Anyone else feel Ubuntu has jumped the shark?

[aztektum]

I began using Linux 10 years ago, first Mandrake, then Slackware, FreeBSD for a time and back around to Linux with Ubuntu. I'm no hardcore hacker, I can cobble together some scripts, I am not afraid to use the command line or dig around under the hood.

The thing that I've always liked is GUI's were designed to facilitate configuring the under the hood stuff and really rather stayed out of the way.

Ubuntu is moving towards social networking integration, data backup services, I curl my lip whenever I think about the tight integration of Tomboy, Evolution etc to the core of the desktop (though I realize a lot of that has to do with Gnome). I've busted my machine more than once removing some of that stuff, in an attempt to do w/o.

NetworkManager breaks my ability to configure network interfaces via /etc/network/interfaces now? PulseAudio *shiver*.

It feels like Ubuntu is turning into a mess of ideas that are popular over important. Flashy over useful (although I admit, I'm a bit shallow and like the basic Compiz flashiness).

Particularly, I don't see the importance behind the integration of social media in Lucid. Services like Facebook and Twitter are useful to a lot of people, I suppse (not really a fan myself), however will that be the way of the future? Likely no. I'd rather see the man hours and engineering time spent working on real issues, hardware compatibility, bug squashing *cough*a non orange/purple UI*cough* or development tools that fit nicely into the environment and feel like native Ubuntu apps.

Leave Facebook and Twitter to application devs and focus on Ubuntu.

-m

[Psumi]

This is why I use Debian now.

[dabby_yo]

I hear you. It feels like pointless bling.

[Crunchy the Headcrab]

Yeah the first thing I do after a new install is disable the stupid status updater and/or evolution notifier.

[V for Vincent]

Hell no. It's great to have a system that isn't too technical. There's hundreds out there that are. Ubuntu has increased linux popularity and that'll get us all better support.

[swoll1980]

It's alot easier for tech heads to remove things then it is for the main stream to install them. That's the way I see it. Ubuntu is geared to the mainstream, and we know this, so why do the tech heads get so butt hurt. Use Debian if you want an unpolished, bland utility.

[lisati]

I was wondering what had happened to the game, "Same Gnome", when I took a Lucid Beta1 CD for a test run the other day. Perhaps it was removed to make room for something else, like the social networking stuff.

[NightwishFan]

I have really tried to get into Debian and it truly is an amazing project. However I have decided to place my trust in Mark Shuttleworth and use Ubuntu for now.

[k33bz]

I agree the social networking desktop is something not really needed. doesnt ******* have something similiar,as a web app, i dont think that went well either.

[Dayofswords]

i rather have the social stuff as installable, not default

[antenna]

It has always been that way though.. I remember years ago when I had recently started using Ubuntu that the build tools disappeared from a regular install and then vim got a less featureful version and so on. Basically, decisions will always be made that cater to newer users (despite the fact that most everyone using Ubuntu isn't) and I have always thought that if you know what you're doing another distro is maybe the best choice..

[mips]

You have choices, nothing stops you from using another distro or OS ;)

[darthmob]

/agree

Though so far there has been no change that made me actually switch distros. It's just that the list of things that have to be removed or reinstalled or changed to get back the optimal OS is getting longer with every new release. I had a look at Debian but I've come to really like the notification system in Ubuntu and it's not available there. :/

[Linuxforall]

Ubuntu is why desktop linux is where it is today, even a veteran Windows user dares now to try out and delve into linux, earlier that would be total taboo. Ubuntu, Fedora and SuSE deserve the credit but in terms of ease, Ubuntu plain old rules.

[rJ~]

I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to move towards the needs of average Windows users. A lot of people enjoy the social network nonsense, so it makes sense to include it in the "friendly" distribution. It's easier for the experienced user to run a bunch of commands to get rid of the fluff they don't want than new users needing to install stuff they might not know is available.

Ubuntu is the first Linux distribution that has made me feel comfortable enough to use it full-time. Even though I've had to do my share of poking at Pulseaudio to get everything to behave, I'd trust they have some idea of where they're going with this.

[Chronon]

It's easier for the experienced user to run a bunch of commands to get rid of the fluff they don't want than new users needing to install stuff they might not know is available.


