Has Ubuntu Reached the End Of the Line?

[sulekha]

Hi all,

see this http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/163903/has_ubuntu_reached_the_end_of_the_line.html

[Kosimo]

Hi all,

see this http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/163903/has_ubuntu_reached_the_end_of_the_line.html

KDE Default in Ubuntu?...
Hmmm... Honestly I don't think that this will ever happen.

[konqueror7]

i doubt it will happen...gnome 3.0 is still under development, and linux has a great gnome community to provide feedback on the desktop environment... i think there will be lots of changes before the final release is made...

if, however, THAT would be the final look of gnome, then i would possibly look for another DE, maybe KDE or Xfce or others there...

[Orlsend]

Don't worry its one of those Silly Harmless KDE'ist, I also think it will never happen. because setting KDE as the default is only scratching the itch of a few while leaving the majority in Poison Ivy heck. :D

[Sashin]

I like Gnome as it is, I really hope it doesn't become that. I'm all for change but I don't want anything like that.

[XubuRoxMySox]

Oh, things that make you go, "hmmmmm."

Since Ubuntu is now a true competitor with Windows and Mac, it really does make sense for them to pursue a graphics-based environment. KDE4 (and all I know of KDE4 is from screenshots and what I've read online) is certainly very Windows-like. I can imagine the next Kubuntu looking very much like Xandros!

But for something lightweight and speedy, I'd go the opposite way. I resurrected an ancient old 'puter that my family had given up for dead a long time ago - using a minimal Ubuntu-based distro called "CRUNCHBANG LINUX." Amazing, mind-bending speed!! And much faster on that old machine than Ubuntu 8.10 is on my almost brand new 'puter!

I love Ubuntu's bells and whistles and user-friendliness, and I hope they do pursue the market with more KDE4 window dressing to make it "feel" and work like Windows and Mac. That's good for Ubuntu and for the whole Linux world! But for what I use a 'puter for, I am delighted with the minimalism and speed of my CRUNCHBANG. I'm using it on both my 'puters now.

[konqueror7]

if KDE would be the default, then there wouldn't be Ubuntu anymore, only Kubuntu...:P

[Sealbhach]

There's so many of these "Will Ubuntu ....." or "Is Ubuntu the....." or "Will Windows 7 kill Linux".....

They're so tedious, no news in them, just opinions and speculation.


.

[jespdj]

"Has Ubuntu Reached the End Of the Line?" - What a sensationalist title...

The story is actually about GNOME 3.0 and the planned changes in it, and not about Ubuntu at all. The story is nothing more than the opinion of a single person who doesn't like the proposed new ideas for GNOME 3.0, and it does absolutely not have any convincing argument that the "end of the line" has been reached for Ubuntu.

His argument for using KDE as the main desktop environment for Ubuntu instead of GNOME is very weak - it's just because he personally doesn't like the GNOME 3.0 proposal. There is no real reason to think or expect that Ubuntu will switch to KDE as the default DE.

If he likes KDE, then he should just use Kubuntu.

[Pasdar]

I think the new idea they want to implement for GNOME is horrible, but I haven't tested it. Instead they should focus on giving a professional design to their standard desktop design and more importantly should speed things up.

A lot of people criticize KDE for every illogical thing they can think of, but fact remains that it is the most professionally designed, practical and good looking desktops environments out there. While the standard desktop of GNOME will make new users want to run away or at least eeww, the standard KDE desktop looks very professional. In fact every program they use in it has the same professional design. If you leave GNOME in the way it is when installed it looks not much different than Windows 95.

I think Canocial's choice for GNOME was a strategic one to make many current Linux users happy with it. However, they need to either help improve GNOME or just use KDE, because they're advancing fast.

[troykent]

wow, some of you really think ubuntu is a competitor to windows or mac? I'm doing research to revist an old article about Open Source enthusiasm from the late 1990's into the millennium. Everyone then thought redhat would burst opensource into homes and business desktops. There was a new company called Google running it on 8,000 computers. Wireless was coming about and there were problems with some distro's and getting it to work.

Truthfully i'm very disappointed in Ubuntu. It seems to have one fundamental flaw i'm finding in these forums and that's multimedia on the web. I'm using an older (what should have been more stable version 8.04) on an IBM thinkpad T43. Everything works great except the user experience on the web isn't even poor, it's non existent.

To be a true competitor to Windows or Mac Ubuntu will need to work out of the box like they do. That means once the install is finished downloading music, uploading pictures to facebook or myspace, or listening to pandora, watching youtube, etc. The typical user does not want to make.config or any of that rubbish on obscure file names buried in the directories. They just want it to work. I don't have tweak my car everytime I need to drive it.

I was really hoping to report that the state of things open source had changed drastically and it does appear they have in some areas. Just not in all, unfortunately it's still not as good of a product as Mac OSX or even (i hate admitting this one) Vista.

[skymera]

Maybe Canonical should think about the release cycle time.
Extend it to a year maybe 2 or 3. Then the new features will be a big "wow".

Ubuntu 9.04 seems to have focused more on Netbook Remix and boot speed. Not much else. This doesn't deserve a total new upgrade, but perhaps a new era in the current Ubuntu release?



To be a true competitor to Windows or Mac Ubuntu will need to work out of the box like they do. That means once the install is finished downloading music, uploading pictures to facebook or myspace, or listening to pandora, watching youtube, etc. The typical user does not want to make.config or any of that rubbish on obscure file names buried in the directories. They just want it to work. I don't have tweak my car everytime I need to drive it.

wwhoah whoah.
Windows. Works out of the box? It doesn't.
In Windows:
Did my sound work ootb? No.
Did my graphics work ootb? No.
Did my wireless work ootb? No.
Did my BlueTooth work ootb? No.
Does Windows fix programs that are missing some rubbish .NET dependency? No.
Did the bootloader work with other OS? No.
Can i play my FLV and AVI's ootb? No
Did it come with a ready-to-work Office suite? No.
Am i able to go to a forum and get decent help FAST? No.

In Ubuntu:
Did my sound work ootb? Yes.
Did my graphics work ootb? Yes from repos.
Did my wireless work ootb? Yes.
Did my BlueTooth work ootb? Yes.
Does Ubuntu fix dependencies? Yes.
Did GRUB work with other OS? Yes.
Did i have to edit any files or compile? NO.
Can i play my AVI and FLV files? Yes
Did it come with a ready-to-work Office suite? Yes
Am i able to go to a forum and get decent help FAST? Oh yes, indeed i can <3 you community :)

You seem to not realise, Windows doesn't make the drivers.
Manufacturers do!
Linux community does make some of the drivers and they make a damn good job.
Hats off to the developers.

