PDA

View Full Version : Ubuntu in top 10 most disappointing technologies



Johnsie
May 23rd, 2009, 11:44 AM
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/16/20090516/ttc-top-10-disappointing-technologies-6315470.html

Ubuntu was listed on there because the author says it was hyped up by over-zealous Linux enthusiasts and failed to live up to the hype. 5 years on Ubuntu is still failing to make any significant impact in the operating systems market and is still mainly an operating system for computing hobbyists rather than the average user.

I have been using Ubuntu since 2005 and haven't noticed significant number of people or companies making the switch from Windows to Ubuntu, so I would tend to agree with the comments made by the author. I like Ubuntu, but it doesn't seem to be going anywhere.

Gucko
May 23rd, 2009, 12:04 PM
The most important feature of Ubuntu is that IT'S FREE.
What do you need more than this? Secure, reliable, and FREEEEE!

samjh
May 23rd, 2009, 12:08 PM
Keep writing such wrong headlines, and you too could end up being a bad journalist. ;)

Ubuntu was not listed in the top 10, as this thread title suggests. It received an honourable mention only. :)

Although it does irk me a little, I have to agree that given their criteria, Ubuntu hasn't made any serious mark against Windows as was hyped.

lukjad007
May 23rd, 2009, 12:15 PM
This has already been posted before :)

Corelogik
May 23rd, 2009, 12:19 PM
The biggest roadblock to any Linux distribution in the desktop space is not a lack of innovation.

There are 3 things that currently block Linux from widespread desktop adoption;

1. Microsoft's lock on pre-instalation.
2. Hardware device driver pervasiveness.
3. The general public's lack of computer literacy.

Break through anyone of the 3, and others will fall shortly thereafter. The result will be the swift adoption of Linux on the desktop, and the equally swift death of Microsoft.

The hardest of the 3 to crack is going to be the public's lack of literacy. As long as learning Microsoft is equated with learning computers, the public will continue to be an illiterate mob.

Linux is on the brink, it will not take much of a push to cross the finish line.

mcduck
May 23rd, 2009, 12:33 PM
5 years on Ubuntu is still failing to make any significant impact in the operating systems market and is still mainly an operating system for computing hobbyists rather than the average user.

Lets see.. Windows 1.0 was released in 1985. Five years later they were at version 3.0, which still was rather marginally used ( and complete piece of crap, excuse my language).

The first Windows you could call suitable for "average user" was 3.11, released in 1993.

I'd say Ubuntu has achieved a lot more in it's first five years than Windows ever did. At least it's usable operating system, Windows versions prior to 3.11 were not. :D

edit: personally, I consider Win98SE as first usable Windows version. That was released in 1999, 14 years after the first Windows release.. :D

tsali
May 23rd, 2009, 12:42 PM
The most important feature of Ubuntu is that IT'S FREE.
What do you need more than this? Secure, reliable, and FREEEEE!

First, no OS or software is 'free'...they demand some of your personal resources to use them. Some 'paid' software packages can end up being less expensive because they solve problems turnkey or otherwise increase the productivity of the user.

In that vein, 'value' is a better feature than 'free'. Value can vary depending on the user's situation. Ubuntu offers a lot of value for the right implementation.

If one looks at Ubuntu as a head-to-head alternative to Windows, I don't think it fares well for most consumer users. I don't think OS X fares well on that same front.

Ubuntu offers a lot of value for a lot of folks. For me, it offered an OS to revive an old laptop and enables that laptop to do what I want it to do. However, my desktop workstation is different - I need Windows to run certain software to make my living. In that case, 'free' Ubuntu would be a disaster.

However, if I have a brand new system with adequate resources that ships with Vista, there are few functional reasons to use Ubuntu.

Pasdar
May 23rd, 2009, 01:02 PM
Ubuntu grew fast in becoming the main Linux distro, taking away users from all other distro's. However, the guys at canocial don't seem to understand what it takes to go up against VISTA and especially 7. That's why it's growing very slowly beyond the borders of the Linux domain.

I mean, seriously, do you think that with the crappy theme/design (GNOME) and the horrible fonts Ubuntu is installed with, it will impress anyone? The only way it seems to be growing is through Ubuntu users that install it on their friends PCs/Laptops. However, they don't install something proper, leaving it with the standard install, and some don't want it anymore soon after. If you install it for something at least install a proper theme, change the fonts, install everything from drivers to fonts and programs they will use and explain about a few things like installing applications and what not and help find applications they like.

lukjad007
May 23rd, 2009, 01:05 PM
Oh, no... Not ANOTHER flame thread...

http://lifescolorfulbrushstrokes.files.wordpress.com/2007/01/north-cascades-opening-weekend-camp-fire-2006-123.jpg

Sashin
May 23rd, 2009, 01:06 PM
What's wrong with GNOME? It's easy to make look good, it's just the default theme that doesn't attract in new users.

Swarms
May 23rd, 2009, 01:14 PM
What's wrong with GNOME? It's easy to make look good, it's just the default theme that doesn't attract in new users.

You have change it to make it look good, and that is exactly the problem.

It has too look good to start with...

Johnsie
May 23rd, 2009, 01:14 PM
First of all, anyone who says 'Linux is on the brink' probably hasn't been using Linux for a long time. People have been saying that for years. Linux is not on the brink, it is an operating system that is still mainly used by computing hobbyists and the occasional person a hobbyist has pushed it on.

The reason Ubuntu has failed to break into the market is simply because it is not competitive enough. Linux cannot compete as a whole because there are no structures in place to drive it forward. There is no real leadership, just a heck of a lot of developers who work on their own individual projects. There is no 'department' to deal with driver issues, no department to push hardware comanies into support. There's just a lot of little entities and many of them have no boss forcing QA on them.

Have a look at the screencast: http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/904features/

It's ugly.


Microsoft and Apple on the other hand are well organised companies who have power over their developers. They can make their developers work to a high standard and sack people who don't do a good job. They can also force time lines on their developers. They have specific departments and an actual leadership structure. Also, because they are pusing for high QA standards their software actually looks good.



Linux is all over place and has no effective leadership so cannot possibly compete against the giants.

michaeldt
May 23rd, 2009, 01:16 PM
What gets me is that people always get things the wrong way around. It's not a problem inherent in Linux or Ubuntu that is preventing widespread adoption. It's that the market isn't ready for Linux. Rather than the other way around.

Hardware vendors need to provide drivers and software developers need to develop for Linux. Of course neither of them will do so until Linux has significant market share, and yet it's their reluctance to develop for Linux which is preventing larger market share. Chicken and egg all over!

What is really needed is more open standards. In an ideal world, someone could just write their software and then compile it on any OS without modification. Same for drivers. Until such standards are developed and adopted, Linux has a long road ahead.

But that doesn't bother me. The fact that my neighbour doesn't use Linux in no way hinders my use or enjoyment of it. Linux got here with little support and market share. Just because it's not up there competing with MS right now doesn't mean it will die away. Give it time.

Pasdar
May 23rd, 2009, 01:19 PM
What's wrong with GNOME? It's easy to make look good, it's just the default theme that doesn't attract in new users.
That's something no new user knows. First of all the installation process is very ugly, compare it to OpenSUSE and you'll know Ubuntu installation looks like ****. Second of all if you give people the choice to either install KDE or GNOME with preview screenshot, you'd see that 99% of the new users would choose KDE. OpenSUSE gives this choice and has implemented them both perfectly, and not ****** like on Kubuntu. So anyway, then they're in this new ugly environment, without knowing they can change it. You really need a linux buddy to tell you this as a new user.

Tibuda
May 23rd, 2009, 01:21 PM
I mean, seriously, do you think that with the crappy theme/design (GNOME) and the horrible fonts Ubuntu is installed with, it will impress anyone? The only way it seems to be growing is through Ubuntu users that install it on their friends PCs/Laptops. However, they don't install something proper, leaving it with the standard install, and some don't want it anymore soon after. If you install it for something at least install a proper theme, change the fonts, install everything from drivers to fonts and programs they will use and explain about a few things like installing applications and what not and help find applications they like.
So do you think a new eye-candy default theme will break MS dominance?

t0p
May 23rd, 2009, 01:28 PM
Microsoft's lock on preinstallation.


Preinstallation? Preinstallation?! What the heck is that?

Preinstalled operating system... was the OS installed before it was installed? Neat trick. That sure is some innovative stuff. Ubuntu doesn't stand a chance against voodoo like that.

Martje_001
May 23rd, 2009, 01:39 PM
Lets see.. Windows 1.0 was released in 1985. Five years later they were at version 3.0, which still was rather marginally used ( and complete piece of crap, excuse my language).

