntu as a base. I haven’t ever used Mepis myself because I really don’t like KDE, but then that’s for another discussion.
Leech
Ok, I find this quite funny, crowd spits on debian saying they are slow and old and it’s good for nothing, and the guy comes complaining about debian developers’ recent fairly high level of activity
You know what ? Everyone should do what they wish, build your distro on what you wish, it doesn’t really matter. Most [of ordinary] users don’t eally care for anything besides a fancy installer and an easy package manager. Is it based on debian, ubuntu, slack or fancypantix, nobody [of ordinary users] cares.
Anyway, mepis is great. Ubuntu is also great. As a fact, all debian-based dsitros are great. If they can make their lives easier by combining sources, efforts, whatever, hey that’s just wonderful.
In my world debian is the king, gentoo is a good friend, others only form the crowd of the coolest party of the realm
But without the crowd the party would suck big time 
Warren continues “SimplyMEPIS used to be built on packages from the Debian unstable (Sid) pool and that worked well because the Debian pool changed slowly. Then the rate change increased in Sid and for this release we switched to Debian testing (Etch). But even Etch is becoming too unstable for our users needs. It took months of extra work to get this release out the door. We’ll have to find a different solution for the future.” “I do not mean to imply that there is anything wrong with Etch or Debian–quite the contrary. The Debian team is working very hard to build the next stable version of Debian. But they have no obligation or reason to consider our needs for a package pool that is stable on a 6 month cycle.”
>In my world debian is the king, gentoo is a good friend, others only form the crowd of the coolest party of the realm
But without the crowd the party would suck big time 
Oh! So we’re all friends now eh? Well I know what you said last summer!
/Grumpy offended Debian/Ubuntu fan
I wonder what the impact of this is going to be on the DCC. Mepis was one of the founding members I believe. Seems like Ubuntu may have been wise to take the wait and see approach.
DCC has lame ducks like Userlinux in its ranks. I think they are beyond careing 😉
Maybe they could marge forces with Kubuntu? The 3.5.1 packages are rolled out at kubuntu.org servers.
before debian switches to ubuntu
I’ve been using Mepis for over 2years now, and it would make upgrading a lot easier. I’m a “computer is for working” user and don’t care what sources Warren uses. It doesn’t have to be set in stone either. If things stabilize with Debian, or the DCC gets it together, and Warren wants to switch, then that would be fine also.
Or Mebuntu?
This is exactly why I said Ubuntu was a bad bad thing. Ubuntu will eventually kill off Debian, and any Debian based competitors. Monopolies are always bad for business, whether they’re Linux based or not.
Dave
Could you please enlighten us as to why Ubuntu is a monopoly? 🙂
Since reading and comprehension skills are so poor on osnews.com these days, I’ll requote my original post in part:
“Ubuntu will eventually kill off Debian, and any Debian based competitors.”
Note the use of the words “will”, and “eventually”. Obviously there are a lot of stupid people reading osnews.com when they mod your post up on such poorly thought out, and ill comprehended replies. So, basic comprehension means that it might not be now, but it will happen. From my post, a reasonably intelligent person can deduce that I am making a presumption for the future, based on what is current happening.
Ubuntu would be nowhere without Debian. Nowhere. I simply have never, and will never, trust the motives behind Ubuntu. I’m old enough, and intuitive enough to smell one very big rat. That’s my prerogative.
Dave
1. Ubuntu is not a monopoly by any sane definition.
2. Debian could easily suck some wind from Ubuntu’s sails by fixing their broken release policies. Ubuntu is really nothing more than Debian with a release policy appropriate to desktop use.
2. Debian could easily suck some wind from Ubuntu’s sails by fixing their broken release policies. Ubuntu is really nothing more than Debian with a release policy appropriate to desktop use
Well… *I* don´t think that the Debian release policy is broken. Actually, I like their approach of “it´s done when it´s done”. It might not matter that much for kids running the latest gimmicks on their computers on their momma´s basement but it surely is appreciated by the sysadmins around the world and people that use their desktops to work, not play.
