[Linux Magazine] Hey Ubuntu, Stop Making Linux Look Bad

[zeroseven0183]

I read an article in Linux Magazine (http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7600/1.html) and thought of sharing this to you all.

Any Violent reactions?

Ubuntu’s new Karmic Koala 9.10 release has been highly anticipated as the greatest release ever. In truth, it falls flat on its face in a time when Linux really needed to shine.

----------

It’s the same old story. A new Ubuntu release, a new series of pain and frustration.

Canonical releases a new version of Ubuntu every 6 months, come what may. Unfortunately what most often comes is a system full of bugs, pain, anguish, wailing and gnashing of teeth - as many “early” adopters of Karmic Koala have discovered.

The problem is, Ubuntu makes Linux look bad. As more and more people make the switch to free software this is not a good thing. Linux is meant to be stable, secure, reliable.

By the way, Ubuntu 9.10 works great for me.


Note: This topic is also found in http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1324988

[Grenage]

half-way through a fresh Ubuntu 64 bit install, the video card suddenly started to display artefacts on the screen. A power off and reboot and it’s still broken. Coincidence? Maybe

I stopped reading at this point, for obvious reasons!

[t0p]

OMG KARMIC DOESN'T WORK (ON ALL HARDWARE) (YET)!

This gets real old, real quick....

[John Bean]

OMG KARMIC DOESN'T WORK (ON ALL HARDWARE) (YET)!

This gets real old, real quick....
True, but it's also a fact that Karmic doesn't work properly on all sorts of hardware that previous versions like Jaunty had no problems with. Ask users of mobile broadband dongles, or owners of the popular MSI Wind netbook (and its clones) just to name two that bit me personally.

It's a fair comment that karmic causes more installation grief to more people than (say) Jaunty did - including journalists who then naturally give it a less than glowing write up.

[Keyper7]

It's a fair comment that karmic causes more installation grief to more people than (say) Jaunty did - including journalists who then naturally give it a less than glowing write up.

I'd like to see actual evidence of that, because I didn't really feel like the flood of "release X is the worse, release (X - 1) was the best" posts was any different from any previous release.

I think what happened is that some journalists saw the Ubuntu Forums at the time of a release for the first time, and others are simply jumping in the bandwagon.

[t0p]

It's a fair comment that karmic causes more installation grief to more people than (say) Jaunty did - including journalists who then naturally give it a less than glowing write up.

Are you sure about that? Seems to me, when a new version of Ubuntu comes out, lots of people complain that it doesn't work for them any more. Eventually most of this dies down as bugs are stomped. Then another release brings out more of the same.

Even Ubuntu's beta-testing model can't catch all the bugs all the time. And updates can't be tested on all possible combinations of hardware before release. And remember: a lot (most?) of hardware support is done at kernel-level, by developers working independently of the hardware manufacturer. Whereas Windows (for example) hardware drivers are usually written by the manufacturer's own devs.

But is Karmic worse than other releases? I don't know; but I haven't seen anything (yet) to make me think that's true.

[issih]

True, but it's also a fact that Karmic doesn't work properly on all sorts of hardware that previous versions like Jaunty had no problems with. Ask users of mobile broadband dongles, or owners of the popular MSI Wind netbook (and its clones) just to name two that bit me personally.

It's a fair comment that karmic causes more installation grief to more people than (say) Jaunty did - including journalists who then naturally give it a less than glowing write up.

Nope you are wrong....and the oft quoted polls actually prove it.

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=t0XWfWgqJpYxCGAZ1G8U-og&output=html

That compares the equivalent poll results for the last few releases - including jaunty (which had well known serious regressions for lots of video hardware btw) and if you look at it you will see that the polls actually prove that karmic is as good if not better than the last few releases.

Taking the raw poll numbers and believing that they mean anything does nothing except expose how little those in the press know about statistics.

Karmic is emphatically NOT a bad release. its just the way that software releases work in the linux community.

[redfoxkt]

I read an article in Linux Magazine (http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7600/1.html) and thought of sharing this to you all.

Any Violent reactions?



By the way, Ubuntu 9.10 works great for me.