The first Windows you could call suitable for "average user" was 3.11, released in 1993.

I'd say Ubuntu has achieved a lot more in it's first five years than Windows ever did. At least it's usable operating system, Windows versions prior to 3.11 were not. :D

edit: personally, I consider Win98SE as first usable Windows version. That was released in 1999, 14 years after the first Windows release.. :D
Speaking about apples and oranges..

0per4t0r
May 23rd, 2009, 01:46 PM
Ubuntu didn't disappoint me at all. And, it did come on a few major market desktops. Like, the Dell Mini9, those Eee PCs, and a lot of online stores have ubuntu PCs.

K.Mandla
May 23rd, 2009, 01:48 PM
I would tend to agree with the comments made by the author. I like Ubuntu, but it doesn't seem to be going anywhere.
I wonder whose fault that is?

0per4t0r
May 23rd, 2009, 01:49 PM
You have change it to make it look good, and that is exactly the problem.

It has too look good to start with...
Well, you could let them try KDE.

Pasdar
May 23rd, 2009, 01:49 PM
So do you think a new eye-candy default theme will break MS dominance?
No, but it's the very first thing you do as an OS because its so darn easy and first impressions count more than anything. The first thing I hear from non-Linux users upon seeing Ubuntu for the first time is "ugly". This is the same crappy design they pre-install on the limited number of PCs/Laptops its installed on.

This is not the age when win95 or MAC OS 8 were released. It has to compete with Win7 and OS X Leopard in design at first, and only then will people be willing to try it out to see if it outperforms those other OSs.

Swarms
May 23rd, 2009, 01:50 PM
So do you think a new eye-candy default theme will break MS dominance?

It is a big part of the solution.

OS X's aesthetics is a big reason of their success.

Johnsie
May 23rd, 2009, 01:55 PM
OSX and Windows default themes look good. Ubuntu is brown and a pale, sickly shade of grey. Also, alot of the programs don't meet the theme and the ones that do look often like they were designed by a Visual Basic 6 beginner. People who are good at programming usually aren't very artistic.

If Ubuntu is to compete then it needs to look good, be trendy and visually appealing. However, Cannonical are not in charge of the projects that make up Ubuntu, so they can't force the developers to make their apps look good. That's where the lack of leadership causes Linux distros to be uncompetitive. There are too many little guys who aren't being forced to perform.

Hardware manufacturers wont release drivers for unpopular operating systems, so it's up to the Linux community to find other ways to become popular. Problen is that most computing enthusiasts spend most of their time on the computer rather than physically going out and promoting Linux. Microsoft and apple pay people to promote their products, but with Linux all the responsibility is on the unpaid users who have other things to do.

pwnst*r
May 23rd, 2009, 01:57 PM
The most important feature of Ubuntu is that IT'S FREE.
What do you need more than this? Secure, reliable, and FREEEEE!

no. security would be the most important feature. the second should be that it works.

xavierp94
May 23rd, 2009, 01:57 PM
Microsoft's dominance in the world markets has caused this. People are not used to running Ubuntu because people are used to Microsoft's line of operating systems. With Ubuntu being more popular and all we can maybe change that.

sim-value
May 23rd, 2009, 02:44 PM
Hello Guys .... Read the article ... (original post with original source here : http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1163866)

1. This guy is Mixing Ancient with Brand new technologies
2. Vista is first on the List
3. He looks very 1-sided at things (Hell bluetooth owns in mobile technology)

Btw the screenshot in the Bluetooth section is from Ubuntu ....

I would say *shrug* and continue improving ubuntu i couldn't care less about some Australians PC magazines article which calls itself PC Authority (stupid name) ...

/me

Tibuda
May 23rd, 2009, 02:52 PM
I would say *shrug* and continue improving ubuntu i couldn't care less about some Australians PC magazines article which calls itself PC Authority (stupid name) ...
I would say "*shrug* and continue improving ubuntu i couldn't care less about" Microsoft dominance or bug #1. Ubuntu have not succeeded in bug #1, but it is doing a great work in being a "Linux for human beings".

SunnyRabbiera
May 23rd, 2009, 03:06 PM
OSX and Windows default themes look good. Ubuntu is brown and a pale, sickly shade of grey. Also, alot of the programs don't meet the theme and the ones that do look often like they were designed by a Visual Basic 6 beginner. People who are good at programming usually aren't very artistic.

But remove Aero from Vista and you will see its no different 5then win95 in looks.


If Ubuntu is to compete then it needs to look good, be trendy and visually appealing. However, Cannonical are not in charge of the projects that make up Ubuntu, so they can't force the developers to make their apps look good. That's where the lack of leadership causes Linux distros to be uncompetitive. There are too many little guys who aren't being forced to perform.
So what we force everyone to use the same UI?
Thats not going to solve anything, limiting freedom on linux would isolate it from the free community that supports it.

zurack
May 23rd, 2009, 03:12 PM
In Europe Linux has seen a recent surge in popularity, so these articles about Linux in the mire must be geared at Australia/Asia/U.S????

Kareeser
May 23rd, 2009, 03:17 PM
I'm not worried about adoption of Ubuntu in any way, shape, of form.

Ubuntu is probably already the leading OS in Africa or China, if you take away all the fake Windows installs. For that reason, and a general upward trend in terms of growth in these countries, it's only a matter of time before big businessmen start working with North Americans, and ask "You're using Windows? Why would you do that?"

Swarms
May 23rd, 2009, 03:23 PM
But remove Aero from Vista and you will see its no different 5then win95 in looks.

EXACTLY! That is why it is important to have slick looks, because it makes the OS feel of so much more, and that feeling is important if you want to make people keep using the operating system.

baseface
May 23rd, 2009, 03:26 PM
Lets see.. Windows 1.0 was released in 1985. Five years later they were at version 3.0, which still was rather marginally used ( and complete piece of crap, excuse my language).

The first Windows you could call suitable for "average user" was 3.11, released in 1993.

I'd say Ubuntu has achieved a lot more in it's first five years than Windows ever did. At least it's usable operating system, Windows versions prior to 3.11 were not. :D

edit: personally, I consider Win98SE as first usable Windows version. That was released in 1999, 14 years after the first Windows release.. :D

thanks to debian. you fail to realize that debian has been in development for YEARS before ubuntu came along and built on top of it.

mangar
May 23rd, 2009, 03:28 PM
I'm a developer, so my POV is a little different. I haven't used Ubuntu in a year, because of the following reasons:
(for the record - I do have Ubuntu installation in a virtual machine, so I do know what is the current status).

1. It's a very mediocre development platform. The tools are weak, the stack is fragmented, multifaceted, incompatible, and in many cases, broken (audio, video, UI, networking, printing. There isn't much left..).

2. Backward and forward compatibility are broken. Red Queen game.

3. Hardware support is either missing or incomplete (anecdote: non of my video cards are supported well. My dual-monitor nVidia setup is broken, my radeon r200 has extremely slow compared to XP, and my i945gse netbook is utterly broken. three out of three is impressive..).

4. Ubuntu is a closed product - it's a monolithic packages, that gets updated at once every 6 months - you're basically stuck with a rotating set of regression, whatever not in the repositories is problematic to install (either because it may break the current setup, future updates, or whatever).

5. Regressions, even critical ones, are common. It is not trustworthy, nor reliable. X crashes, stuff stops working, critical bugs are not fixed in a long time.

6. The base system UI is crude, the working experience isn't competitive. Metadata indexing is the standard for the last couple of years, while Ubuntu is yet to implement a working solution (Beagle is a slow resource hog, tracker is broken, neither are integrated with the base system).
It's not about the theme - XP and Vista are both ugly, IMHO, it's about functionality - the UI isn't as functional as the competition.

7. Missing key applications - TagAndRename, VisualAssist, foobar2000, chronoPC, notepad++, and some other, more exotic stuff, have not functional equivalent in Linux. I'm not talking about iTunes, Photoshop or autocad, since I have no use for them, but since everybody got a subset of functionality that is not available to them, this is a problem in general.
OpenOffice is awful as well (really, it sucks), for what little office work I do.

8. No clear vision - what exactly is Ubuntu doing in order to be a viable desktop system? What is its vision? where is it going to differentiate itself? On price alone? It doesn't seems to be working.


Ubuntu is simply not a good product, not even good-enough. It still got most of the Linux user's mindshare - for theme, Ubuntu IS Linux - but unless there will be some major leadership display, it will end like Corel or Mandrake Linux.