That´s just one of the aspects where I consider Ubuntu being overhyped. After all, their repositories are nothing more than frozen snapshots from Etch where their developers can do the (admitedly heavy) work on the packages so that they can suit their needs. But what most Ubuntu fans forget is that _this_ work depends on the _heavier_ work done by Etch mantainers and that Debian have much more manpower (over 1000 developers/maintainers last that I heard) than Canonical have at the moment. Ubuntu just takes advantage of the wonderful infrastructure put in place by Debian.
While I have nothing against nor torwards Ubuntu, *I* think that it is a dangerous idea to consider Ubuntu as the base for developping anything related to Linux as a standard since, in my eyes, it is just another fad. If the ISVs coming from other platforms are not targeting RedHat to develop commercial software, then they oughta be targeting Debian. Period. Ubuntu might be good for desktops, Debian is good at everything.
That being said, I´d like to play a little bit with Kubuntu mainly because it usually is bleeding edge on KDE but before that I´d like to ask to the Ubuntu-ers if that sudo thing can be changed to a proper root account without breaking too much stuff (I know about sudo -s, but I want a proper root account). Thanks in advance.
(Disclaimer: I´m a current MEPIS fan/user)
Edited 2006-02-10 06:03
You can easily have a “real” root account for Ubuntu/Kubuntu. You simply use passwd explicitly to set a password for root.
Edited 2006-02-10 06:08
It might not matter that much for kids running the latest gimmicks on their computers on their momma´s basement but it surely is appreciated by the sysadmins around the world and people that use their desktops to work, not play.
Ah yes, the unspoken motive behind a lot of Debian users: snobbery. Only real men run Debian Stable, everyone else is a frivolous fellow-traveller, etc, etc..
If the ISVs coming from other platforms are not targeting RedHat to develop commercial software, then they oughta be targeting Debian.
In that case you have to ask, why don’t they? Might it have something to do with the fact that if you have millions of dollars and a lot of jobs on the line, you are going to go with the grown-up, standards-compliant company that runs a tight ship and has the largest market share in the enterprise? Or are you going to have to explain to your stockholders why you are betting the farm on the crew from, say, Debian Planet with their “it’s ready when we say so, forget deadlines” approach and personal grooming challenges?
There is an awful lot of BS talked about Linux. A lot of different distributions will do pretty much what anyone needs, including SuSE and Red Hat (and probably Ubuntu, Gentoo and Slackware though I’ve never used the last two). Pulling out better and worse is just a waste of time, other than choosing the most appropriate tool for the job.
Actually, I like their approach of “it´s done when it´s done”. It might not matter that much for kids running the latest gimmicks on their computers on their momma´s basement but it surely is appreciated by the sysadmins around the world and people that use their desktops to work, not play.
I mostly agree with you here. Ubuntu is not a replacement for Debian. That said, I must take exception to your characterization of Ubuntu and Ubuntu users. I’ve been using Debian and Debian derivatives since 1998. Debian is, imho, the best overall Linux distro available.
So, considering my very high opinion of Debian why do I use Kubuntu? Beacause Debian’s release policy is not geared to the needs of desktop users. Stable has a tendency to get very, very long in the tooth a year or so after release. After the 3 years, it’s positively archaic from the point of view of desktop users. This fact is what drove me, along with most other people using Debian a desktop OS, to start tracking Sid rather than stable, which I did for years.
For the most part this works rather well, but there are the occasional gotchas (usually updates to GCC, glibc, multimedia libs, or X) when things break for a week or so. No biggie for me, I have a reasonably good undertanding of how Debian packaging works and I can generally fix things when they break. The other major downside to running Sid is the huge amount of package churn. After all, it’s a development branch! Often this means 1 to 2 GBs of updates a week for a desktop type install.
While I can deal with the shortcomings of using Sid, I’d prefer not to if possible. And for less experienced users (not to mention those without broadband) tracking Sid just isn’t a workable solution. (K)Ubuntu fixes these problems. For most most server installations though, I personally use and recommend Debian stable. That being said, I do think Debian should move to dependable schedule for its release, preferably 18 month cycles.
*I* think that it is a dangerous idea to consider Ubuntu as the base for developping anything related to Linux as a standard since, in my eyes, it is just another fad.
Who’s considering Ubuntu as a base for a standard?
f the ISVs coming from other platforms are not targeting RedHat to develop commercial software, then they oughta be targeting Debian. Period. Ubuntu might be good for desktops, Debian is good at everything.