/end (I can now return to my college work)

[Pasdar]

wow, some of you really think ubuntu is a competitor to windows or mac? I'm doing research to revist an old article about Open Source enthusiasm from the late 1990's into the millennium. Everyone then thought redhat would burst opensource into homes and business desktops. There was a new company called Google running it on 8,000 computers. Wireless was coming about and there were problems with some distro's and getting it to work.

Truthfully i'm very disappointed in Ubuntu. It seems to have one fundamental flaw i'm finding in these forums and that's multimedia on the web. I'm using an older (what should have been more stable version 8.04) on an IBM thinkpad T43. Everything works great except the user experience on the web isn't even poor, it's non existent.

To be a true competitor to Windows or Mac Ubuntu will need to work out of the box like they do. That means once the install is finished downloading music, uploading pictures to facebook or myspace, or listening to pandora, watching youtube, etc. The typical user does not want to make.config or any of that rubbish on obscure file names buried in the directories. They just want it to work. I don't have tweak my car everytime I need to drive it.

I was really hoping to report that the state of things open source had changed drastically and it does appear they have in some areas. Just not in all, unfortunately it's still not as good of a product as Mac OSX or even (i hate admitting this one) Vista.
I've installed many Windows versions on many PCs and Laptops and it's rare to find a Laptop it fully functions on without the need to install several drivers and functionality programs. On PCs, usually many things work, but not always. On my HP t260, nothing works when installing any version of Windows, from XP to 7. I basically have nothing unless I have a second PC to download drivers from.

Even if you have all the drivers installed and can access the internet. You sure as hell can't run divx/xvid/quicktime/etc without downloading additional codecs/programs for them. This while under Ubuntu it asks you for permission to download the codecs when running the file for the first time and it just runs it.

However, I do believe Ubuntu should go further in their userfriendlyness than Windows to convince people to use it.

[jespdj]

I just looked at these GNOME Shell screencasts (http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Screencasts) and I actually like the new desktop navigation idea.

[SomeGuyDude]

People who act like Ubuntu "needs" KDE to be competitive make me laugh.

[Ms_Angel_D]

To be a true competitor to Windows or Mac Ubuntu will need to work out of the box like they do. That means once the install is finished downloading music, uploading pictures to facebook or myspace, or listening to pandora, watching youtube, etc. The typical user does not want to make.config or any of that rubbish on obscure file names buried in the directories. They just want it to work. I don't have tweak my car everytime I need to drive it.

It would appear to an experienced OS installer, the only windows you have ever installed came from a system restore disk given out by your OEM, as a vanilla windows install a brand new built pc does not have anyway near anything which works out of the box. You'll have to have the drivers on hand. (please note this is not an attempt at being asinine, I'm just pointing it out as it's difficult to get mannerism across in writing.)

How is this for irony, My network card won't work with a fresh windows install, but I need the network to go get the driver?! what kind of nonsense is that???

[Saint Angeles]

i hated this quote in the article:


There can be no doubt that the Ubuntu guys have finally caught up with Windows and Mac OS X (and, after all, this was the whole point back in the beginning) (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1).WHAT? "finally caught up with"?

from my experience, it seems like windows and OS X is trying to keep up with the innovations of Linux. i mean, compiz destroys all the others GUIs and the only thing that proprietary OSes have that can be considered better than Linux is the amount of proprietary software created for it (which can hardly be the fault of the OS itself).

if linux had all the newest 3d games and adobe software and DAW (digital audio workstation) software like protools or cubase (even though we have ardour), linux would be considered way better than any of the others hands down.

ugh

[chucky chuckaluck]

I just looked at these GNOME Shell screencasts (http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Screencasts) and I actually like the new desktop navigation idea.

kind of neat, but it looks like it was intended as a learning tool for preschoolers.

[Pasdar]

It's true that Linux/other programs usually have functions that can not be found on Windows and that Windows later on adds them (i.e. Screenlets / Info on desktop / Browser / Mail program / etc). It's not true that Outlook and IE were imitated upon, as written in the review, IE and Outlook were stolen ideas from Netscape navigator and mail, the later functionality found in IE are ideas stolen from Firefox. The screenlets they have on their standard desktop existed on Linux long before.

But it is also true that MS is a master at stealing ideas and making them better. Not better, as in a better product necessarily, but better as is better integration into their OS. Even tough their latest browser in Win7 has just about stolen every idea out there from every browser, and its really fast, how it opens/closes, etc, people still prefer using Firefox I've seen. Though I really like the changes they've made to the design of WMP in Win7.

[3Miro]

I expect, the migration to Gnome 3.0 to be something like the migration to KDE 4.*

Initially everything was buggy and different, so people hated it. Now KDE 4.2 is as sable as Gnome and is my main choice (I still have 8.10's Gnome on my laptop). I now like KDE 4.2 because of all the features that are different from KDE 3.*

Some were predicting death to KDE because of the initial 4.0 release, however, that did not happen. I suppose some people would predict the end of Gnome, Ubuntu and the entire OS community, but that would not happen either. It is just that upon migration to Gnome 3.0, Ubuntu will have a few hard months.

[jdrodrig]

I think the article raises a crucial point that I agree with. So far, the linux world has been playing catch-up to alternatives...think "can we develop an office clone under an open source development method?"...and the community has succeded time and time again....

Now the next step is to make most of open source projects innovative in the way they address consumer needs (besides providing cheap alternatives). After all, one key point of the open source movement is the proximity to the end user.

It is plain stupid to propose any distro to "move" to an specific Destkop Environment. The whole point is about giving the user options and letting it speak about what he likes or dislikes and invite him/her to contribute ideas.

I have more than a year with my current signature; and I think now more than ever is relevant.

[days_of_ruin]

kind of neat, but it looks like it was intended as a learning tool for preschoolers.

What makes you say that?
I don't see what is preschoolish about that.

[vexorian]

I want my 2 minutes back.