P.S.
As of the competition - Windows 7 RC1 works quite well out-of-the-box, I didn't have to install a single driver. The competition IS moving along, and do become better.

swoll1980
May 23rd, 2009, 03:51 PM
I've been here since 06/2007, and with every release, the user forum has grown significantly. I know were gaining users along the way.

zurack
May 23rd, 2009, 03:59 PM
Interesting post mangar (http://ubuntuforums.org/member.php?u=14163)

madjr
May 23rd, 2009, 04:08 PM
I've been here since 06/2007, and with every release, the user forum has grown significantly. I know were gaining users along the way.

+1

and remember that 1/10 (one out of ten) users or more don't register in these english forums, they either use another language or use some kind of derivative or other distro in their country.

albinootje
May 23rd, 2009, 04:11 PM
[url] I have been using Ubuntu since 2005 and haven't noticed significant number of people or companies making the switch from Windows to Ubuntu, so I would tend to agree with the comments made by the author. I like Ubuntu, but it doesn't seem to be going anywhere.

You must be joking...
It has never been easier for me to help other people install Linux since Ubuntu is around, and it only gets easier each time (depending on their hardware).

Try installing Hoary or Warty again on (a spare hdd) on your machine, and compare that with Jaunty.

mangar
May 23rd, 2009, 04:19 PM
Where does Ubuntu compete?
In the Linux Desktop OS market? It clearly won. Ubuntu IS Desktop Linux.
In the Desktop OS market? Ubuntu isn't as impressive, by a long shot.

albinootje
May 23rd, 2009, 04:36 PM
No, but it's the very first thing you do as an OS because its so darn easy and first impressions count more than anything. The first thing I hear from non-Linux users upon seeing Ubuntu for the first time is "ugly".

Strange, I never hear that from my new Ubuntu users (over 50 people).
Are you perhaps located in a country like the USA or Italy were outer appearance is very important ?

I show my new users how easy it is to install software from repositories, and how easy it is to set up a printer, they are amazed about that.

I always disable the special effects for them, as I think it is distracting.
My users need to work on documents and the internet, they're not a group of very young hardcore gamers looking for eye-candy for pleasure.

automaton26
May 23rd, 2009, 04:38 PM
All it'll take is a major worm outbreak on the Windows platform.

Anyway, I'm happy to have a choice - simply dual-boot and use the best software from both.

Swarms
May 23rd, 2009, 04:53 PM
Strange, I never hear that from my new Ubuntu users (over 50 people).
Are you perhaps located in a country like the USA or Italy were outer appearance is very important ?

Discriminator! :D


I show my new users how easy it is to install software from repositories, and how easy it is to set up a printer, they are amazed about that.

I always disable the special effects for them, as I think it is distracting.
My users need to work on documents and the internet, they're not a group of very young hardcore gamers looking for eye-candy for pleasure.

Very interesting, but I think its normally only old people (who are facinated by anything made after the eighties) and nerds, who are probably more interested in the stuff under the hood, who are like that. :)

Where the general population are more superficial (and what is wrong with that?)
This is probably a reason that Ubuntu still has a small percentage of the market, it appeals to a smaller clientele.

albinootje
May 23rd, 2009, 05:25 PM
I think its normally only old people (who are facinated by anything made after the eighties) and nerds, who are probably more interested in the stuff under the hood, who are like that. :)

No, the people that I am talking about are not old people and not
nerds, but still they were amazed to see how easy it is to configure a printer or to install software in Ubuntu.

And this is also not about under the hood or geeky stuff, this is the same stuff that a normal user on a computer bought with MS-Windows pre-installed, has to deal with : installing software, configuring a printer.


Where the general population are more superficial (and what is wrong with that?)

Everything ;-)

A society where the majority of people judge other people and other things based on eye-candy (outer appearance) is a society which needs to be cured imho.


This is probably a reason that Ubuntu still has a small percentage of the market, it appeals to a smaller clientele.

I think it is obvious that Ubuntu, or Linux for that matter, has not a majority share on the desktop computer market, for other reasons, for example :

* Majority of desktop computers come with MS-Windows pre-installed.
* Majority of people are used to MS-Windows, because they're forced to use it at work, or at school.
* Majority of computer hardware vendors still stick with only actively supporting MS-Windows.
* Majority of software vendors don't develop commercial software for Linux because they think that Linux users don't want to spend money, because they think that Linux is fragmented, because they don't want to deal with different package format (dpkg,rpm,pacman etc.), and perhaps because they don't want changes.
* There's no advertisement in the "traditional way" of making advertisement for Linux.
* The competitive way of living ("survival", me, myself and I) on large parts of this planet makes people uncomfortable with the sharing ideas of the Linux community.

Tipped OuT
May 23rd, 2009, 05:49 PM
The most important feature of Ubuntu is that IT'S FREE.
What do you need more than this? Secure, reliable, and FREEEEE!

Well maybe user friendliness? Not everyone knows how or wants to know how an operating system/computer works.

Bölvağur
May 23rd, 2009, 05:53 PM
First, no OS or software is 'free'...they demand some of your personal resources to use them.
being free..... you obviously do not understand the word freedom. freedom may cost you more -.- and has nothing to do with.... oh never mind -.-



But saying ubuntu is a disappointing technology is a strange thing to do. How is it that the technology is bad? Perhaps this is not what is being looked at and is talked about by bunch of amateurs that have no idea... never mind. -.-

phrostbyte
May 23rd, 2009, 05:57 PM
Honestly I think it will take a verrrrry long time for Ubuntu or Linux to displace Windows.

It's already starting, and Microsoft has already lowered it's prices on certain classes of computers (ie. netbooks) to deal with the threat.

But will Linux takeover in a year? Probably not. 10 years? More likely, but that is only if Microsoft doesn't have tricks up it's sleeve with Windows.

Any market that Microsoft didn't have a direct hand in creating (ie tablets or the "surface"), you'll see Linux there first. Just because it's so flexible technologically and legally.

But even 10 years we still might be seeing a Windows dominated market on PCs. But I think in the long term (50+ years from now), open source will become the software model of choice, and Linux will be the dominant OS - even on PCs, which will probably still exist. Just my opinion.

RichardG891
May 23rd, 2009, 06:18 PM
Does Ubuntu, or linux in general, need to be dominant over windows on the desktop. Do you care if your neighbour uses windows. I don't. Linux is developed by a global community and it's always going to take longer and look a little more disjointed and ugly than a heavily controlled corporate development like MacOS. It works, it's free, it's getting prettier and it's getting easier for newbies. It's all irrelevant anyway because if Google realises its grand vision, all anybody will really need in 10 years time is an embedded micro-OS (Android, anyone?) running Chrome.

Pasdar
May 23rd, 2009, 06:23 PM
Does Ubuntu, or linux in general, need to be dominant over windows on the desktop. Do you care if your neighbour uses windows. I don't. Linux is developed by a global community and it's always going to take longer and look a little more disjointed and ugly than a heavily controlled corporate development like MacOS. It works, it's free, it's getting prettier and it's getting easier for newbies. It's all irrelevant anyway because if Google realises its grand vision, all anybody will really need in 10 years time is an embedded micro-OS (Android, anyone?) running Chrome.

You SHOULD care, because no company is going to give a #$%^&* about you and your "Ubuntu" to make anything for it, if it is only you and your pals using it.

If we ever want to have the latest drivers available to us (AT LEAST), companies developing software and games, you better start advertising it to everyone you know and install it for them.

tsali
May 23rd, 2009, 06:30 PM
being free..... you obviously do not understand the word freedom. freedom may cost you more -.- and has nothing to do with.... oh never mind -.-


I believe the poster was referring to free as in beer...

I absolutely understand the difference.

abjt
May 23rd, 2009, 06:30 PM
I think i agree with mangar. I am new to Ubuntu/Linux so my perspective of the "other" world is still fresh.
While Ubuntu has all the good things e.g. it is free, secure etc. It falls short on the backbone of any adoption i.e. support

The support is fine for the a specific category of users - where the user group responds to any query/help request, but I don't see the mainstream users relying on it.

specifically on ubuntu by having 6 monthly releases we are just repeating the mistakes of windoze world. In the absence of vendor support like windoze, I don't think i would want to wait for 6 months to get my broken video card support working again (just because I am one of the few people who has "that" card which btw works on windoze).

While I see a lot of corporates adopting Linux for their servers, this is mainly to get security and flexibility but more importantly to get away from the recurring license costs that can be a drain on their budgets. However, none are very keen on the desktop version of Linux i.e. Ubuntu or other flavours.

This is primarily due to lack of support - this applies to both corporate desktops as well as consumer desktops.