Which distros ISVs target is always going to be determined by install base and, at this time, there are a lot more desktop users of Ubuntu than Debian. Thus ISVs selling desktop, packages will likely target Ubuntu and not Debian. I’d prefer to see strong compatibility between Ubuntu and Debian, but that cannot happen until Debian streamlines its release schedules. In a perfect world, all Debian derivatives would be based off of testing, but testing needs to recieve regular security patches and binary compatibility needs to be ensured for specified windows of time (like 6 months). The other option is to do essentially what Ubuntu has done and set up a separate desktop release tree which still feeds from Sid, but where the release schedule makes sense for desktop use.
Edited 2006-02-10 19:37
I agree with pretty much everything that you said except that I don’t think that it is that easy to specify a timeframe for release policies for a project as big as Debian is as people here seems to think. Ubuntu’s official repository is just a very small subset of the Debian repository, with over 16000 packages.
It’s easy for them to select a small collection of desktop oriented packages and say that they’ll put out a new release every six months. Meanwhile, they can just go ahead and say that everything that outside this collection is unsupported. You’re free to install them and do whatever you want, just don’t bug us when stuff get broken later.
Who’s considering Ubuntu as a base for a standard?
If you follow the thread carefully, you’ll see a handful of Ubuntu proponents suggesting that we should ditch everything else and that Ubuntu should be the defacto standard on Linux land.
Again, I have nothing against Ubuntu per se. But the fact is that Ubuntu is not even that different from other desktop oriented distros to be considered a Linux standard. What the hell, Mark Shuttleworth has stated several times that they don’t want to be tied to decisions coming from a comitee nor anything like that as that could hinder their development and I kinda agree with him considering their goals, but I can’t see that working as a truly Linux standard. You know, something that would push Linux forward. They’re more interested in do the best that they can, and I wish more power to them.
If you’re going to suggest that the ISVs should consider something to use as a base to develop their desktop stuff upon, I think that they should look at FreeDesktop.org. Granted, fd.o still doesn’t cover everything that it could but I think that it would be a better foundation than anything that could come from the Ubuntu camp. Debian is another story, though. It has a solid foundation that could truly have something built upon it. And I’m not saying this out of arrogance as some other poster accused me, as I’m not even a proper Debian user on my desktop (I prefer SimplyMEPIS for that). I’m saying this because that’s how I perceive these things. I can attest Debian stability, flexibility and functionality because I used to administrate some web/e-mail/dns/traffic shapers servers on a ISP sometime ago.
Dearie me…comprehension is exceptionally bad today. Read my reply to the other poster. Saves me having to repeat it.
1. Not a monopoly – yet.
2. Debian does not have broken release policies. Slow, yes. But not broken. Please choose your words more carefully. Debian’s main issue is that it supports so many arches. imho – too many arches. In reality, only PPC, i386, amd64 and sparc should be supported, the rest should die like the dinosaurs that they are.
Please note that Debian doesn’t have millions of dollars donated to it. It does what it does on a much smaller budget than Ubuntu. Money does help. Maybe Mark should have donated a few million to Debian eh?
Dave
You most certainly did imply that Ubuntu is a monopoly. You further asserted that this will eventually “kill of Debian”. I’d suggest you pay more attention to what you write if you wish to be understood more precisely.
I choose to call Debian’s release policies “broken” because that is what I believe them to be. They need to to be fixed. Luckily most of the Debian maintainers realize this and efforts to this are underway. FWIW, I agree with you that Debian needs to reasses its support of obscure platforms. My recommendation would be make only PPC and the x86 family release critical, all other architectures would remain supported so long as there are maintainers interested in doing the work, but problems getting X to build on Spark would no longer be able to hold up the release schedule.
Quote: This is exactly why I said Ubuntu was a bad bad thing. Ubuntu will eventually kill off Debian, and any Debian based competitors. Monopolies are always bad for business, whether they’re Linux based or not.
Dave”
Read my f–king post again dimwit. Jesus. Are you guys that f–king thick that you can’t f–king read and comprehend basic English?
As to broken, I don’t consider Debian broken, slow, yes, but not broken.
Dave
Boy, you’re an offense little f–kwit aren’t you? Improve your facilities with the english language if you wish to be understood.