Basically, it just seems to be the same old gnome vs. KDE flame (I wonder why wasn't this moved to recurring discussions yet)

Personally, I am just using Jaunty on my 6 years old computer, I got metacity compositing and well, this is just the best looking, most responsive interface this computer would ever dream to have. KDE4 will have all these sorts of crazy things, but I've been trying some of the upgrade-forced KDE4 apps like dolphin and the new konqueror, and I am sorry but KDE4 seems to be made thinking of another person instead of me, its interface is just less responsive and the oxygen style that often looks so good in screenshots just doesn't look too well here. I don't know...

Just saying that there are many groups of users, and it is unlikely KDE4 will appeal them all, I can't think of a feasible way in which Gnome will not survive. And imho, if gnome 3.0's changes are not that big but there are some little less noticeable but important changes (like in gnome's case, improving the development infrastructure and doing tons of polish) and if they don't get into flaming users that disagree with their 'vision', it will do better than KDE 4 .

Of course, that's not to say that gnome can work for all users either. It is good to have both things and I can't look into the future and expect either not to survive.

I think ubuntu will do just fine qith gnome and that WTF-features!!11 are not what users really need. Windows 7 sounds like MS jumping the shark with many things that nobody really needed or wanted. They did do something right: more responsive interface. Ubuntu, at least from my jaunty experience seems to be trying as well to be more responsive. The windows users never really asked for a dock-taskbar hybrid or a new theme, and the truth is ubuntu users don't need that either...

Edit: To say windows users will prefer KDE4 over gnome is just crazy, those familiarity-loving guys will despise both. KDE 3 was great for this, but KDE4 is just a new way to scare users, thanks to all the "innovation" effort.

I think innovating just for the heck of it is a great way to scare users away, at least it will get you mentioned in articles/reviews about how much you "innovate" though.

[wildman4god]

I don't think that gnome will have as hard of a time moving to gnome 3.0 as kde did going to 4.0. The reason for this is KDE's mistake was releasing 4.0 before it was considered stable, which it wasn't until 4.2, gnome already said they will not release it untill it's ready, even if it means holding it back a cycle or two, plus they have already been working on this awhile now and they have a year left to go, which interestingly enough was how long it took kde 4.0 to become stable and usable. As far as the new interface I like it, I will miss being able to have complete control over panels and no more panel applets, but remember that ubuntu and gnome both shoot for ease of use, and ubuntu in general is geared towards typical PC users not more advanced Linux users, of course your typical Linux user will not like having customization options taken away, but for the normal user too many choices can over whelm them, so if taking away options is whats necessary to get normal pc users to use it than so be it, there are other DEs out there for more technical users. And I also think the new UI is very intuitive, very easy to figure out, and has great motion dynamics to make it easier on the eyes and its not even an alpha yet, by next year it should be fantastic, lookin' forward to using it.

Edit: As far as no panel apps, gnome is planning on integrating widgets/gadgets into the desktop to take their place.

[bp1509]

d

[spoons]

I think there's still a way to go yet - I'd like to see Canocial help us get an open-source flash player and open-source video drivers for more cards. I keep trying Ubuntu with every new release but the ATi drivers always let me down.

[days_of_ruin]

I don't think that gnome will have as hard of a time moving to gnome 3.0 as kde did going to 4.0. The reason for this is KDE's mistake was releasing 4.0 before it was considered stable, which it wasn't until 4.2, gnome already said they will not release it untill it's ready, even if it means holding it back a cycle or two, plus they have already been working on this awhile now and they have a year left to go, which interestingly enough was how long it took kde 4.0 to become stable and usable. As far as the new interface I like it, I will miss being able to have complete control over panels and no more panel applets, but remember that ubuntu and gnome both shoot for ease of use, and ubuntu in general is geared towards typical PC users not more advanced Linux users, of course your typical Linux user will not like having customization options taken away, but for the normal user too many choices can over whelm them, so if taking away options is whats necessary to get normal pc users to use it than so be it, there are other DEs out there for more technical users. And I also think the new UI is very intuitive, very easy to figure out, and has great motion dynamics to make it easier on the eyes and its not even an alpha yet, by next year it should be fantastic, lookin' forward to using it.

Edit: As far as no panel apps, gnome is planning on integrating widgets/gadgets into the desktop to take their place.

I hope they allow panel applets anyway.
You can't see the desktop when you have a lot of windows or a fullscreen window.

[vexorian]

To be a true competitor to Windows or Mac Ubuntu will need to work out of the box like they do.Windows does not bring flash or java out of the box, you need to install.

Installing flash on ubuntu is nothing tough to do as of now. You may need some tutorial or soemthing if you are a newbie. But you must remember that in order to use flash on windows, you had to learn how to install it as well.


wow, some of you really think ubuntu is a competitor to windows or mac? I'm doing research to revist an old article about Open Source enthusiasm from the late 1990's into the millennium. Everyone then thought redhat would burst opensource into homes and business desktops. There was a new company called Google running it on 8,000 computers. Wireless was coming about and there were problems with some distro's and getting it to work.
Then ubuntu came and made it true! Interesting?

[bp1509]

d

[vexorian]

As for the article... it seems to me that Gnome 3.0 is trying to equal the suck that is KDE4.

Looks like i'm staying at Xfce or Openbox. Seriously who are they making desktops for now-a-days? Toddlers raised on Boobahs? (http://www.boohbah.tv/)
You just got to see what's waiting for you in xfce 5.

[hessiess]

KDE4 is extremely familiar for modern Windows users


This is presisly the reason why I don't like KDE, I use Linux to get away from the horrible windows desktop enviroment.

[Bart_D]

Hi all,

see this http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/163903/has_ubuntu_reached_the_end_of_the_line.html

That's one guy's opinion. It doesn't mean **** to me! It shouldn't mean **** to you either!!! Just because one guy says that he thinks all deer should be spray painted yellow, doesn't mean that it's going to happen.

I enjoyed his book, but he ain't goina determine what happens to Ubuntu!!!

[TheLastDodo]

You just got to see what's waiting for you in xfce 5.

Laugh all you like, but when the state of Linux UI design is looking worse than it did in 2003, who knows what the future may bring? KDE4.x and this new Gnome design are a great example of why coders shouldn't try UI design.

[amg181270]

Laugh all you like, but when the state of Linux UI design is looking worse than it did in 2003, who knows what the future may bring? KDE4.x and this new Gnome design are a great example of why coders shouldn't try UI design.