I personally feel Ubuntu is refreshing as it gets you away from the stifling and in many cases unjustifiable license costs and that the idea behind canonical is good as it provides a platform for a concerted effort to get a coherent linux desktop alternative. However, as many have pointed out earlier this will fail if they continue/insist on repeating the mistakes of windoze e.g.
- no or broken backward compatibility
- long 6 month gaps between releases (i know windoze is longer but i get support for that)
- patchy support for a lot of peripherals
etc

bigbrovar
May 23rd, 2009, 07:44 PM
I really dont care what some journalist of infact anybody says .. for me This whole linux thing was setup to give people an alternative and not to kill windows of mac.. the world needs to have a choice and Linux provide that choice. Although ubuntu is free and open source the number 1 freedom in the world is freedom to choose what work best for you. Ubuntu/Linux works for me and that is why i stick to it. beside its give me an alternative to run a free and open source OS that i can be part of its developments so in that light i try to play my part.

Linux doesnt force anyone to use it, you choose to use it by choice and if it doesnt work for you. LEAVE they are alternative.

Corelogik
May 23rd, 2009, 07:57 PM
Preinstallation? Preinstallation?! What the heck is that?

Preinstalled operating system... was the OS installed before it was installed? Neat trick. That sure is some innovative stuff. Ubuntu doesn't stand a chance against voodoo like that.

Are you really that dense or are you trying to be sarcastic?

Everyone who has spent more than 10 minutes around computers and is actually interested in learning something about them, knows exactly what I mean.

MysticalRiotCandy
May 23rd, 2009, 08:14 PM
All it'll take is a major worm outbreak on the Windows platform.

Anyway, I'm happy to have a choice - simply dual-boot and use the best software from both.
In that case, people will start switching to Mac OS X instead.

sim-value
May 23rd, 2009, 08:15 PM
In that case, people will start switching to Mac OS X instead.

Yes ... cause everybody will ofcourse buy a new computer for a month sallary ...

bhishan
May 23rd, 2009, 08:23 PM
I think it is good coz Ubuntu is making news.

And for him to say that he uses Ubuntu, he is a liar, he just wants to sound genuine. If he would have been using Ubuntu he wouldn't have mentioned it in his article.

MaxIBoy
May 23rd, 2009, 08:29 PM
The most important feature of Ubuntu is that IT'S FREE.
What do you need more than this? Secure, reliable, and FREEEEE!I think we need to grow up and stop using this argument. We've seen how free-of-charge software can easily be superior to software that costs money, hiding behind the "it's free" argument does not do anyone any good.

That being said, it's "free" as in "freedom," and that's a massive argument in our favor.

bhishan
May 24th, 2009, 01:29 AM
I think we need to grow up and stop using this argument. We've seen how free-of-charge software can easily be superior to software that costs money, hiding behind the "it's free" argument does not do anyone any good.

That being said, it's "free" as in "freedom," and that's a massive argument in our favor.

True.

Possum Films
August 19th, 2009, 04:01 AM
I mean, seriously, do you think that with the crappy theme/design (GNOME) and the horrible fonts Ubuntu is installed with, it will impress anyone?
Have you ever seen what Windows XP looks like?

steveneddy
August 19th, 2009, 04:20 AM
It's all about marketing.

Windows isn't better, it's just marketed well.

Ubuntu is still in development and being tested by the largest group of geeky nerds ever available to test anything.

I honestly believe (honestly) that the next LTS (whatever the name is) if marketed in the correct manner could make a mark on the world. If we (Canonical) strikes while the iron is HOT, then there may be enough inertia to get Ubuntu on enough PC's and enough non-geeky types educated on the merits of Ubuntu in particular and Linux in general.

Ads cleverly placed in newspapers and billboards, magazines and radio ads would drain Mark's wealth but would put Ubuntu on the map.

But, it really has to be a bulletproof, rock solid LTS.

My .02

Tamalin
August 19th, 2009, 04:40 AM
Well, currently the competition (even though it is not really a proprietary competition), Microsoft, isn't in too great shape either with the condition of their legal affairs related to MS Word.

Dimitriid
August 19th, 2009, 05:08 AM
The biggest roadblock to any Linux distribution in the desktop space is not a lack of innovation.

There are 3 things that currently block Linux from widespread desktop adoption;

1. Microsoft's lock on pre-instalation.
2. Hardware device driver pervasiveness.
3. The general public's lack of computer literacy.

Break through anyone of the 3, and others will fall shortly thereafter. The result will be the swift adoption of Linux on the desktop, and the equally swift death of Microsoft.

The hardest of the 3 to crack is going to be the public's lack of literacy. As long as learning Microsoft is equated with learning computers, the public will continue to be an illiterate mob.

Linux is on the brink, it will not take much of a push to cross the finish line.

Thats the one. Computers are popular and massively available but 99% of the people using a computer have next to no idea what they are doing and are able to write/print/email/surf and thats about it.

Coincidentally, my made up numbers look good if you consider that 1% of people using computers is probably using a *nix systen :P

Chronon
August 19th, 2009, 05:50 AM
Preinstallation? Preinstallation?! What the heck is that?

Preinstalled operating system... was the OS installed before it was installed? Neat trick. That sure is some innovative stuff. Ubuntu doesn't stand a chance against voodoo like that.

Ghost of Carlin, is that you?

jctweb
August 19th, 2009, 05:56 AM
If I got a nickel for everytime someone chimed in with their option of "the only thing that linux needs is X to beat Windows", I'd have a lot of nickels...

Personally, I think there's a bigger picture that many of us in the *nix community are really missing - the answer to the question, "So what?"

The Linux kernel has excellent support for most modern computer hardware
so what?
Linux and its distributions have rock-solid security
so what?
You have a choice of window manager, music player, web browser, email client, and everything else in between
so what?
A good linux distribution can have your computer running circles around an equivalent windows-based PC
so what?

Seriously, folks - ask yourself "so what?" after every single "benefit" and argument that people offer in favor of using <insert favorite Linux distribution here> and I don't think the answer will convince anyone to make the switch.

It's not about the security, choice, price, or default look and feel. People aren't going to choose unless they are forced to. The massive market share that many of us hope for won't occur regardless of how good Ubuntu gets. The existence of choice doesn't mean the choice will be made.

Here's the scenario I think needs to happen before adoption hits any massive scale:
All PC vendors would have to offer a choice of OS with every PC/Laptop purchase - and the Linux choice would always have to reflect the price difference.
Tell me how this:
http://www.thelinuxlaptop.com/products_new.php (only has a CELERON processor)
compares to this:
http://www.dell.com/us/en/business/notebooks/laptop-vostro-1520/pd.aspx?refid=laptop-vostro-1520&s=bsd&cs=04&~ck=mn

The Dell (with Microsoft Windows pre-installed) is $100 cheaper with better hardware specs --- why in the world would I buy something different?

I would rather see something like:
XXX Laptop
Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8ghz
4GB RAM
300 Gb hard drive
built-in wireless/bluetooth/hdmi/whatever
15" screen

$500 with Microsoft Windows
$350 with Ubuntu Linux

If that was the choice given to every single person that bought a computer - from ANY manufacturer - do you think things would change?

It's not about being better, cheaper, faster, or cooler. It's not about the existence of choice. It's not even about someone knowing that there are alternatives. People want to get more for their money.

After they pay - then they want to be able to do "crazy" things like play video games, chat, check their facebook page, send email to Mom with photos downloaded from their camera, edit a home movie, watch a DVD, and play "elf bowling.exe".

Is this a chicken/egg issue? maybe. I still can't put PC loaded with Ubuntu in front of my Grandpa and expect him to be able to figure out how to get pictures from his camera. His camera came with a GREAT BIG POSTER with screenshots of how to do it with Microsoft Windows - XP or Vista. The hardware vendors know that "everyone has windows" so there is no monetary benefit to them to develop something that works in Linux. Aside from the aesthetics, insecurity, and general 'crappiness' of Windows - people are used to it and it (generally) does the job.

Sorry for the rant...

On a side note, it's my personal opinion that "Linux" has nothing to do with the usability of my computer. I don't spend my day "using Linux". I spend my day using the applications that support my line of work. My trouble with Windows is that the OS gets in my way - Vista's UAC alone drove me over the edge. The OS should do it's job and stay out of my way - "Linux" does that just fine....

hanzomon4
August 19th, 2009, 06:00 AM
If I got a nickel for everytime someone chimed in with their option of "the only thing that linux needs is to get rid of X to beat Windows", I'd have a royal with cheese...