Edited 2006-02-10 22:44
“This is exactly why I said Ubuntu was a bad bad thing. Ubuntu will eventually kill off Debian, and any Debian based competitors.”
Please explain? Why is Ubuntu a “bad, bad” thing? If Ubuntu killed off Debian, Debian would still live on as Ubuntu because Ubuntu _is_ Debian. For arguments sake let’s say Debian was killed off, and Ubuntu tooks it’s place. Why would that be a bad thing in the grand scheme of things? I would assume that most Debian users would then be using Ubuntu (or one of its derivatives) and I don’t really see why that would be a bad thing. Perhaps it’s just because you don’t like Ubuntu because it’s popular, and because it is encroaching on Debian’s turf. Perhaps I am wrong. However, I see this sort of lame argument so much from the Linux crowd, and it’s _really_ sad.
“Wah! My Linux distro is better than yours, and yours is becoming so popular that it threatening the longevity of mine. It sucks! Instead of embracing the more popular distro, I’m going to bite my nose to spite my face and switch to another unknown distro! See how you like that!” Quite frankly, I couldn’t give a rats. Use what you want, but believe this — Linux will _never_ succeed (at least in the desktop world) being so damned fractionalized. I don’t know how many distros there are these days, but probably way more than when I last checked, and _way_ more than there should be. I think it would be _far_ more constructive for people to work on existing, popular distros than to create their own, because unless they do something _really_ special, it will only ever be used by a relative handful of users, and effectively go nowehere. Sure, it was a good learning experience, and probably a lot of fun, and that’s great, but at some point the less popular distros have got to die out and allow the more popular ones to live on.
It will all work out in the end.
“Monopolies are always bad for business, whether they’re Linux based or not.”
Monopolies are _not_ always bad for business. Monopolies are bad for business when they start abusing their monopoly position to better their position at the cost of their competitors. That is why there are laws against that sort of business practice. Making monopolies flat-out illegal (because they are a “bad, bad thing” would be insane. This would stifle growth and innovation because companies would be in fear of becoming so popular and inadvertently crushing all their competition because their product was better, so putting themselves in the position of being a monopoly.
For arguments sake let’s say Debian was killed off, and Ubuntu tooks it’s place. Why would that be a bad thing in the grand scheme of things?
Yes, for those who use architectures supported by Debian but not by Ubuntu. Debian also officially supports a lot more packages than does Ubuntu. Debian (stable) is also a lot more stable, something business users care about. Ubuntu isn’t exactly positioned to take over Debian’s server segment. And you know there would be some people who wouldn’t be happy with being beholden to Canonical, though the creation of the Ubuntu Foundation should help.
Anyway, Ubuntu does not have the same focus that Debian does, so in the end Debian croaking and being replaced by Ubuntu would be imho a loss.
Quote: “Debian would still live on as Ubuntu because Ubuntu _is_ Debian.”
Umm no. Ubuntu is Debian based. It is not Debian. That’s like saying you have two non identical brothers, but saying that they’re the same.
Quote: “Perhaps it’s just because you don’t like Ubuntu because it’s popular, and because it is encroaching on Debian’s turf.”
I don’t like Ubuntu for a variety of reasons, strangely enough, popularity isn’t one of them. Nice try and putting your words into my mouth.
Quote: “Instead of embracing the more popular distro, I’m going to bite my nose to spite my face and switch to another unknown distro!”
Really? I actually use a rather well known, and well respected Debian based distribution. I’ll leave you to research it and figure it out.
Quote: “Linux will _never_ succeed (at least in the desktop world) being so damned fractionalized.”
I disagree. Linux won’t succeed because Microsoft will never be punished for being a monopolist, not at least by the current US regime. Until the playing ground is truly even, and Microsoft is actually behaving itself, and hardware manufacturers aren’t afraid to support another operating system other than Microsoft, Linux will not get anywhere. If I were to say that the US government is deliberately sabotaging Linux and open source, in order to keep Microsoft going, and of course, the revenue that it brings into the US economy, I wouldn’t be too far from the truth. Linux is much more a world based operating system, and that doesn’t really help the US economy. Remember, most IT and software based firms are US owned, and US based. The US wants to keep that stranglehold on the world IT related market, because it means income coming into the already overloaded US economy.
