10.4 O dear what can the matter be

[Frak]

I just wonder why this happens . Something that works on an old release doesn't work on the new release! . Really strange !

Non-stable API/ABI. There's no guarantee that a module will work in a newer release due to the constantly changing interface. Windows, Mac, and most BSD's do not suffer from this issue.

[wilee-nilee]

Come to the dark side. We have cookies!

Well we all have a shadow in direct sunlight, except that it sometimes blinds your view.

[nmccrina]

I am not looking for support for these issues. That is why I didn't post in the support section. I have had many many years IT support experience. I am a retired CIO. I owned my own company, I have been with Ubuntu since day one and Linux for 0ver 10 years I know what I am doing.

This is about the direction and the performance of Ubuntu and the risk this type of release poses to its future and the future of Linux. It has to stop if Ubuntu and Linux is to continue to progress.

Ever wondered why Dell is not enthusiastic ? and others are no longer ?

We are quick to rubbish MS for Vista , but get our own house in order first. Those in glass houses should not throw stones.

Okay, I have some views on this too. Personally, I don't think it's important for Linux to pander to the masses. I'm not going to complain if a company like Canonical tries to do so, since Linux is all about taking it and doing your own thing, but it's not something I'm interested in personally. In fact, I'm going to go a step further and say that people who aren't interested in computers being anything other than Facebook and Youtube machines should not really bother having a computer anyway, even one running Windows. It is just aesthetically distasteful to me. Computers are about Godel and Turing and mathematical beauty, not "Leave Britney Alone!" or lolcats.

I recommend that everyone read "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" by Eric Raymond. It explains what the open source idea is all about. Open source works by users also being co-developers. They report bugs, they contribute patches. If someone needs a feature, they don't complain about it in a forum and wait for the maintainer (who is probably maintaining the program in spare time) to take care of it, they implement it themselves. Open source is basically hobbyists swapping gadgets and tips around, but on a larger scale than any other hobbyists in history just because of the nature of the hobby. So what happens when you get a flood of new users, who don't know the operating system from the web browser? They are just mooching off other people's work, and making redundant, superfluous, and impractical requests of the people doing the work. They expect that things are centered on them, when in reality it's all about the thrill of making something cool, or learning new things. Why do we want large hordes of people that contribute nothing?

For example, suppose you had a club of aeronautical engineers that build little remote-controlled flying airplanes from scratch. Sure, the hand built models are going to be a lot better than your plastic ones from Wal-Mart. And also, the members are going to be open to new people joining the club to learn and help out. But are they trying to replace Wal-Mart as the main supplier of remote controlled airplanes? Of course not. The aeronautical club just isn't going to scale well to that kind of market. I think this is fairly analogous to the world of open-source software, but feel free to disagree.

I don't see how striving for a mainstream presence is helpful to open source software. Hats off to the people who try to accomplish it, but I think that there is a fundamental limit there. If people really want to use a Universal Turing Machine to do Facebook and Youtube, let them pay a few bucks to allow Microsoft or Apple to focus on eye candy and user friendliness.

All of that to say, if you aren't expecting and willing to work around a driver crash every now and then, why are you using Linux in the first place?

BTW, I'm aware that I'm an elitist jerk, so you don't need to tell me so.

[DeadSuperHero]

I just wonder why this happens . Something that works on an old release doesn't work on the new release! . Really strange !

Funny, DOS apps still work great in Windows7.

[schauerlich]

I don't know if 10.04 is any better than previous releases, and I can't even get past the splash screen.

It's a very pretty splash screen, though.

[Frak]

I recommend that everyone read "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" by Eric Raymond. It explains what the open source idea is all about. Open source works by users also being co-developers. They report bugs, they contribute patches. If someone needs a feature, they don't complain about it in a forum and wait for the maintainer (who is probably maintaining the program in spare time) to take care of it, they implement it themselves. Open source is basically hobbyists swapping gadgets and tips around, but on a larger scale than any other hobbyists in history just because of the nature of the hobby. So what happens when you get a flood of new users, who don't know the operating system from the web browser? They are just mooching off other people's work, and making redundant, superfluous, and impractical requests of the people doing the work. They expect that things are centered on them, when in reality it's all about the thrill of making something cool, or learning new things. Why do we want large hordes of people that contribute nothing?

You're right. That's why I'm always on Ubuntu for making a larger upstream presence. If the users are unable to fix the problems themselves, it is up to Canonical to be the proxy. The original maintainer has no obligation to implement anything unless it either provides a good enough benefit or is within the best interest of the financial sponsor. If Ubuntu consistently tries to rely on upstream/mainstream to commit the fixes, there might as well not be an Ubuntu project in the first place. I mean, if Ubuntu wants to be an art project, that's fine, but if you do ship a desktop system that's supposed to be stable, fix the underlying base before you add on top. Software centre is neat, as is the social toolbar and some of the artwork. Though, why is there no clear plan to stabilize a kernel for a prolonged interval. People will be using these computers to watch crap on youtube, there's no excuse why the sound should go out, or the wireless fail, or the entire video server crash. If you're going to ship a stable system, make the underlying base stable or ship on-top of a stable base.

[KiwiNZ]

worksforme

Oh gosh, I'm going to get force-choked! O.o

The "works for me" attitude is something we simple cannot continue with. Why? it will doom Ubuntu and Linux to being nothing more than a Hobby OS.

[Chrysantine]

I don't know if 10.04 is any better than previous releases, and I can't even get past the splash screen.

It's a very pretty splash screen, though.

Boot with nofb or vga=ask and choose some fancy text mode and see what's cookin'.

[nmccrina]

The "works for me" attitude is something we simple cannot continue with. Why? it will doom Ubuntu and Linux to being nothing more than a Hobby OS.

Lol, that's what my whole wall of text was about! I'm fine with a Hobby OS! I don't want to do anything with my computer. I just want to know how it works, and experiment with it.

I don't want to read your (or anyone else's) mom's posts about how teh internetz won't work!

But sometimes I do anyway, for fun or because I feel like helping out at the moment

[KiwiNZ]

Lol, that's what my whole wall of text was about! I'm fine with a Hobby OS! I don't want to do anything with my computer. I just want to know how it works, and experiment with it.

I don't want to read your (or anyone else's) mom's posts about how teh internetz won't work!

Well I joined Ubuntu Geek here because I have a less selfish view of life. I wonder why someone with the above attitude would even be a member of a social forum