Although new here, as are you it would seem, do I detect a Microsoft/Apple fanboi? :)

[TheLastDodo]

Although new here, as are you it would seem, do I detect a Microsoft/Apple fanboi? :)

I wouldn't say so, although you're free to form your own opinion. I've used computers for most of my life (my Dad was a programmer) and have gone through everything from various Unixes, Amiga, DOS, BeOS, RiscOS etc, to Mac OS (Classic and X) Windows and about 30 different Linux distros. I've used Linux on and off for some time, started around '98 or so, so I figure I've had a fair amount of experience with it.

One thing I've noticed over the years is that UI design seems to be a tricky proposition at best, and generally isn't well understood by most OS developers (free or for-profit). It seems to me that the point of the user interface is to let the user accomplish a task, and to do so in a way that makes the user comfortable. In other words, be simple, flexible and stay out of the way more often than not. I would argue that Gnome and KDE (and most modern UIs, really) both seem to be headed in the other direction: "forget flexibility, do things our way" and throwing out desktop paradigms that the majority of us have been comfortable with for years and replacing them with something else with fewer features. (Mac OS X suffers from this same problem, but users over the years have managed to fill in the gaps somewhat)

People don't like unnecessary change. The KDE devs' explanation that the entire backend needed to be overhauled to make it easier to work with, because the 3.x series was held together behind the scenes with all sorts of hacks and kludgey crap was a good one... it was an example of something that wasn't working well and a change needed to be made. But what was the rational for overhauling the UI? Why change what works? And if you're hellbent on change, why not keep old features while adding new ones, and allow people to choose what works best for them? This sort of "devs know best" attitude has already rendered KDE borderline unusable (and yes, I'm referring to the 4.2.x version, I'm not bashing it based on the 4.0 release), and so pardon me if I'm less than thrilled to see Gnome headed off in the same cockamamie direction.

[jdrodrig]

Basically, it just seems to be the same old gnome vs. KDE flame (I wonder why wasn't this moved to recurring discussions yet)



"Why wasn't this moved" because GNOME -versus- KDE is *not* the point of the article. It was a naive way for the author to start the discussion of what next for ubuntu?

whether ubuntu has a good way to generate innovative ideas by itself beyond replicating closed-source software....

The fact that people (we) inmediatetly jump at the opportunity to label manythings in terms of which Desktop Environment is better is a symptom of how much of us focus on the surface; this is only an OS; an OS does not per se do much in terms of business or school productivity...

it is time to move beyond desktop environment and even distro discussions and focus on what to put on top of those distro; exploiting the community-driven development engine...

[DenysT]

I think there's still a way to go yet - I'd like to see Canocial help us get an open-source flash player and open-source video drivers for more cards. I keep trying Ubuntu with every new release but the ATi drivers always let me down.

Allow me to go on a tangent from the topic. Open source drivers are one thing holding back Linux in general. Most hardware manufacturers spend big bucks on R&D to try to stay ahead of the competition. But to get onto a Linux system they need open source drivers thus divulging proprietary secrets to their competitors. Is it any wonder I can't get my AIO Epson to work? Sure there are now drivers for printing over the network but no scan function unless I remove it from the network and connect to USB. Does no good to complain to Epson, though I do anyway.

To the previous post about MS not writing device drivers, this is not true. They do have base drivers, it's just manufacturers sometimes tweak certain components, again to get an edge on the competition, and the base drivers don't work. Example: Sound and video drivers on laptops seem to be the biggest culprit. If you do a Windows update and it ever comes back with hardware driver updates for your video or audio, don't install them or they'll probably quit working! This is also happening more now that most MB have built in audio, video and ethernet built in. (I won't even mention wireless on laptops.) About the only stable drivers that do work are ide, sata and usb. (Parallel and serial still work but who cares?) And even then most MB manufacturers have proprietary drivers on a CD that are better than Windows built in drivers.

[BuffaloX]

Ubuntu will never become KUbuntu, if people want KDE they can choose KUbuntu.

I believe Ubuntu chose Gnome over KDE and others, because it's the easiest to use, not because it's better. "Linux for humans"

I like the ideas Gnome team are working with for Gnome 3.0, and I disagree that Gnome is suffer from being developer driven, they have a clear user oriented design philosophy, KDE has that too, but its just about the opposite philosophy.

In short it could be said Gnome want functionality through simplicity, and KDE want functionality through options.

[jdrodrig]

But to get onto a Linux system they need open source drivers thus divulging proprietary secrets to their competitors.


I am afraid I would disagree on principle.

I dont see why we cannot have closed-source drivers for linux; could you elaborate?

I am new to the linux-world but as far as I can see, porting to linux and being open source are not the same thing.

[Tibuda]

I am afraid I would disagree on principle.

I dont see why we cannot have closed-source drivers for linux; could you elaborate?

I am new to the linux-world but as far as I can see, porting to linux and being open source are not the same thing.
You are correct. We can use closed source software/drivers in Linux. See NVIDIA, Adobe Flash Player, Adobe Acrobat Reader... Dropbox daemon is closed source, but the nautilus interface is open.

[growled]

I like the ideas Gnome team are working with for Gnome 3.0, and I disagree that Gnome is suffer from being developer driven, they have a clear user oriented design philosophy, KDE has that too, but its just about the opposite philosophy.


I too like the Gnome ideas. I am willing to wait and see where it goes before I jump on the "I hate it" band wagon.

[jdrodrig]

before I jump on the "I hate it" band wagon.

you mean before you type, "sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop" ?

[wildman4god]

Gnome isn't going out on a limb and trying some thing new, they are supposed to be conduction surveys of the user's to see how to develop the new ui and the gnome 3.0 shell isn't set in stone, they would like to use as they have already spent a good deal of time working on it rather than start something compleatly new. Also when making a change like this you can't please everybody, no matter what you do there will be those who don't like change and those who think there needs to be change. I see the biggest problem here is that for a long time linux was just an OS for geeks and it was geared towards them, but now linux (ubuntu in particular) is trying to be an OS for normal computer users and this obviously requires change, a normal user will not use the "more customization options" or manual control of things, nor do they even want that much control, they want something that lets them do what they want, that is pleasing to the eyes out of the box and just works, where as geeks generally want compleat and total control over every aspect of their desktop. my suggestion is if you don't like they way ubuntu and more modern DEs are headed either: A. start your own DE or B. choose another one that already exist and help develop it (Like XFCE).