Fixed that for ya :popcorn:

running_rabbit07
August 19th, 2009, 06:01 AM
Have you ever seen what Windows XP looks like?

I thought XP looked great when I had it.

Sadly the article that the OP posted isn't there to be analyzed.

jctweb
August 19th, 2009, 06:04 AM
Fixed that for ya :popcorn:

mmmm...royal with cheese....

Frak
August 19th, 2009, 06:05 AM
I thought XP looked great when I had it.

Sadly the article that the OP posted isn't there to be analyzed.
Take it from me, it was literary rubbish. Such postings as calling the NeXTCube as a failure because it "didn't run mainstream software" and therefore it wasn't accepted by the general populous. The flaw in that reasoning is:

IT WASN'T MARKETED AT THE GENERAL POPULOUS!

/rant

thisllub
August 19th, 2009, 06:10 AM
So much of this is outright wrong that I have to respond.
I will assume Linux as a whole and not just Ubuntu.



1. It's a very mediocre development platform. The tools are weak, the stack is fragmented, multifaceted, incompatible, and in many cases, broken (audio, video, UI, networking, printing. There isn't much left..).


Development platform for what?
There is no better development platform for web apps.
.NET is Microsoft's big offering but it isn't a good web application platform.
Every other significant web technology is better on Linux.
As a developer of web applications everything I need is available in Linux without spending a fortune on additional apps and functionality to set up and maintain a secure server system.

You can't really be serious if you claim that Microsoft's networking is superior to Linux.
Printing works perfectly unless you have a printer that is designed to be a Windows only appliance.
I record multitrack on Linux without a glitch.

It is also worth considering that nearly all of the world's supercomputers now run Linux and that technology is finding its way into mainstream Linux.



3. Hardware support is either missing or incomplete (anecdote: non of my video cards are supported well. My dual-monitor nVidia setup is broken, my radeon r200 has extremely slow compared to XP, and my i945gse netbook is utterly broken. three out of three is impressive..).

I have never had a single problem with a dual monitor NVIDIA setup. You obviously have it set up wrong. That is another problem altogether.




4. Ubuntu is a closed product - it's a monolithic packages, that gets updated at once every 6 months - you're basically stuck with a rotating set of regression, whatever not in the repositories is problematic to install (either because it may break the current setup, future updates, or whatever).


That's not true either. Updates are released when appropriate, especially for security. Compared to Windows they tend not to break things too. Even on this Arch system where updates are continuous I have only ever had problems with Xorg because I didn't read the documentation before I did the update.



5. Regressions, even critical ones, are common. It is not trustworthy, nor reliable. X crashes, stuff stops working, critical bugs are not fixed in a long time.


Examples?


6. The base system UI is crude, the working experience isn't competitive. Metadata indexing is the standard for the last couple of years, while Ubuntu is yet to implement a working solution (Beagle is a slow resource hog, tracker is broken, neither are integrated with the base system).
It's not about the theme - XP and Vista are both ugly, IMHO, it's about functionality - the UI isn't as functional as the competition.

The UI covers the whole spectrum.
At its most basic Gnome and KDE are very Windows / MAC like, for serious developers like yourself there are options like OpenBox that are blazingly fast, rock solid and mouse free and frankly make Windows and MAC environments seem incredibly sluggish.
I don't want my OS to index metadata. I use an open source content management system to store my documents in. My choice not a software vendors.




7. Missing key applications - TagAndRename, VisualAssist, foobar2000, chronoPC, notepad++, and some other, more exotic stuff, have not functional equivalent in Linux. I'm not talking about iTunes, Photoshop or autocad, since I have no use for them, but since everybody got a subset of functionality that is not available to them, this is a problem in general.
OpenOffice is awful as well (really, it sucks), for what little office work I do.

Wrong again.
Check out the rename functions in Thunar, foobar is easily matched by mpd and vlc and you really can't consider notepad++ as a serious competitor for Vim.




8. No clear vision - what exactly is Ubuntu doing in order to be a viable desktop system? What is its vision? where is it going to differentiate itself? On price alone? It doesn't seems to be working.


Ubuntu is simply not a good product, not even good-enough. It still got most of the Linux user's mindshare - for theme, Ubuntu IS Linux - but unless there will be some major leadership display, it will end like Corel or Mandrake Linux.


Opinion only, and you are allowed to be wrong.

Methuselah
August 19th, 2009, 06:22 AM
So Ubuntu is 'disappointing' because people choose to stick with windows?

I know there are many good things people don't stick with (like exercise) and many unhelpful things that they use compulsively (like cigarettes).

Likewise, there have been many great technological ideas that have never gained traction.
So it would seem to make more sense to judge a technology by its intrinsic qualities rather than how many people adopt it.

Now I'm almost amount to go off into a rant, not because some 'journalist' doesn't like ubuntu but, because such vacuous critique has become so common and people seem to lap it up unquestioningly.

amitabhishek
August 19th, 2009, 06:44 AM
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/16/20090516/ttc-top-10-disappointing-technologies-6315470.html

Ubuntu was listed on there because the author says it was hyped up by over-zealous Linux enthusiasts and failed to live up to the hype. 5 years on Ubuntu is still failing to make any significant impact in the operating systems market and is still mainly an operating system for computing hobbyists rather than the average user...

Though the link has died...I don't give the report a donkey's *****. I just can't imaging my cyber life without Ubuntu!!! I can't keep clicking 'start' button all my life!!

aviedw
August 19th, 2009, 10:31 AM
I fail to understand why so many users are so concerned about how man people are using linux. When i used windows i noticed that i spent more time configuring my firewall and anti virus then actually enjoying the operating system.

With linux it seems many are bent on the idea that linux should be taking more market share from windows.

Now if the motives were the same then i would understand the feelings that ubuntu isn't up to par. But ubuntu is profit driven. Thats why its not talked about on the radio or seen on commercials. Linux's isnt exposed as much. And in my opinion for good reason. I like that linux and specifically isn't as well known as windows, but if it were we would have a whole new set of problems. Much of what we hate about windows would come to the linux world.

Just enjoy it. I still cant believe that its free and well supported. usually things that are free aren't worth buying. I would buy Ubuntu over windows any day.

pmlxuser
August 19th, 2009, 11:08 AM
Do you wonder that the site that provided the info is in partnership with Microsoft?

in the desktop world ubuntu has taken linux to where it has never been before (peoples homes).... ;)

SonicSteve
August 20th, 2009, 02:29 PM
I would rather see something like:
XXX Laptop
Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8ghz
4GB RAM
300 Gb hard drive
built-in wireless/bluetooth/hdmi/whatever
15" screen

$500 with Microsoft Windows
$350 with Ubuntu Linux

If that was the choice given to every single person that bought a computer - from ANY manufacturer - do you think things would change?.


If you all don't mind me jumping in for the most part I agree that the linux choice should reflect an appropriate price difference.

Here is the real problem,
The OEM's like Dell don't pay $150 for XP home, or Vista home premium. They likely pay closer to $50. Remember that they literally buy millions of copies from MS each year so we will never see a retail price difference of $150, at best we could expect the price difference to reflect what Dell pays for the software.

Secondly, and this bothers me even more than the price difference, using Dell as an example;
The windows system and Linux system are like comparing apples and oranges.

System A with windows vista home premium $600, was $650 but rebates are $50
Inspiron 1590
-Core 2 duo 1.8ghz, 250gb hdd, DVD-RW, 2GB ram

System B with Ubuntu $650 inspiron 1550
-Dual Core 2ghz (not core 2 duo), 160gb hdd, DVD-RW, 1gb ram, no rebates

Firstly these are fictitious but based on experience pricing with Dell. They never offer the same system at the same time with a choice, the systems are always different in name and specs. The Linux machine is always inferior and more expensive. As a result I refuse to buy a system from them either Windows or Ubuntu. It's insulting to offer such terrible deals.

jctweb
August 20th, 2009, 02:43 PM
I fail to understand why so many users are so concerned about how man people are using linux. When i used windows i noticed that i spent more time configuring my firewall and anti virus then actually enjoying the operating system.

I'll put a different slant on it...

Let's pretend that I have just created a really cool new keyboard. This new keyboard is special because it has the "super button" that does really cool stuff.

This "super button" requires special software to be running so that it will work properly.

If I want to sell my keyboard to as many people as possible and make as much money as I can - what should I do?
hmm...
200 million Microsoft Windows users (just making the number up)
5 million "other OS" users (again, just making up the number)

Wow - seems like writing a device driver to work for a majority of users is the right choice to maximize my profits.