Quote: ” think it would be _far_ more constructive for people to work on existing, popular distros than to create their own”
You’re obviously one of the new breed of Linux users. Linux was always about choice. I’ll say it again for you, so you can comprehend it – choice. That’s why Linux, and open source software is so special. Who are you to dictate that we all should just use one type of software in each area? It is the one thing that I particularly dislike about Ubuntu.
Quote: ” Monopolies are _not_ always bad for business. Monopolies are bad for business when they start abusing their monopoly position to better their position at the cost of their competitors.”
Every monopolist abuses their monopoly. It just takes some time for people to start noticing it. Note how Microsoft is a monopolist, and is still successfully employing the same monopolist and anti competitive behaviour without penalty. Does that really make you wonder? My belief is you never give something the chance to become a monopoly, because once it has a monopoly share of the market, it’s only a matter of time before it becomes a monopoly. Better to avoid the temptation in the first place, no?
Quote: “That is why there are laws against that sort of business practice.”
Very funny. Those laws aren’t very good are they? Let’s see, the current US regime isn’t very happy with what the Europeans are doing about Microsoft and it’s monopolistic and anti competitive behaviour, aren’t they? One law for the rich, and one law for everyone else. No thanks, that’s not my idea of a responsible society.
Quote: “This would stifle growth and innovation because companies would be in fear of becoming so popular and inadvertently crushing all their competition because their product was better”
Bullshit. Competition is good, monopolies destroy competition.
Dave
Have you considered that part of the reason Etch is changing so quickly is because Ubuntu is feeding changes into Debian, and this in turn is making it easier for Debian maintainers to keep up to date?
Ubuntu’s success doesn’t mean the death of Debian any more than Fedora means the death of RHEL or openSUSE means the death of SUSE Enterprise. Quite the contrary. These bleeding branch distributions provide an important role in experimenting and stabilizing new technologies so that the old workhorses can be solid.
If you’re going to deploy and be responsible for 1000 desktops, the last thing you want to do is to upgrade every 6 months or risk a supposedly minor bug shutting down your company. You may want the flash and glitz of the bleeding edge distros for your own desktop, but when you’re head is on the line, you’ll likely go for the low risk boringly stable. That’s what Debian, RHEL, and SUSE enterprise are.
There’s no way the bleeding edgers are a threat.
Quote: “Have you considered that part of the reason Etch is changing so quickly is because Ubuntu is feeding changes into Debian, and this in turn is making it easier for Debian maintainers to keep up to date? ”
Sure. Some stuff is going back into Debian. You’re trying to imply that all of the Etch changes are a sole result of Ubuntu. That’s a load of codswallop. Keep dreaming your rosy Ubuntu glasses.
Quote: “There’s no way the bleeding edgers are a threat.”
Of course not, since on the workplace desktop, most users will have very cut down desktops for a variety of reasons. Having the latest and greatest in that type of scenario was never going to be a real issue, even before the release of Ubuntu.
Dave
Ubuntu is very bad, I knew it from when it first came out and all of a sudden became the golden boy of distros. Here were Mepis and PCLinuxOS that were around for longer and ubuntu comes in and sweeps the community off it’s collective feet.
Now even warren is running to them. Well no matter I use PCLinuxOS now.
I’m sorry but what kind of subjective, unsubstantiated, unexplained, biased crap is “Ubuntu is very bad”??? I also have used Ubuntu since before the first version was released. It revitalised my interest in Linux after being put off by Red Hat. I since moved to Mepis and tried a bunch of others but have both (K)ubuntu and Mepis running on various boxes. (K)ubuntu supports my AMD64 machine nicely and Mepis runs good on my other x86 boxes. I like the cleanness of Kubuntu and the comprehensiveness of Mepis.
Now tell my just why hundreds of satisfied Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Edubuntu users are so dramatically wrong in thinking these distros are so good, and why in fact, they are just plain “very bad”???
I have seen so much FUD being spread around Ubuntu: from people who just “know” that Mark Shuttleworth has evil, monopolistic ulterior motives to those who are just plain upset that Ubuntu threatens to bring some stability and popularity to the Linux world on a scale previously unseen. There are Linux purists of some kind who despise the fact that Ubuntu brings Linux within the grasp of “average Joe” users removing the uber-geek mystique (although I would argue that Mepis and other distros also have their share of non-techie users).
