Install Everything Required: Why Not?!

[Breakablec]

Hello there,
I am just wondering why it does not make sense to preinstall all common software during installation.
What I mean by common software is everything that is required for Internet and Multimedia experience.
For example I don't imagine a computer that does not want to use:
Flash, Java, Video Codecs.
So this is the first thing that I install after Ubuntu itself.

I understand that its really easy to install that stuff during usage, and you can choose what version you want, whether its proprietary of free, but why cant the user make a decision by choosing the distribution instead - you do have gobuntu for the free-only version of software?

Is it some distribution problem, so you cannot distribute proprietary content on the installation cd?
Is it some ideological decision?
Or is it simply a design decision trying to make something "better"?

Please share your knowledge, or provide an opinion.

[Keyper7]

The user DOES have an option: Linux Mint, for example.

Gobuntu follows a policy of free software only, Ubuntu follows a policy of opt-in proprietary software and Linux Mint follows a policy of opt-out proprietary software. Just choose whatever suits you better. It's Ubuntu's choice and there's no such thing as a "correct" way. What is required for you is not required for other people.

[Joeb454]

This is due to various international laws - especially regarding the use of CSS for reading dvd's (which circumvents the copy protection).

You can install them though, I think this subject is mentioned on an Ubuntu help page :)

[az]

Is it some distribution problem, so you cannot distribute proprietary content on the installation cd?
Is it some ideological decision?
Or is it simply a design decision trying to make something "better"?

Please share your knowledge, or provide an opinion.

Probably all of the above. For example, the patent holder of the MP3 format requires that anyone who distributes the codec pay them a royalty. Users can download the codec on their own, if they choose to do so, without being required to pay the royalty - the royalty is only imposed on the distributer. So that means than you have to install the MP3 codec yourself.

This is not Ubuntu's fault, but the owner of the patent.

To follow with your other two points, the ogg-vorbis format is free/libre and open source and is distributed on the CD, so that promotes "something better" and suits the ideological position of software freedom.

[armandh]

many drivers are not open so in order for ubuntu to work out of the box it is shipped with the open drivers. other drivers may work now but not after an upgrade or patch. your choice.

with the ability to change anything comes the possibility of screwing up everything.

[ukripper]

Hello there,
I am just wondering why it does not make sense to preinstall all common software during installation.
What I mean by common software is everything that is required for Internet and Multimedia experience.
For example I don't imagine a computer that does not want to use:
Flash, Java, Video Codecs.
So this is the first thing that I install after Ubuntu itself.

I understand that its really easy to install that stuff during usage, and you can choose what version you want, whether its proprietary of free, but why cant the user make a decision by choosing the distribution instead - you do have gobuntu for the free-only version of software?

Is it some distribution problem, so you cannot distribute proprietary content on the installation cd?
Is it some ideological decision?
Or is it simply a design decision trying to make something "better"?

Please share your knowledge, or provide an opinion.

This may help understanding!
http://www.ubuntu.com/community/ubuntustory/philosophy

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RestrictedFormats

[wolfen69]

you have to remember that even windows does not come with these codecs.

try linux mint if you require these things to be pre-installed.

[stchman]

Hello there,
I am just wondering why it does not make sense to preinstall all common software during installation.
What I mean by common software is everything that is required for Internet and Multimedia experience.
For example I don't imagine a computer that does not want to use:
Flash, Java, Video Codecs.
So this is the first thing that I install after Ubuntu itself.

I understand that its really easy to install that stuff during usage, and you can choose what version you want, whether its proprietary of free, but why cant the user make a decision by choosing the distribution instead - you do have gobuntu for the free-only version of software?

Is it some distribution problem, so you cannot distribute proprietary content on the installation cd?
Is it some ideological decision?
Or is it simply a design decision trying to make something "better"?

Please share your knowledge, or provide an opinion.

Copyright laws.

A lot of the stuff you talk about is proprietary. An individual can download it but a major distro cann include it as a pre-installed feature.

[Sef]

Moved to recurring discussions.

[LaRoza]

Hello there,
I am just wondering why it does not make sense to preinstall all common software during installation.
What I mean by common software is everything that is required for Internet and Multimedia experience.
For example I don't imagine a computer that does not want to use:
Flash, Java, Video Codecs.
So this is the first thing that I install after Ubuntu itself.

Please share your knowledge, or provide an opinion.

Windows doesn't come with Flash, Java and many codecs either.

Windows doesn't come with an office suit, or other essential software. You'd think Windows would come with antivirus at the very least.

[bruce89]

I find it odd that Ubuntu's MOTU videos were on Youtube (flash, gnash no longer works there). Shows you what Ubuntu think of FOSS. They are Theoraising them now however. Roll on HTML5 and Dirac I say.

GIMP did the same thing by the way.