PDA

View Full Version : Why the animal names?



mrgs
February 7th, 2010, 12:47 AM
I have used Ubuntu from 5.10, and still I haven't found a good reason for having a double (or triple) title for each version.

Why not simply use '9.10' for this version? Naming it Karmic or Karmic Koala does not add anything, it only makes it harder to use a search engine.

I can only think of the cuteness-factor as an explanation. I hope there is also a better one.

Bachstelze
February 7th, 2010, 12:54 AM
There is also the coolness.

EDIT: Oh, and also the "It's our OS so we will name it how we damn well please"-factor.

Even OS X has codenames. If you don't like them, Microsoft is that way ===>

Paqman
February 7th, 2010, 01:05 AM
Why not simply use '9.10' for this version?

Why not simply use a number instead of "mrgs"?

juancarlospaco
February 7th, 2010, 01:12 AM
uɐɔ ǝʍ ǝsnɐɔǝq

Blvaur
February 7th, 2010, 01:15 AM
It's just done to confuse people. It's not like other's are giving their project pet names. Like firefox is just named 3.5 and no code name.


when adding repos it actually might be better to just write 910 instead of karmic. I admit that.

sisco311
February 7th, 2010, 01:29 AM
I have used Ubuntu from 5.10, and still I haven't found a good reason for having a double (or triple) title for each version.

Why not simply use '9.10' for this version? Naming it Karmic or Karmic Koala does not add anything, it only makes it harder to use a search engine.

I can only think of the cuteness-factor as an explanation. I hope there is also a better one.

The official name of an Ubuntu release is "Ubuntu X.YY" (X is the year minus 2000 & YY is the month).

DevelopmentCodeNames

squilookle
February 7th, 2010, 01:36 AM
i don't see how it can be confusing, even if you aren't sure which code name corresponds to which version, it is easy to find out on the internet.

meanwhile, it sounds cool, and i think it actually makes it easier to remember which version you are using and ask for help.

besides, every os has version numbers AND codenames, including windows and osx. that's not to say every os does something so ubuntu should too, but to say that there must be some good reason behind it...

mechro
February 7th, 2010, 01:44 AM
It's a small victory against txt spk.

days_of_ruin
February 7th, 2010, 01:57 AM
I have used Ubuntu from 5.10, and still I haven't found a good reason for having a double (or triple) title for each version.

Why not simply use '9.10' for this version? Naming it Karmic or Karmic Koala does not add anything, it only makes it harder to use a search engine.

I can only think of the cuteness-factor as an explanation. I hope there is also a better one.

I think the names help when searching actually.

Also: FAQ is FA.

ticopelp
February 7th, 2010, 02:00 AM
I actually remember the releases much more easily by name than version number.

Good news, you have a choice.

zeroseven0183
February 7th, 2010, 02:02 AM
Hey, we're cool, you know. And not boring. Check this out: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DevelopmentCodeNames

wojox
February 7th, 2010, 02:03 AM
It's just done to confuse people. It's not like other's are giving their project pet names. Like firefox is just named 3.5 and no code name.


when adding repos it actually might be better to just write 910 instead of karmic. I admit that.

3.5 in codenamed Shiretoko. Every OS has a code name.

mickie.kext
February 7th, 2010, 02:07 AM
It's just done to confuse people. It's not like other's are giving their project pet names. Like firefox is just named 3.5 and no code name.


when adding repos it actually might be better to just write 910 instead of karmic. I admit that.

I think that codename of Firefox 3.5 is Shiretoko.

Bachstelze
February 7th, 2010, 02:09 AM
Guys, it's dangerous to go on UF alone. Take this:

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a267/moskalel/sarcasm_detector.jpg