It is absolutely high time that people who claim to support Linux stopped encouraging the separation between distros and started realising that keeping distros apart in small pockets all pursuing different aims and agendas will never be good for Linux.
And if people are so paranoid and naive as to think that a single person could wipe out the combined efforts of the many contributors, testers, users, in short the whole community that makes up the Linux world, then fine, go ahead and have your anti-Ubuntu, anti-Mark Shuttleworth witch-hunts. But the rest of us will continue to live in the real world and hope that increased cooperation and sharing of resources between distros will continue to improve Linux in all it’s various guises.
Your post demonstrates why ubuntu is a bad thing. As I said about when it first came out, there is something very distributing about it and while I can’t place my finger on it.
It may well be Mr. Suttleworth, those of us who use Linux have been burned by a millionaire and maybe some are not ready to retread the path of the herd mentality. It could have been the fact that when it took the Linux world by storm there were better distros out there and where ubuntu came from was not put out for the public to see right away.
And FYI I am not a “Linux Purist” I want to see Linux take over the market. Just not under one person, that would be no better than Windows.
In fact, the more I think about it the more it smacks of MS. When one gets Ubuntu it’s not ready to go, you have to download some stuff to be able to use .mp3. There are distros out there that are that ready PCLinuxOS and Mepis are just but two.
This all reminds me of a scene from Pirates of Silicon Valley where Steve Jobs tells Bill Gates “We make better stuff!” and Bill Gates looks back and tells him “That’s not the point!”. Microsoft as well as ubuntu is good at marketing but falls short everywhere else.
Microsoft as well as ubuntu is good at marketing but falls short everywhere else.
Have you even ever used UbuntuLinux for more than ten minutes? Ubuntu works beautifully and UbuntuLinux is Free in every sense of the word.
The reason that Ubuntu doesn’t ship stuff like MP3 codecs is because those technologies are proprietary and legally shady. Any distribution which hasn’t licensed them with the proprietor is tainted and a lawsuit waiting to happen.
Have you even ever used UbuntuLinux for more than ten minutes? Ubuntu works beautifully and UbuntuLinux is Free in every sense of the word.
No and I don’t intend too. Ubuntu is not good for the Linux Community and may end up taking it down th wrong path. I can see it fast becomin another MS, just because it’s free now doesn’t mean it always will be.
How can you dislike something you have never tried, ubuntu is bringing the linux experience to people who might never try it, or try a less user-friendly distro and not like it, so they switch back. Being closed minded and choosing to believe the worse about an organization when they have made no actions that backup your feelings are bad for the whole OSS movement
IMHO no it’s not. That’s a silly saying going around that if you haven’t tried it don’t criticize it. That’s like saying a person can’t say jumping off a building is bad unless you did it.
One can form perfectly valid opinions about things even if they never have used it or done it. Experience is not everything.
I suppose, but you are using quite a drastic example (jumping off a building). Despite public opinion, using Ubuntu will not cause certain death
. However, many people disregard Ubuntu as being totally bad for GNU/Linux. Yes, the potential does exist for Ubuntu to really alter the GNU/Linux landscape for the worse. That being said, there were some nice features that I have not found in any other Debian-based distribution.
I have tried it, thank you very much, and trying it confirmed my suspicions. So don’t try to presume that you know what I have done, or haven’t done. Idiot.
Dave
You can’t form valid opinions about something you know nothing about, that would be called “superstition”
I have never heard such an insane statement in my life,
“One can form perfectly valid opinions about things even if they never have used it or done it. Experience is not everything”
I personally use Windows, FreeBSD and Ubuntu, I have tried Fedora Core, Suse and older versions of Red Hat, I learned to make choices based upon experience and knowledge, not beliefs and opinions. Experience is what gives us the ability to learn from our mistakes, and to overcome them. The argument you just used is the same argument that a lot of windows users use when they talk about linux, so welcome to a very large club
When you get Fedora core, you have to install multimedia support, most distros come like that it is not a corporate issue, it is a liscense issue.
You can’t kill a way of thinking or a philosophy. That’s my understanding of what Debian is – it’s not some ‘company that can go under’ or anything.
(BTW, I use Ubuntu because it’s Debian based and easy to maintain. That and it has most things I need on a single CD installation – and it works for me.)