And again remember that ubuntu is trying to be a Linux distro for normal computer users not geeks or technically incline persons, I think it is necessary for Mark Shuttlesworth and Canical to guide developers towards this vision, because lets face it if linux is developed solely be developers and geeks it will continue to be geared towards developers and geeks, it'll never make any head way into mainstream desktop. and besides ubuntu 9.04 is the first result of conical's design and usability efforts and I have heard nothing but good things about this release, I believe we need to trust that Mark and his designers might know a little more about UI design and usability than we do.

[MaxIBoy]

I was initially against GNOME-shell, but I'm beginning to have second thoughts.

It remains to be seen whether I'll actually like it, but if they don't screw this up, this has major potential for changing the user interface for the better.

I still think that the best design would be something along the lines of Emacs or (to a lesser extent) the GIMP, where you get some base libraries, and everything else is done in plug-ins. This makes any conceivable look-and-feel a possibility.

[Athropos]

This Gnome Shell looks fun, but after viewing the 4 screencasts, I just don't see how this is going to change anything in a day-to-day usage. What's the difference between the standard application menu and the one the Gnome Shell is showing? The animation showing workspaces is nice, but so what? It's just a menu. Task-oriented menus already exist, and can already be used.

[growled]

you mean before you type, "sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop" ?
I do not much care for KDE. I would probably go with Xfce or LXDE before I switched to KDE.

[forrestcupp]

I, for one, am extremely excited about what I've seen of Gnome 3 and Gnome-shell.

We've been operating on the same hackneyed 'desktop' ideas for almost 15 years now. For that whole time, we haven't been able to move past the Start menus, task bars, and notification areas. They've given them new colors and even made them transparent, but we've been working on the same ideas for a very, very long time, and it's getting tired.

I was beginning to wonder if anyone would ever even be capable of coming up with something new that is workable. Enlightenment is about the only thing out there that is different at all, but it's progress is slow and it doesn't have a lot of backing.

I'm totally stoked that the Gnome team is actually coming up with something that is completely different. It appears that they have come up with some new ideas that actually are not stolen from everyone else. I applaud them.

If I want to use something that is just like everything else, why not just use Windows? It's more compatible.

[Stavro]

I'm totally stoked that the Gnome team is actually coming up with something that is completely different. It appears that they have come up with some new ideas that actually are not stolen from everyone else. I applaud them.

Nicely put! The initial article was accusing open source as always imitating proprietary, whether that's true or not, why not try something new if it increases productivity?

[forrestcupp]

Nicely put! The initial article was accusing open source as always imitating proprietary, whether that's true or not, why not try something new if it increases productivity?

Exactly! He accused open source of always imitating proprietary (which they do), then he bashed Gnome for doing something different, saying it will be too hard to figure out.

I don't put much stock in people who are that unstable in their thinking.

[TheLastDodo]

If I want to use something that is just like everything else, why not just use Windows? It's more compatible.

Why not Windows? Because it has security problems, I'd say. As for for praising the Gnome devs for being original, why is originality good? It seems to me that a good idea is a good idea, no matter who has it. If tomorrow Microsoft leaked a new release of the Windows 7 beta with some great new feature, I'd be happy if Apple and the various Linux developers out there copied it. Anything to help me do what I want to do more easily. And that right there is the problem I see with this new shell; it doesn't seem to do much of anything new (or at least anything that couldn't easily be fitted into the existing UI paradigm), but it makes a lot of stuff that's currently easy to do more annoying to access.

How is a menu that pops up to fill half the damn screen (and only shows 20 items btw) in any way a usability improvement. Being different at the cost of functionality isn't a virtue. There are truly different ideas out there that can improve usability, make options easier to access, icons easier to click on (round pop menus, for example), but from what I've seen so far, this new Gnome Shell thing isn't looking good.

[jacob01]

There's so many of these "Will Ubuntu ....." or "Is Ubuntu the....." or "Will Windows 7 kill Linux".....

They're so tedious, no news in them, just opinions and speculation.


.

I agree, seemed very opinionated.

[dragos240]

One word answer: Nevar.

[ZankerH]

from my experience, it seems like windows and OS X is trying to keep up with the innovations of Linux. i mean, compiz destroys all the others GUIs


The only thing compiz destroys is vsync on nvidia cards.

[drawkcab]

If that is what Gnome 3.0 is going to be, I'm going to jump ship to KDE.

[toupeiro]

I know I'm a minority in this, but from a one time Windows power user and server admin for many years who is now much more of a Linux power user and server admin, I don't think ubuntu has very much catching up to do at all!! Quite the contrary. I think ubuntu has set more bars than any other OS out there over the last 2 years. I'm really tired of seeing article after article of how for ubuntu to really "cross the finish line" It has to look, feel, and act more like Windows and OSX, be that by means of adopting only Windows feeling Desktop environments or what have you. NO, it doesn't! If Ubuntu were actively pursuing this, what would be the point of ubuntu being an alternative?! It does a great job of not being windows or OSX, and thats one of the things I love about it.

[abhiroopb]

Ubuntu is a bit like an iPod (bear with me)...in some sense its the early iPod models. It lacks a lot of features of other more polished OS's but at the same time its able to deliver. At this point in time, ubuntu is not king of the desktop, but neither is it dead.

[Saint Angeles]

The only thing compiz destroys is vsync on nvidia cards.
by destroy, i meant destroys the competition as far as innovation, impressive effects, and serious "linux conversion" power. i use ATI so i'm not familiar with any nvidea issues with compiz...

I know I'm a minority in this, but from a one time Windows power user and server admin to a Linux power user and server admin, I don't think ubuntu has very much catching up to do at all!! Quite the contrary. I think ubuntu has set more bars than any other OS out there over the last 2 years. I'm really tired of seeing article after article of how for ubuntu to really "cross the finish line" It has to look, feel, and act more like Windows and OSX. NO, it doesn't! If Ubuntu was actively pursuing this, what would be the point of ubuntu being an alternative?!
+38,042

This is EXACTLY how i feel. there is no other OS that has made more advances in just about any field in the last two years. to me, it seems like OS X and Vista (i guess Win7 now) are trying to catch up to Ubuntu.