What if those numbers were different?
100 million Microsoft Windows users
100 million "other OS" users

Not such an easy decision anymore. With an adoption of *nix at that level, it's hard to ignore. It is then in the best interests of the hardware/device manufacturers to ensure their products function properly in non-Microsoft Operating Systems.

ryaxnb
August 20th, 2009, 06:09 PM
1. It's a very mediocre development platform. The tools are weak, the stack is fragmented, multifaceted, incompatible, and in many cases, broken (audio, video, UI, networking, printing. There isn't much left..).

The tools are strong if you are of the UNIX mindset. Vim is the best text editor around. The stacks for key technologies are hardly fragmented, the UI is standardized in Ubuntu as X/GTK+, the GTK+/QT are actually quite comaptible and interopable using Open X11 Interopability, and "printing" is hardly broken, it's the same system as OS X, CUPS. same with networking, it's the standardized GNU sockets and WebKit. audio is universally Pulse/ALSA throughout Ubuntu. The availablity of choices means you can develop in the toolkit designed for your project.


2. Backward and forward compatibility are broken. Red Queen game.

Not really. The Linux ABI and GTK 2.x and X11 ABIs are designed to be roughly-binary-compatible... and services like the opensuse build service make it easy to package for all significant linuxes and versions with a few commands.


3. Hardware support is either missing or incomplete (anecdote: non of my video cards are supported well. My dual-monitor nVidia setup is broken, my radeon r200 has extremely slow compared to XP, and my i945gse netbook is utterly broken. three out of three is impressive..). .
Odd as the linux kernel has the best hardware support in the world as far as kernels go. As far as X, it has support for 2d on more GFX cards than Windows has certified drivers for. It also has 3d on major Radeon, Geforce, AMD, and Intel cards, and it worked fine on my HD 3650, Xpress 200M, and GMA 950.


4. Ubuntu is a closed product - it's a monolithic packages, that gets updated at once every 6 months - you're basically stuck with a rotating set of regression, whatever not in the repositories is problematic to install (either because it may break the current setup, future updates, or whatever).
this is an utter falsehood. Adding repositories, particularly from Launchpad, is fully supported. They work across updates fairly well, and launchpad even has an auto-build service for versions from Hardy to Karmic. Ubuntu is not closed, it is updated for security every 6 months, and you can add repos and debs whenever you want. Saying it's monolithic is like saying windows is modular. Windows installs everything in its monoloithic tree when you install it, and there's really no way to uninstall it after. Ubuntu OTOH is a modular collection of packages. :)

5. Regressions, even critical ones, are common. It is not trustworthy, nor reliable. X crashes, stuff stops working, critical bugs are not fixed in a long time.
I have never had this problem. I myself have never heard of major regressions affecting LTS releases, and have never heard of an undocumented regression, or a regression that wasn't easy to forsee (so you could delay updating until regression was fixed). Those looking for no regressions at all may look at Debian 5. Ubuntu 9.04 is a solid product, and 8.04.3 is a stable, peaceful release.



6. The base system UI is crude, the working experience isn't competitive. Metadata indexing is the standard for the last couple of years, while Ubuntu is yet to implement a working solution (Beagle is a slow resource hog, tracker is broken, neither are integrated with the base system).
It's not about the theme - XP and Vista are both ugly, IMHO, it's about functionality - the UI isn't as functional as the competition.
Metadata and a better UI is coming in GNOME 3. Beagle is actually fairly good application, and KDE 4 has some interesting stuff as well. The UI is hardly "crude" and functions quite well, containing a very sensible, functional, interface due to the GNOME HIG. The working expierence to me beats windows and comes close to rivaling OS X, due to the seamlessness of the GNOME DE and the niceness of apps like Firefox and the GIMP. GNOME 3 promises to bring a more logical window manager, more sensible start menu, metadata and a indexing system within a year.


7. Missing key applications - TagAndRename, VisualAssist, foobar2000, chronoPC, notepad++, and some other, more exotic stuff, have not functional equivalent in Linux. I'm not talking about iTunes, Photoshop or autocad, since I have no use for them, but since everybody got a subset of functionality that is not available to them, this is a problem in general.
OpenOffice is awful as well (really, it sucks), for what little office work I do.
REALLY NOW? You expect US to write a complete replacement for all those minor apps? How about just have the developers port them, which they won't do for whatever reason. Also, many apps like that have excellent replacements or solutions. foobar2000 and notepad++ and MS Office run well in wine, to replace your OpenOffice. notepad++ is really inferior to kate, vim or emacs. TagandRename sounds like something a small bash script could do better. Same with many other small exotic apps like that.

8. No clear vision - what exactly is Ubuntu doing in order to be a viable desktop system? What is its vision? where is it going to differentiate itself? On price alone? It doesn't seems to be working.

Ubuntu differentiates itself along a few lines:
1. Ubuntu is free as in freedom, providing stallman's four essential freedoms and guaranteeing the ability to fork your code, examine your code, and have others more knowledgable do the same. Ubuntu is written with the people's best interests in mind, not a company's and as such will never have DRM (like Vista or iTunes) or be tied to hardware (like Mac OS) or only be sold with computers (like Windows Tablet/Media Center/Starter editions).
2. Ubuntu will not price gouge or increase in price. Windows NT started at $299 and today is at $399. Windows Home started at $99 and today is at $219. Windows Server runs into the thousands range. Ubuntu will not charge price on a scale. Windows today runs from $79 to $1499 or so. Ubuntu is always $0 for Ship-It media and $25 or so for a retail box.
3. Ubuntu provides easy installation of applications, codecs, drivers and supports all your hardware OOTB, in many cases. Ubuntu makes installing apps easy and makes using your computer less problematic. Ubuntu also makes customizing your computer to fit your personality fun and easy.
4. Ubuntu is more secure. Ubuntu supports AppArmor, ships with root disabled, has PolicyKit, a firewall, and no active viruses, worms or trojans, unlike OS X. Ubuntu ships with a phishing filter and a privacy mode for the browser (privacy mode starting in 9.10)
5. Ubuntu has free applications for a wide variety of tasks, and these are easy to get to without all the demoware, trojanware, etc. on windows.
6. Ubuntu comes with a preinstalled Office and Photo Editing enviornment, unlike windows. Ubuntu can have all required software for codec viewing and flash playing etc installed with one command, unlike windows which comes with very little of that OOTB and requires several suspicious downloads (codec packs, flash 10, java, Media Player Classic, Quicktime, etc.)


Ubuntu is simply not a good product, not even good-enough. It still got most of the Linux user's mindshare - for theme, Ubuntu IS Linux - but unless there will be some major leadership display, it will end like Corel or Mandrake Linux.


Ubuntu has plenty of leadership, for instance taking the initiave in making drivers by NVIDIA/ATI/AMD and restricted extras easy to find, taking the initiave in fixing remaining problems in desktop code with the papercuts project, and creating a new notification system and even offering codecs and DVD players in the Store available legally, a smart move. :)


P.S.
As of the competition - Windows 7 RC1 works quite well out-of-the-box, I didn't have to install a single driver. The competition IS moving along, and do become better.

[/quote]
Does windows 7 include flash 10, java, and other players with just one click, all-in-one? I thought not. Does windows 7 support GUI acceleration on the GMA 900? I thought not. Does windows 7 come with a repository of one-click installs of fabulous, free software apps? I thought not. Does windows 7 include a clunky confusing taskbar and an incosistent, slow "XP MODE"? I thought so. :lolflag:

RabbitWho
August 20th, 2009, 06:44 PM
When you buy a computer it has Vista in it, I tried to get one without it but I couldn't "downgrade".

That's why people "choose" vista.

If you were given a choice, people would say.. Ubuntu? What's that? And they would read about it and give it a try, but the thing is.. no ones ever even heard of it.

The other thing is what jctweb said, compatibility, which isn't ubuntus fault, it's the companies. But times are changing, Windows can't stay dominant forever.
Remember we are in the first generation where computers are avalible to the genneral public.
If I have kids they'll know more about computers by the time they're 10 then I did when I was 20.
Knowlage is key!

GMU_DodgyHodgy
August 20th, 2009, 08:18 PM
I have some real differences with the OP viewpoints. As someone who dual booted for years with Windows and Linux on a machine - using linux because it was fun and different. I can clearly state that Ubuntu/Canonical has provided the most comprehensive and coherent approach towards a linux distribution. In the early days - any install of ubuntu would require a few days to get wireless working - via file edits and CLI exercizes, I would have to find codecs to play DvD's and music - and I would have to rely on Windows to use MS Money to manage my finances. Playing flash videos? Forget it.