It works for you, but it doesn’t work for me. I don’t have to like Ubuntu, and I most certainly don’t have to support it. People love fads. Ubuntu is a fad, just as Gentoo was 4 or so years ago.
Dave
And that’s absolutely fine by me. It’s totally up to you what you like and don’t like – that’s the groovy thing about linux and highlights what I think it’s all about.
Choice.
Good on you!
Exactly. But now we have the ubuntuites dictating that I must like Ubuntu, that I must use it, and if I dare even speak out that I dislike it, I’ll get moderated down. Again, we have a spate of my comments being f–king moderated down by dimwit f–king idiots, for no apparent reason at all. We have the osnews.com spineless f–king staff doing f–k all. I might just continue to keep swearing all the time just to piss them off, because in reality, I want my account removed. This website has become so f–king useless, so f–king lawless that it’s a waste of time even visiting it, let alone trying to make a sane comment.
I asked the staff a few weeks ago to remove my account, and they haven’t even done so. Do I have to formally serve a subpeona on you guys to make yo do it? I can’t stand this site anymore, and I can’t stand the inability of the staff to ensure that things are done right.
Dave
Then don’t come to the site
Exactly. But now we have the ubuntuites dictating that I must like Ubuntu, that I must use it, and if I dare even speak out that I dislike it, I’ll get moderated down. Again, we have a spate of my comments being f–king moderated down by dimwit f–king idiots, for no apparent reason at all. We have the osnews.com spineless f–king staff doing f–k all. I might just continue to keep swearing all the time just to piss them off, because in reality, I want my account removed. This website has become so f–king useless, so f–king lawless that it’s a waste of time even visiting it, let alone trying to make a sane comment.
I asked the staff a few weeks ago to remove my account, and they haven’t even done so. Do I have to formally serve a subpeona on you guys to make yo do it? I can’t stand this site anymore, and I can’t stand the inability of the staff to ensure that things are done right.
Dave
Ever heard of Chicken Little?
And your off topic reply’s point is? Amazing how an off topic reply doesn’t get moderated down.
Dave
Wow, you’re so dense I’m surprised other stupid people don’t orbit around you!
I’ll find a link to the story of Chicken Little and include it, but essentially it’s the story of a little chicken who ran around crying and flailing their limbs about in anticipation something that wasn’t really happening, which they only became convinced of because they had such a slanted and limited viewpoint in the first place.
Does that sound at all familiar to you?
Here’s a pleasantly presented version of the story, as promised…
http://www.geocities.com/mjloundy/
Oh, personal insults now. I can see the moderators have been so busy, that they just couldn’t moderate you down! Well, f–k you. f–king moron.
Dave
Ever heard of Chicken Little?
Oh, yeah. 😀
So mepis will take ubuntu as its base hmm so theyll take kubuntu and slap a mepis logo on everything wow that WILL speed up “development” So the only difference between mepis instead of kubuntu will be that itll have the non free stuff in it. Instead of mepis just TAKING from debian and bitching about bugs etc why dont they work on fixing debian and GIVE somthing back to the community
Frankly, I think pure Debian stable is better than any of the Debian derivatives basing themselves off unstable or testing, both as a desktop and as a server. The new Debian installer is great (Ubuntu’s is s slightly modified version of it), and it’s very stable, fast, clean, and easy.
But I’ve always wanted a good, solid version of Debian Stable that had some of the “niceties” that Mepis brings to the table – that is, boots live, then has an easy live installer, then includes java and media codecs. But the core and most packages would be pure Debian stable. That would be an awesome combination – the stability and quality and stable Deb repos of pure Debian, with the extra luxury of a Mepis.
Yes, you may like stable. I, for one, need to have access to software that was released this year. Being a project manager I should know what new sits in PgSQL and if we should move Subversion to next version. I’ve been running Debain SID but it’s fun, when it’s fun. But when it’s broken, it’s just fcuked. And if I can have polished, new packages, without being exposed to SID — I’m all for it.
I bet Mepis owner took the same path. 🙂
There already an OS such as this, it is Genie OS (formerly Debian Pure).
http://genieos.toluenterprises.com/
There already an OS such as this, it is Genie OS (formerly Debian Pure).