Note: This topic is also found in http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1324988

im still running 9.04 so i cant really say to much but isnt it obvious that there is going to be bugs ?? everything that first releases has bugs and thats y there is patches and updates. its just another person that had nothing to write about so they attacked a new release ( expecting bugs ). and since when was 9.10 not secure i thought it is jsut has secure as 9.04 ?????...and since when has ubuntu made linux look bad ???....gahh some people now days.

Edit: i dont mean this to u zeroseven0183 (http://ubuntuforums.org/member.php?u=678032)...just who ever made that idiot article attacking a new release...people do that all the time to games to software to anything they can get their hands on and through in the dirt and stomp on....gahh makes me mad...

[YosefKaro]

I read that article and I am thoroughly disgusted with Linux Magazine. "Ask users of mobile broadband dongles" Yes, I have 2 of these, one Novatel u727 and Sierra Wireless Compass 888. Neither one of them worked on Windows 7 nor was there away to get either of them to work, even in XP or Vista mode. However, both of these work perfectly for me on Lucid (Yes, I was so impressed with Karmic that I have already jumped on Lucid). And what I read in one of the comments, that "all" Windows 7 installs and upgrades went smoothly...who is he trying to fool. Didn't it make headlines when those trying to upgrade to Windows 7 got stuck in a reboot loop? Come what may, Karmic Koala is still leagues ahead of any other distro and in no way makes Linux look bad. Man, this just makes me sick. That is the first, and last article I will read from that magazine unless they allow the truth to also be published and not just propaganda.

-Yos

[starcannon]

When using Linux-centric hardware (gasp imagine buying hardware that supports the OS you use?!?!), 9.10 has been the best release yet. Indeed, I normally run LTS cycles unless there is some improvement for laptop X or some hardware specific thing that I need. 9.10 is on all of my computers though(except my little practice server, its still running 9.04).

I wonder why all the backbiting within the Linux community. Seems like who ever is leading distrowatch with the most users gets hammered. /shrug go figure; let the 1337 633|< go install LFS and 574(| already.

[Dimitriid]

I expect to have some regressions and things that might need fixing when I am on Arch, but going through the pain of formatting every 6 months ( cause upgrade its just an additional onslaught of problems anyway ) just to have worst regressions is not acceptable.

[zeroseven0183]

I still prefer a buggy Linux/Ubuntu over an improved Windows.

[YosefKaro]

Who says that you would have worse regressions...are you speaking from personal experience or are you just making an assumption ? That is, did you even try Karmic out ? The vast, over-whelming majority experienced no regressions...unfortunately, not everyone of them comes to the forums and posts, "Great, it worked perfectly," only the minority of them who have problems post on the forums. I bet if Windows had such great support as the ubuntu community does, we would see all of their whines and woes about their problems with Windows 7.

-Yos

[zeroseven0183]

I wonder what distro the author is using...?

Nevertheless, I think it (the article, the woes) shouldn't come from someone who's promoting Linux. May be I'm wrong but that's just my sentiment.

How can the Linux community convince other OS users to switch to Linux if we are firing against each other?

[pookiebear]

I still prefer a buggy Linux/Ubuntu over an improved Windows.

bingo. My windows 7 install was slower, and after it was running for 3 hours the network quit. I went back and put windows xp with just SP2 (way faster) no patches but the Daylight savings patch. That computer only runs WoW and Ventrilo. My other computers for work are running Ubuntu 9.10 or LTS

[Penguin Guy]

Perfectly true.

[UKBB]

Are you sure about that? Seems to me, when a new version of Ubuntu comes out, lots of people complain that it doesn't work for them any more. Eventually most of this dies down as bugs are stomped.

So what is wrong with that? It sounds to me like the community is working.

[JBAlaska]

You would think that Linux Magazine would be less into Ubuntu bashing and winblows fanboyism (is that a word..well it is now).

I've been serious about using Ubuntu since Feisty and have seen the same posts, "Leaving Ubuntu forever" and "Ubuntu not ready for the desktop" for EVERY release.

If Linux does not work outta the box on someones system it's gotta be a "Bug" or the dev's "Rushed the release before it was ready"... Dang this is getting old.

[Bachstelze]

Recurring.