After 4-5 years of Ubuntu - I install 9.04 - One click and enter my network password - boom wireless working in 15 seconds. I put in a DvD - Ubuntu says I need codecs to play it and would I like it to install them - click - I am watching DvD's. Open Office has only gotten better and might be the only real Word Processor available if MS doesn't win a court case soon. Ubuntu has gotten IBM to contribute more developers for Open Office and Linux desktop. I can manage photos, sync with my iPod using Banshee - Heck I watch all my downloaded flash, avi, and .mov videos in Banshee. No hiccups - no fails.

Microsoft stopped selling and supporting MS Money. I know use Jgnash - written in Java - runs on all my machines at home and can be set up as a server to support multiple users. It also imports all Quicken file formats. Got that covered now.

More importantly - each release is quicker, lighter, and more stable. And THAT is being disappointing???????

The taste is in the pudding - I know longer dual boot and no longer use Windows at home. With recent activity and improvements in PiTiVi - I now have a video editor that replaced MS MovieMaker and will soon be as functional as iMovie.

Ubuntu/Canonical has brought the linux Desktop to the highest point its been. The assertion by the OP is ridiculous.

HappyFeet
August 20th, 2009, 09:09 PM
Ubuntu/Canonical has brought the linux Desktop to the highest point its been.

This is true. Without ubuntu, linux would still only be used by a handful of people. They have truly brought linux to the masses.

Spencer Caplan
August 20th, 2009, 09:23 PM
I think Ubuntu is great, but in all reality most people have never heard of it. That is because Microsoft has a budget which makes it come installed on almost any computer one can buy. No Linux distro will ever be able to compete with that. Also, the majority of people just is not very computer savvy. It is sad but because people grow up with Windows it seems the norm. Maybe when the Chrome OS comes out that will change, because people do not associate with the word Linux, but everyone knows the name Google. Here is to hoping that it is a positive push for Linux.

emrys
August 21st, 2009, 10:00 AM
Open Office has only gotten better and might be the only real Word Processor available if MS doesn't win a court case soon. Ubuntu has gotten IBM to contribute more developers for Open Office and Linux desktop.

Come on, MS Word is not going to disappear just because... And yes, Open Office is much better now, but the compatibility problems are really awful. I created a brainstorm idea to look for solutions... http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/20877/

hellmet
August 21st, 2009, 08:49 PM
....
The reason Ubuntu has failed to break into the market is simply because it is not competitive enough. Linux cannot compete as a whole because there are no structures in place to drive it forward. There is no real leadership, just a heck of a lot of developers who work on their own individual projects. There is no 'department' to deal with driver issues, no department to push hardware comanies into support. There's just a lot of little entities and many of them have no boss forcing QA on them.

Have a look at the screencast: http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/904features/

It's ugly.


Microsoft and Apple on the other hand are well organised companies who have power over their developers. They can make their developers work to a high standard and sack people who don't do a good job. They can also force time lines on their developers. They have specific departments and an actual leadership structure. Also, because they are pusing for high QA standards their software actually looks good.



Linux is all over place and has no effective leadership so cannot possibly compete against the giants.
What about Red hat and/or Novell ? Why don't they come out with a proper desktop OS to compete with MS and APPLE?

Katalog
August 21st, 2009, 09:01 PM
The biggest roadblock to any Linux distribution in the desktop space is not a lack of innovation.

There are 3 things that currently block Linux from widespread desktop adoption;

1. Microsoft's lock on pre-instalation.
2. Hardware device driver pervasiveness.
3. The general public's lack of computer literacy.

Break through anyone of the 3, and others will fall shortly thereafter. The result will be the swift adoption of Linux on the desktop, and the equally swift death of Microsoft.

The hardest of the 3 to crack is going to be the public's lack of literacy. As long as learning Microsoft is equated with learning computers, the public will continue to be an illiterate mob.

Linux is on the brink, it will not take much of a push to cross the finish line.

Ding-ding-ding! Give this man a cigar. Number three is the biggest one I run into when engaging people in conversation regarding Linux and FOSS. Most have been using a home PC and computer at work for most of their adult lives, and I still have a hard time explaining to 90% of them what an "operating system" is in the first place. They just seem to have a really hard time grasping that concept for some reason, and then once once you actually get past that, it's a hard sell convincing them that they can get almost exactly the same software/functionality for free what they've been paying hundreds of dollars for all these years. It's a tough nut to crack, for sure.

jctweb
August 22nd, 2009, 04:30 AM
The likelihood of people* switching to any Linux-based distribution is very low; the existence of a better alternative just isn't enough...even if it's a free one! When people* buy a new PC, the choice is effectively already been made.

I don't think it matters if Ubuntu produces "the perfect distribution" - because there will be no market penetration without hardware and OEM's getting onboard and supporting it.


* meaning the general populace

DouglasAWh
August 22nd, 2009, 04:37 AM
I don't think it matters if Ubuntu produces "the perfect distribution" - because there will be no market penetration without hardware and OEM's getting onboard and supporting it.


Let's all work to make this happen. Send letters and make phone calls directly to the vendors. Writing on forums and blog posts isn't getting us anywhere.

Also, do *NOT* buy a system with Windows pre-installed. Just don't do it. Don't act like there aren't alternatives. There are.

Stevie78
August 22nd, 2009, 04:53 AM
Send letters and make phone calls directly to the vendors. Writing on forums and blog posts isn't getting us anywhere.

Quite right. One thing is moaning on blogs how bad things are with preinstalled windoze etc, another thing is complaining - taking the issue directly to people in charge of business decisions.

RabbitWho
August 22nd, 2009, 05:06 AM
Also, do *NOT* buy a system with Windows pre-installed. Just don't do it. Don't act like there aren't alternatives. There are.

Sorry but when i buy a computer i'm looking at hardware specs and price. OS doesn't come into it.

*has bought a computer once*

When my mother buys a computer she looks at price, then goes into the shop and the man convinces her higher numbers are better. :(

Regenweald
August 22nd, 2009, 05:10 AM
So who in this thread is disappointed again ?

motoperpetuo
August 22nd, 2009, 05:14 AM
What's wrong with GNOME? It's easy to make look good, it's just the default theme that doesn't attract in new users.

i remember wondering why ubuntu went with the "cockroach" theme as a default when i first started using it.

motoperpetuo
August 22nd, 2009, 05:16 AM
Let's all work to make this happen. Send letters and make phone calls directly to the vendors. Writing on forums and blog posts isn't getting us anywhere.

Also, do *NOT* buy a system with Windows pre-installed. Just don't do it. Don't act like there aren't alternatives. There are.

i like my dell inspiron 530n with ubuntu preinstalled. gonna get me a system 76 laptop too, someday, once the $$$ situation gets a little better.

Luca_turicci
August 22nd, 2009, 08:11 AM
I personally am working hard to get the people in my comunity to know ubuntu, JUST KNOW IT, not convincing them to switch to it, I installed Ubuntu in all my boxes, when my friends come home or use my laptop they see ubuntu (tweaked of course) and I get the chance to explain the pros of it.

When ppl come to me asking me to reinstall windows because it's full of viruses I ask them "have you heard about Ubuntu?" and tell them pros and cons of it, install WinXP or Vista and give them a free LiveCD of ubuntu so they can try it at home anytime, actually 2 guys have switched to it, wich made me sooo happy.

The "visual" thing is a huge problem, the "human" theme must disappear!, really much people see the default desktop and feel like they're using an OLD computer, we need more "glossy" windows, I'm aware that programers are BAD graphic designers, but there needs to be some kinda team to do that. I love design, and many of my friends do so too, but we just don't know how to put that glossy and incredible icons, toolbars and stuff into a computer.

Now, a friend of mine is a butcher, he's used computers very little, and he uses mine most of the time. HE HAS NEVER COMPLAINED about anything, in fact, one day we were working on a Windows box and he was like "Why is everything so different? there's no organization here!"

I have to admit, when I started using ubuntu, i didn't liked it cause it was not like windows, but after a few weeks with it, i realized the difference, using Windows was like having THE SAME COMPUTER everyone has, but with Ubuntu it was like having a "blank" PC, and as time went by, now it feels like MY own computer, a part of me, MY theme, MY colors, MY icons, MY fonts, MY apps, MY way to organize, everything is MINE. I love Ubuntu, and will never be disapointed of it.

I insist! we should team up! programmers and designers, and we should leave the forums sometimes and promote Linux, distribute liveCDs, show it to friends, tell people about it, anything!!!

Copernicus1234
August 22nd, 2009, 08:14 AM
Its easy. Make Ubuntu look great and it will attract a lot of young people to it, and they will then become very good at it, bringing their knowledge with them to the corporations they work at later in life.