I use compiz as an example only because its the most graphically obvious case of linux software that is way beyond the capabilities of windows or mac. not only does compiz offer way more features than any window manager in a proprietary OS, but it also offers more customization options as well. for example, windows aero has that flip3d effect for switching windows and compiz offers it as well... but compiz offers ways to tweak the colors, the angles, the amount of zooming, etc.

another example i would mention is the new ext4 filesystem. when it runs fsck after a certain amount of boots, it used to take about 10 minutes with ext3 (similar to the "scandisk" on windows), but now, with ext4, it LITERALLY takes about 4 seconds! its absolutely insane!

i'm not the biggest linux expert so i know there are a lot more advances "under the hood" but these are the ones that stick out to me the most.

[Saint Angeles]

Ubuntu is a bit like an iPod (bear with me)...in some sense its the early iPod models. It lacks a lot of features of other more polished OS's but at the same time its able to deliver. At this point in time, ubuntu is not king of the desktop, but neither is it dead.
actually, it offers MORE features than any other OS. the only thing Linux lacks is the amount of third party software written for it. its like, OS X or Windows are like iPods but Ubuntu is like a better iPod that can only play a higher quality, but less popular, audio format.

[jdrodrig]

And again remember that ubuntu is trying to be a Linux distro for normal computer users not geeks or technically incline persons, I think it is necessary for Mark Shuttlesworth and Canical to guide developers towards this vision, because lets face it if linux is developed solely be developers and geeks it will continue to be geared towards developers and geeks

This is where I always get lost...wouldnt developers want mass audiences for their creation? either to sell support or to have more people working on improving it?

Shuttlesworth guide developers? I dont think so.... he should just post his vision and *developers* would choose to follow him or not! freedom! (think Mel Gibson in Braveheart)

[jdrodrig]

Nicely put! The initial article was accusing open source as always imitating proprietary, whether that's true or not, why not try something new if it increases productivity?


+1

That was exactly the point of the article...to challenge us to think outside the box!

[gymophett]

If GNOME becomes that... I would switch to XFCE.

[wildman4god]

Why not Windows? Because it has security problems, I'd say. As for for praising the Gnome devs for being original, why is originality good? It seems to me that a good idea is a good idea, no matter who has it. If tomorrow Microsoft leaked a new release of the Windows 7 beta with some great new feature, I'd be happy if Apple and the various Linux developers out there copied it. Anything to help me do what I want to do more easily. And that right there is the problem I see with this new shell; it doesn't seem to do much of anything new (or at least anything that couldn't easily be fitted into the existing UI paradigm), but it makes a lot of stuff that's currently easy to do more annoying to access.

How is a menu that pops up to fill half the damn screen (and only shows 20 items btw) in any way a usability improvement. Being different at the cost of functionality isn't a virtue. There are truly different ideas out there that can improve usability, make options easier to access, icons easier to click on (round pop menus, for example), but from what I've seen so far, this new Gnome Shell thing isn't looking good.


What part of "it's not finished yet" do you not understand, what you see are just eary prototypes, they still have a whole year to go, they plan on integrating a whole app browser into the overlay mode as well as zeightgiest. I think for an early prototype, they have acomplished alot, It will be amazing to see what they have for us when they finish it a year from now (okay well a year from march).

[edm1]

I doubt they would make gnome 3.0 the default until after the next LTS (10.04) and by 10.10 gnome 3.1 will be coming out.

[forrestcupp]

Why not Windows? Because it has security problemsSome people might argue that it's a worthwhile trade off to have to run an antivirus app to get more compatibility. Honestly, Cinelerra is the only open source app that I care about that can't run in Windows.


I'd say. As for for praising the Gnome devs for being original, why is originality good? It seems to me that a good idea is a good idea, no matter who has it.I agree that a good idea is a good idea. But if all of us always have the mentality that we're making it just fine with the great ideas we've always had, then nothing would ever get invented. We'd still be riding across the country in steam engine trains instead of flying in jets. Just look at the Amish.

As far as Gnome 3's usability, we'll just have to wait and see how it ends up. I'm excited about the changes, and as long as they have left, I'm sure they'll figure out all of the usability issues.

[TheLastDodo]

What part of "it's not finished yet" do you not understand, what you see are just eary prototypes, they still have a whole year to go, they plan on integrating a whole app browser into the overlay mode as well as zeightgiest. I think for an early prototype, they have acomplished alot, It will be amazing to see what they have for us when they finish it a year from now (okay well a year from march).

People said the same thing about KDE 4.x being great when it was done, and we can all see how that turned out. I'm sure we'll see a fair amount of polish and some new features added to Gnome Shell before the release of Gnome 3 next year, but it's the basic UI concept I have a problem with, not only a specific implementation. What advantages do a series of constantly resizing desktops offer? How will this sort of UI make Gnome easier to use? I don't see any advantages, frankly... maybe you can explain some of them to me?

[Cybie257]

wow, some of you really think ubuntu is a competitor to windows or mac? I'm doing research to revist an old article about Open Source enthusiasm from the late 1990's into the millennium. Everyone then thought redhat would burst opensource into homes and business desktops. There was a new company called Google running it on 8,000 computers. Wireless was coming about and there were problems with some distro's and getting it to work.

Truthfully i'm very disappointed in Ubuntu. It seems to have one fundamental flaw i'm finding in these forums and that's multimedia on the web. I'm using an older (what should have been more stable version 8.04) on an IBM thinkpad T43. Everything works great except the user experience on the web isn't even poor, it's non existent.

To be a true competitor to Windows or Mac Ubuntu will need to work out of the box like they do. That means once the install is finished downloading music, uploading pictures to facebook or myspace, or listening to pandora, watching youtube, etc. The typical user does not want to make.config or any of that rubbish on obscure file names buried in the directories. They just want it to work. I don't have tweak my car everytime I need to drive it.

I was really hoping to report that the state of things open source had changed drastically and it does appear they have in some areas. Just not in all, unfortunately it's still not as good of a product as Mac OSX or even (i hate admitting this one) Vista.

Have you tried 9.04? I have yet to find something (aside from possibly my webcam - haven't tried it yet) that doesn't work 'out of the box'. Ubuntu is making a lot of progress making things work right out of the box. I have no complaints with the latest and greatest release. I started back in the days of the beginning RedHat desktop releases. Back then, Linux was horrible to use and not a chance in the world was it ever going to take over Windows on the desktop. Ubuntu 9.04 has proven to be a milestone in Desktop computing.

