PDA

View Full Version : What ubuntu needs ?



arunpawar
February 24th, 2006, 04:16 PM
Ubuntu distro is one of the most famous linux distribution.Why ubuntu succeeds since last few years,some of the reasons are
1.Free CD shipments,
2.Easy to use
3.Excellent commuity support and nice geeks over lists and forums.
But still something is missing and even novice can figure out what is still missed by ubuntu.Some of the reasons are compiled to form a short checklist.
1.Slower boot process (Even on 128 Meg DDR)
2.Some of the most useful apps are not included at all or discntinued.
3.Aimed at users having internet connection,no benefit for offline users.
4.Documentation is still in alpha infancy.
5.Lags in feature like live+installable installation as it doesn't allow upgrading via this method.
6.Upgrade issues with some of the releases are not resolved yet.
7.Installation of the ubuntu is slower than any debian variant and not newbie friendly.
and finally some peoples think it is operating system for virtual machine and not ready for the hard disk.so there is long way to go for ubuntu.So i ask what we need to make ubuntu more succesful?

earobinson
February 24th, 2006, 04:24 PM
2.Some of the most useful apps are not included at all or discntinued. examples?

3.Aimed at users having internet connection,no benefit for offline users. How so it still works with no internet just no updates just like any other os?

4.Documentation is still in alpha infancy. again the docs are quite good, better than lots of docs i have seen both for windows, mac, and other linux distros

6.Upgrade issues with some of the releases are not resolved yet. example?

7.Installation of the ubuntu is slower than any debian variant and not newbie friendly. ya it is a bit slower but ifs quite easy for most people, also the full debian install is like 11 cd's or something. so the install is slow you get more features, it takes time to copy all that info over.

as for 1 I cant comment and im not sure I under stand 5

please if your going to make this claim back it up. ya ubuntu has a long way to go but i think you need to back up your claims first.

overcast
February 24th, 2006, 04:26 PM
Hi there i am agree with you on few technical issues while totally disagree with application selection issue.anyway i would love to see what others think before i can make any comments.

darkmaze
February 24th, 2006, 06:32 PM
the only thing i can think of to make linux more successful would for congress to adopt it. but maybe i'm an idealist.

engla
February 24th, 2006, 06:39 PM
1.Slower boot process (Even on 128 Meg DDR)
7.Installation of the ubuntu is slower than any debian variant and not newbie friendly.

These will be "fixed" in the next release!
Lots of work has gone into making ubuntu faster all the way from after the kernel loads (or perhaps even that too) until the desktop is usable.

Also, espresso seems to provide a very neat way of installing ubuntu for new users (& me :-)). Yes, it's far from perfect.

lcg
February 24th, 2006, 06:51 PM
1.Slower boot process (Even on 128 Meg DDR)
Slower compared to what?


2.Some of the most useful apps are not included at all or discntinued.
What exactly do you mean here?
And just for comparison: how many applications does Windows have on its install CD? (And no, Wordpad and Notepad do not count as useful applications and neither does Outlook Express!)


3.Aimed at users having internet connection,no benefit for offline users.
Because apt-get/Synaptic fetches packages from a server? Additional packages have to come from somewhere, they don't just appear out of thin air.


4.Documentation is still in alpha infancy.
Agreed, I have seen better. But then again, I have seen worse, too.


5.Lags in feature like live+installable installation as it doesn't allow upgrading via this method.
Could you explain what you mean here? There is a DVD image which works both as a live and an installation disc.


6.Upgrade issues with some of the releases are not resolved yet.
Again, I'm not sure what you mean here. What problems occured for you when dist-upgrading?


7.Installation of the ubuntu is slower than any debian variant and not newbie friendly.
Actually, I think Ubuntu installs pretty fast and the installer works reasonably well. What would you expect a "newbie friendly" installer to be like?


and finally some peoples think it is operating system for virtual machine and not ready for the hard disk.
Who would think that? And what makes them believe that? Sounds like FUD to me.

Lars

InfoTech
February 27th, 2006, 09:47 AM
As a quite new user of Ubuntu, I will agreewith the following:



2.Some of the most useful apps are not included at all or discntinued.
3.Aimed at users having internet connection,no benefit for offline users.
4.Documentation is still in alpha infancy.

I see 2. & 3. as same thing. It is my feeling that installation is not finished if you can't download some software from internet. I tried to find DVD version on www.ubuntu.com, but with no success. I found a DVD version on P2P and trying to download it. But no official release I could find. Don't ask me what software is missing, because, if you have other free distros shipped on 4 to 5 CDs, and Ubuntu on 1, there must be something missing. I found very very very easy to download and istall everything from the Internet, but what if some computers do not have internet access!?
Updating is very nice & simple, if you have an internet connection. But, what if you don't have?
As far as documentation is concerned, I believe that there is no need for further comments. Still, I am eager to assist, especially concerning localisation.
Regards

Doytch
March 1st, 2006, 10:56 PM
I think what he means in 5) is that when you're running the Live CD, you can't just hit a button and it'll start installing itself.

IYY
March 4th, 2006, 10:06 PM
1.Slower boot process (Even on 128 Meg DDR)

128 Mb is not a lot at all these days. 256 is actually the required amount for Windows XP, and Vista will require 512. Same story with Mac OS.

I am running Ubuntu with 64 MB and it boots fast enough. Not ideal, but not enough to cause problems. I don't recall FreeBSD and Gentoo being significantly on the same hardware.

3rdalbum
March 6th, 2006, 04:58 AM
Personally, I'm thankful that Ubuntu starts at all on a 128 meg machine :)

I think Ubuntu comes with all the applications it needs, with the single exception of the gstreamer plugins (but we all know why they're not in there, and they're easy to install anyway). Ubuntu is unlike some distros out there, where you get ten graphic editors, fifteen text editors, and four web browsers. If Ubuntu had much more on the CD, it wouldn't fit on a CD :)

Documentation is lacking a bit, I find, but rather than complaining I should go and help out the documentation team. Also, I have no doubts that Ubuntu's documentation is better than some distros.

#5 and #7 are being fixed as we speak.

Also, I think what the original poster was talking about with #6 (upgrade issues) was that some of the latest versions of programs haven't made it into the Breezy repositories yet. Yes, I would classify that as an issue. I've compiled from source before and although I don't find it unpleasant, I'd prefer not to do it as it makes it impossible to uninstall or upgrade with Synaptic.