But you cant expect them to start using something that looks ugly on default install. Why do you think the IPhone sells?

Its frustrating to me to see such a superior OS as Ubuntu get dissed because its ugly on default install, but thats just the way the human mind works. We like beauty.

If Ubuntu doesnt improve in the looks department, it will never rise above nerd level and/or people who get sick with Windows. Ubuntu will never be their first choice. And making people pick it as their first choice is the key.

Look. If you are reading a news paper and its showing screenshots of a operating system, its all about the looks. Today Ubuntu looks awful in its default suit. No wonder people dont think "Wow, what is that? I want it!".

Stevie78
August 22nd, 2009, 09:17 PM
This thread is very important and I hope the devs / Canonical take note of this.
Its so simple:

1) Have a different default theme
2) Have a different default background image

The Human theme and brown wallpaper can still be there, they just shouldnt be default. Go with a silver/light grey theme plus some more vibrant colours for the default desktop background pic - you cant go wrong there and can keep the African theme going.

It will have an impact on potential new users and win more people over...guaranteed.

Katalog
August 23rd, 2009, 01:39 AM
I personally am working hard to get the people in my comunity to know ubuntu, JUST KNOW IT, .....

As am I, as am I. Tough row to hoe, sometimes, but also worth it many times.


I insist! we should team up! programmers and designers, and we should leave the forums sometimes and promote Linux, distribute liveCDs, show it to friends, tell people about it, anything!!!

I agree (well, maybe not to the point of insisiting, but). That's what LoCos are for. That's what the soon to be launched spreadubuntu.com is for. The resources are out there, they exist, they are available, they are accessible and in several languages. All we need is enough people with the motivation to utilize them, and that is probably the highest hurdle to get over - convincing people to actually get of their duff and contribute. Even if you can't write a single line of code or are incapable of drawing a straight line, everyone is still able to give back through advocacy. Not to mention bug reports, Brainstorm, etc. It costs nothing and takes very little time to create a public key and a Launchpad account.

Tamalin
August 23rd, 2009, 03:11 AM
I agree (well, maybe not to the point of insisiting, but). That's what LoCos are for. That's what the soon to be launched spreadubuntu.com is for. The resources are out there, they exist, they are available, they are accessible and in several languages. All we need is enough people with the motivation to utilize them, and that is probably the highest hurdle to get over - convincing people to actually get of their duff and contribute. Even if you can't write a single line of code or are incapable of drawing a straight line, everyone is still able to give back through advocacy. Not to mention bug reports, Brainstorm, etc. It costs nothing and takes very little time to create a public key and a Launchpad account.

Yes, but the problem with people is when I mention Ubuntu to someone, I always get the same response:
But Linux is too complicated!
Then I tell them that it really isn't.
But its free, and you always get what you pay for!
(Sigh)

Anyway, it is always good to tell people that the programmers behind Ubuntu are like chefs that eat the food they make. They use their own product, and just like a chef would put effort into making his own meal good to eat, a programmer would make his program good for use.

cprofitt
August 23rd, 2009, 03:32 AM
The single biggest reason that Windows and OS X have dominance is that software companies can sell product to OS X and Windows users...

More titles available for your OS = more OS adoption.

hanzomon4
August 23rd, 2009, 04:01 AM
The single biggest reason that Windows and OS X have dominance is that software companies can sell product to OS X and Windows users...

More titles available for your OS = more OS adoption.

No... More good, can't live without apps. Most linux apps are "hey we can do such and such too!!!" So what? my OSX/Windows already can do that.

stwschool
August 23rd, 2009, 04:54 AM
Linux is kinda like natural selection. Only the intelligent get to survive and not put up with viruses etc. If people are too stupid to use linux let them have their fun, pay for tech support, etc.

madjr
August 23rd, 2009, 05:06 AM
i hope win7 and new google chrome OS can make linux wake up and standarized better or the OS market will just be 3:

msft, apple , google

yes, ubuntu can go down hill (and loose everything they have archived) if they don't bring in a much better mass appealing product.

mmix
August 23rd, 2009, 05:33 AM
remember that, sometimes, number 7 is the best thing in the lists.

hanzomon4
August 24th, 2009, 12:35 AM
Linux is kinda like natural selection. Only the intelligent get to survive and not put up with viruses etc. If people are too stupid to use linux let them have their fun, pay for tech support, etc.

I just through up a little

Katalog
August 24th, 2009, 08:43 AM
Yes, but the problem with people is when I mention Ubuntu to someone, I always get the same response:
But Linux is too complicated!
Then I tell them that it really isn't.
But its free, and you always get what you pay for!
(Sigh)

Anyway, it is always good to tell people that the programmers behind Ubuntu are like chefs that eat the food they make. They use their own product, and just like a chef would put effort into making his own meal good to eat, a programmer would make his program good for use.

That's a really, really good analogy. I'm going to have to remember that the next time I hear those same lines you mentioned above. Seems like about 1 out of 10 people I talk always have some kind of comeback similar to that. And then there are the "I use (insert name of distro here) and Ubuntu is junk" people who tie you up while you're trying to talk to someone else, but that's a topic for another discussion I suppose......

HappinessNow
August 24th, 2009, 08:50 AM
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/16/20090516/ttc-top-10-disappointing-technologies-6315470.html

Ubuntu was listed on there because the author says it was hyped up by over-zealous Linux enthusiasts and failed to live up to the hype. 5 years on Ubuntu is still failing to make any significant impact in the operating systems market and is still mainly an operating system for computing hobbyists rather than the average user.

I have been using Ubuntu since 2005 and haven't noticed significant number of people or companies making the switch from Windows to Ubuntu, so I would tend to agree with the comments made by the author. I like Ubuntu, but it doesn't seem to be going anywhere.The article you linked to no longer exist!


Sorry! We couldn't find the page you requested.

The page you requested is no longer available on Yahoo! News.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/16/20090516/ttc-top-10-disappointing-technologies-6315470.html


What's wrong with GNOME? It's easy to make look good, it's just the default theme that doesn't attract in new users.Gnome is rather boring but could Gnome really be the downfall of Ubuntu?

NCLI
August 24th, 2009, 01:14 PM
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/th.69be7c93b0.png (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/69be7c93b0.png)

Chame_Wizard
August 24th, 2009, 01:25 PM
The biggest roadblock to any Linux distribution in the desktop space is not a lack of innovation.

There are 3 things that currently block Linux from widespread desktop adoption;

1. Microsoft's lock on pre-instalation.
2. Hardware device driver pervasiveness.
3. The general public's lack of computer literacy.

Break through anyone of the 3, and others will fall shortly thereafter. The result will be the swift adoption of Linux on the desktop, and the equally swift death of Microsoft.

The hardest of the 3 to crack is going to be the public's lack of literacy. As long as learning Microsoft is equated with learning computers, the public will continue to be an illiterate mob.

Linux is on the brink, it will not take much of a push to cross the finish line.
4.FUD+misinformation,wide spread by Proprietary software companies and copyright lobbyists.



:lolflag:

Ubu2009
August 24th, 2009, 01:35 PM
it's hard to compete when one has the money, the power, and dominance in OS market share.Even Apple has failed to get to Microsoft.

pookiebear
August 24th, 2009, 02:38 PM
In IT here for long time.

Here is the thing that will help Linux come into the Biz on the desktop level.

1. When all the software a company uses to operate will be web based, meaning that the desktop just needs a browser. Office apps and management apps all browser based, either coming from the cloud or a local server. A small desktop with built in 16gb SSD drive and linux would be a lock at $150 (cheaper than a RDP winterm to connect to terminal services)


Here is the thing that will help Linux come into the home on the desktop level.

1. A huge selling game that is for linux only. It will need to be on the shelf at walmart and bestbuy. Since 80% of the home computers I work on (when I have to do that) were purchased at one of those 2 places. That is where parent's go to buy this stuff. Everyone wants their "free" OS and "free" games which is cool, and trendy. But you need a branded product that is huge sitting on the shelf for sale at walmart to make "impact". A great linux only game for sale for $15 at walmart will drive downloads of Ubuntu and you would see a ton of posts....like "how do I setup ubuntu and windows 7 dual boot so I Can play my new game I just bought at walmart" (this would be a huge reading comprehension test for american education system too, since the min sys reqs for the game will say LINUX)

just my thoughts at the moment.

dmizer
August 24th, 2009, 02:41 PM
The article you linked to no longer exist!

If the news is old enough for Yahoo to drop, then it's old enough for us to drop too.

Closing thread.