One of the best things about OpenSource is that it's free. One of the worst things about OpenSource is that it's free. Free motivates people to use it. Free demotivates people to develop for it. All I can say is that the many thousands of developers that have dedicated their time (and companies dedicating time) to the development, have impressed me. Yeah, it's a little slower to get things done, but that's also a good thing. Instead of money being a motivator, the motivation lies in the fact of making it work.

If you know the true story behind Windows 95, you'll know that M$ released it with thousands of known bugs at the time. But, they were only motivated for money. They released it way to early and only for ONE reason. To make sure OS/2 didn't take the market as OS/2 was due for release before the original Win95 release date. OS/2 was not only more stable, but a more effiecient OS. Unfortunately, there were already to many people into the Microsoft hype and afraid of change, even though Windows 95 was a HUGE change from Windows 3.1.

(Just some thoughts...........)

-Cybie

[wildman4god]

People said the same thing about KDE 4.x being great when it was done, and we can all see how that turned out. I'm sure we'll see a fair amount of polish and some new features added to Gnome Shell before the release of Gnome 3 next year, but it's the basic UI concept I have a problem with, not only a specific implementation. What advantages do a series of constantly resizing desktops offer? How will this sort of UI make Gnome easier to use? I don't see any advantages, frankly... maybe you can explain some of them to me?


Well first of all, most users aren't used to the virtual desktop concept because it doesn't exist in windows, when ever i explain it to them they thing its the coolest thing they ever heard of, with the overlay mode, they will quickly find out about it and this mode makes it more intuitive more managing virtual desktops and launching apps on the and moving windows between them, just click and drag the app you want to the desktop you want, and by integrating it into the menu system when ever they go to open a new app or document they can easily see what windows they have open in all their desktops, speaking from experience this is a good idea because I often forget I have an app open if I am trying to manage more than two desktops. Also adding/removing them now only requires a single click rather than changing some properties and settings. Next we will have zeightgiest, which is a file manager that takes a journaling approach to managing files rather than a hierarchical folder structure which can easily become confusing if you have a lot of files, this method lets you find your files by date, tags, type etc. you don't need to remember where it is or even necessarily what it was called, say for example you were working on a file in gimp but you can't remember what you named it but you know you worked on it yesterday and it is (obviously) a picture file and it started with the letter "F", well then you just open zieghtgiest and look at yesterdays files, narrow by the picture type and search the letter "F" and low and behold there it is before your eyes you didn't have to spend a half an hour looking for it. I have describe this feature to windows users and they said that would make them switch (or at least try) to Linux, many normal computer users think these ideas are brilliant, well at least the ones in my area, and I used to be a sales man so maybe I just that good at selling an idea to people. ;) in any case, while techies may thing all this is unnecessary it will go a long way with normal computer users in ease of use.

[drawkcab]

Well first of all, most users aren't used to the virtual desktop concept because it doesn't exist in windows, when ever i explain it to them they thing its the coolest thing they ever heard of, with the overlay mode, they will quickly find out about it and this mode makes it more intuitive more managing virtual desktops and launching apps on the and moving windows between them, just click and drag the app you want to the desktop you want, and by integrating it into the menu system when ever they go to open a new app or document they can easily see what windows they have open in all their desktops, speaking from experience this is a good idea because I often forget I have an app open if I am trying to manage more than two desktops. Also adding/removing them now only requires a single click rather than changing some properties and settings. Next we will have zeightgiest, which is a file manager that takes a journaling approach to managing files rather than a hierarchical folder structure which can easily become confusing if you have a lot of files, this method lets you find your files by date, tags, type etc. you don't need to remember where it is or even necessarily what it was called, say for example you were working on a file in gimp but you can't remember what you named it but you know you worked on it yesterday and it is (obviously) a picture file and it started with the letter "F", well then you just open zieghtgiest and look at yesterdays files, narrow by the picture type and search the letter "F" and low and behold there it is before your eyes you didn't have to spend a half an hour looking for it. I have describe this feature to windows users and they said that would make them switch (or at least try) to Linux, many normal computer users think these ideas are brilliant, well at least the ones in my area, and I used to be a sales man so maybe I just that good at selling an idea to people. ;) in any case, while techies may thing all this is unnecessary it will go a long way with normal computer users in ease of use.

I appreciate your taking the time to explain, but all of that sounds awful to me. If Gnome and KDE are going in this direction I'll have to get back with xfce.

To play off the analogy, I've always hated the Ipod's ui. I'm a big fan of the old Iriver H1xx series that allowed you to build a simple file tree however you want. Less bells and whistles, more sound quality and supported file formats plz.

[forrestcupp]

People said the same thing about KDE 4.x being great when it was done, and we can all see how that turned out.

That wasn't a very good example. KDE 4.x is way better now than it was when it was in beta. I don't think Gnome 3 is even in alpha right now.

[wildman4god]

I appreciate your taking the time to explain, but all of that sounds awful to me. If Gnome and KDE are going in this direction I'll have to get back with xfce.

To play off the analogy, I've always hated the Ipod's ui. I'm a big fan of the old Iriver H1xx series that allowed you to build a simple file tree however you want. Less bells and whistles, more sound quality and supported file formats plz.


And that's the great thing about Linux, is you do have a choice, if you don't like where a desktop environment is going then just use another one, how ever I don't think they'll do away with the traditional file manager completely, you'll still need it for browsing system files. Personally I am looking forward to gnome 3.0 and for the record, I like where kde is going as well, just right now it's not my particular cup of tea, if they improve gtk app integration it maybe a option in the future, plus it should be very stable and mature by the time gnome 3.0 releases.

[DJonsson2008]

I don't get much of the article's argument. For one Apple and MS did
not invent the concept; of the operating system, (as mentioned before) the browser, the windows desktop concept, office suites, the mouse, the keyboard, MIDI and tcpip interfaces...

Another question that should be asked in this argument is there
anywhere where 'proprietary' innovation 'borrows' from open source?

...and if not how can it be assumed it will never happen?

As to Gnome 3, its hard to believe after Gnome 3 we will be left
with no other Linux desktop choice, for now Xubuntu suits me fine, and
if push comes to shove it seems somebody will make a simple enduring classic X windows interface, reflecting its 1980s Xerox lab ancestor, suitable for those who have daily work to get done.

[LuigiAntoniol]

I don't think that Linux has anything to answer for with respect to Mac and Windows. I understand that the open source movement isn't even in the race to "catch up" with the incumbents.

I believe that the open source movement is simply running a different kind of race with Mac and M$ playing catch up.

How many products can M$ truly claim was their own to begin with? Other than DOS. Most of what they've "developed" was bought or copied from other, now defunct, vendors.

Ubuntu is not threatened by Windows. It's only a matter of time for the brainwashed masses to see the light of day and convert to GNU/Linux. :lolflag:

[miegiel]

Almost at the end of the article (http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/163903/has_ubuntu_reached_the_end_of_the_line.html):

Scratching the Itch

There's another truism here too, and it applies to the whole concept of open source experimentation: open source developers have a habit of scratching their own itches, rather than those of their users. In other words open source tends to be very developer driven and developer focussed. By way of contrast, proprietary software is exclusively user-focussed. It has to be, or it simply couldn't exist. Nobody would buy a proprietary project if it didn't do what they want. Open source has no such hindrance.

An amazing part to start with "There's another truism here too, ..." I should laugh this off I guess. Since I laughed my head of when I learned pravda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pravda) meant truth in russian. :lolflag:

If "proprietary software" aims to be bought, how can it be "exclusively user-focussed"? That's a contradiction in the next sentence.

"... open source developers have a habit of scratching their own itches, rather than those of their users." There's a truth at least, you could even statistically proof it. =D> But, not only are all those different itch-driven scratching sticks a blessing when you have an uncommon itch to scratch. All the most widely used scratching sticks have a strong user drive in one way or another. So that's "statistically true" and ... What shall we call it? Misleading?

Didn't bother with the rest of the article.

I think it could do with a better title too. The truth about Linux might catch more readers.

[vambo]

I gave up reading when I came to this bit ...

open source tends to follow paths created by proprietary software.


Emmm .. sorry, but it's the other way around.

[miegiel]

I gave up reading when I came to this bit ...

open source tends to follow paths created by proprietary software.

Emmm .. sorry, but it's the other way around.

That's what it looks like if you use propriety software. If you use the free stuff you're wondering what they're going to steal next. There's merrit to both, but the perception is based on where you stand.

Who knows, it might be their user drivenness that makes them chase each others tails.

[Eddie Wilson]

Why did you all take this article so serious. Trying to break it down and figure it out. Its someones opinion and he has made a lot of good points. This may be sad to say but it's true, eye candy and ease of use is going to be one of the biggest selling points of Linux distros to the public. Developers need to give the general public what they want. If they don't then a Linux os won't be used. So get ready for the desktop wars and the attack of the eye candy.

[calrogman]

I expected the last line to read "lawl I troll j00!".

[WindowsSurvivor]

That article made me LOL... and yes, I actually did laugh out loud!

What a crock. This is no better than those idiots who ACTUALLY BELIEVE Windows 7 is going to "put an end" to Linux. Yeahhhhhhh-no.

Keep dreaming those pipe dreams.

As for Gnome vs. KDE? Well, I think they're both fine DEs. I've used both, and I like both very much. I use Gnome, but I wouldn't be opposed to using KDE.

Gnome 3 looks exciting! I can't wait to try it out. Anyway, let's not squabble about Gnome vs. KDE... we'll end up looking like those retarded Mac/PC idiots in the mac commercials. Let the morons who pay for software fight it out. As long as we've got Linux, doesn't matter what our DE is, we still kick their asses.

:)

[verb3k]

To all those uninformed, I've heard sabdfl himself is considering a switch from GNOME to KDE as the main GUI. I wasn't able to believe until I read it in his own blog.

[Piraja]

But for what I use a 'puter for, I am delighted with the minimalism and speed of my CRUNCHBANG. I'm using it on both my 'puters now.
+1! But I must say my route to Crunchbang went from being a frustrated user of Windows XP first to Xubuntu, then Ubuntu, tried different DEs and WMs alongside Gnome, and also other distros, then ended up with Ubuntu + OpenBox, from which CrunchBang was like a logical conclusion — now I have #! on an old desktop and a new laptop and also an external HDD that I can plug in to any computer (including my Windows XP machine at work). So I have a sort of a gateway theory — Ubuntu might be the gateway distro to #! CrunchBang...

[Xbehave]

To all those uninformed, I've heard sabdfl himself is considering a switch from GNOME to KDE as the main GUI. I wasn't able to believe until I read it in his own blog.

Why dosn't he just switch and see if he likes it. I love kde3, i cant stand kde4, unfortunately i gave gnome a try and still hate it as much as i did when i first tried ubuntu, so switching isn't always the answer!

Canonical never support kubuntu much so the choice to kill kde3 and go kde4 only in 8.10 wasn't surprising and means i no longer use kubuntu (in the short term anyway). Fortunatly for gnome users, the switch to gnome3 doesn't come with a toolkit switch so canonical can (and hopefully will) be able to offer the gnome2 desktop+gnome apps+compiz alongside gnome3 desktop+gnome apps+compiz for those unhappy with the switch.

[XubuRoxMySox]

+1! I must say my route to Crunchbang went from being a frustrated user of Windows XP first to Xubuntu, then Ubuntu, tried different DEs and WMs alongside Gnome, and also other distros, then ended up with Ubuntu + OpenBox, from which CrunchBang was like a logical conclusion — now I have #! on an old desktop and a new laptop and also an external HDD that I can plug in to any computer (including my Windows XP machine at work). So I have a sort of a gateway theory — Ubuntu might be the gateway distro to #! CrunchBang...

Being a newbie who has only known WinXP 'til a little over a month ago, I still kinda prefer a desktop environment, but Ubuntu is so Gnome-heavy. I use Crunchbang for the mind-bending speed, but added LXDE for simplicity and "familiarity."

My desktop is now eerily Windowsish (with icons on a blue background), but it's definitely cheaper and probably faster than Xandros!

As for your gateway theory, I agree completely! Folks looking for a lightweight and fast Ubuntu usually try Xubuntu first - but it's hardly any faster than regular Ubuntu, especially on older machines. So maybe Xubuntu is the gateway to #! Crunchbang (http://crunchbanglinux.org), LOL. My Crunchbang works awesomely fast, and with LXDE installed, it's still as newbie-friendly as ever.

-Robin