I completely agree.

[moody_mark]

Im probably have less than average linux experience than most of you folks on here. From my point of view, it made the transition to using Linux on my everyday work PC easier and allowed me to build my experience. Other Linux distros are more difficult to configure and as such are a reserved domain for the experienced. I think its a good idea to have different "grades" of linux distros where some are easy and some harder. Recently Ive been looking at Arch Linux, probably a little too tricky for me at the moment, but give it a year or so more, and I might even start using that. It can only help to build my experience and "add another string to my bow"

[madnessjack]

I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to move towards the needs of average Windows users. A lot of people enjoy the social network nonsense, so it makes sense to include it in the "friendly" distribution. It's easier for the experienced user to run a bunch of commands to get rid of the fluff they don't want than new users needing to install stuff they might not know is available.

Ubuntu is the first Linux distribution that has made me feel comfortable enough to use it full-time. Even though I've had to do my share of poking at Pulseaudio to get everything to behave, I'd trust they have some idea of where they're going with this.

Agreed. Ubuntu is for humans, not you guys :P

[jetmech568]

Ubuntu is why desktop linux is where it is today, even a veteran Windows user dares now to try out and delve into linux, earlier that would be total taboo. Ubuntu, Fedora and SuSE deserve the credit but in terms of ease, Ubuntu plain old rules.

Totally agree I am new to lunix and not a genuis where computers are involved, but who knows this little taste of linux may change that.;)

[[h2o]]

NetworkManager breaks my ability to configure network interfaces via /etc/network/interfaces now? PulseAudio *shiver*.
Yes, but since Network Manager does the job nicely for most cases (I beleive even static IP is configurable now?) why would you want to use /etc/network/interfaces? A lot of people connect to different wirelesss networks, and I don't think anyone thinks editing/replacing config files is simpler than using NM.

[kaldor]

I hear you. It feels like pointless bling.

"Linux for Human Beings".. What do (at home) people do the most on computers these days? Social networking!

What's wrong with making Ubuntu appeal more to the average user by giving them tools they may find useful?

It's not like you need to use Ubuntu. How about Mint? gNewsense even. Then there are a few hundred active non-Ubuntu/Debian based distros.

[Dragonbite]

Ubuntu is geared to the masses, and the masses use social networking sites and "shiny stuff".

For those that don't want the hand-holding or ease and doing for you that Ubuntu utlizes should go elsewhere, where they can learn more, be more in control and even offer something back to the community in their own way.

Fedora is good with hardware detection and such. Using it will expand your knowledge and benefit the community because a number of improvements worked out in Fedora trickle down into other distributions including Ubuntu.

At the same time, it leaves Ubuntu to focus on their target-market that would otherwise say "Linux is for Geeks" and "Linux is too hard".

The breadth of Linux distributions is an asset, not a liability.

Ubuntu is great for getting started. When the time comes, go to something more hands-on. I started with Red Hat and went to Gentoo before Ubuntu came out. Now I use Ubuntu because I want the ease and simplicity in installing/maintaining/setting up. My goals have changed to using the computer, not constantly tweaking it.

[snowpine]

No, it hasn't jumped the shark, but it definitely jumped the koala! Lucid is going to be the release that makes or breaks Ubuntu's reputation, my prediction.

[Dragonbite]

No, it hasn't jumped the shark, but it definitely jumped the koala! Lucid is going to be the release that makes or breaks Ubuntu's reputation, my prediction.

Yeah, I mean the past 6 years is really nothing, being offered installed by a major computer manufacturer (Dell) wasn't like a milestone for Linux or anything, and the reputation of being the most popular desktop Linux distribution is just handed out by monkeys anyway.

If this "ruins" Ubuntu's reputation, then who the hades will take it's place? Second place in Distrowatch is not consistently one distro and usually there is a wide margin between 1rst and 2nd place.

If it is good, people will write bad reviews about Ubuntu for a couple of weeks. If it is bad then they'll write bad reviews for a couple of months! If it is abyssmal then they will write bad reveiws for 6 months!

I think people are STILL writing bad reviews about Vista! ;)

[_h_]

No, it hasn't jumped the shark, but it definitely jumped the koala! Lucid is going to be the release that makes or breaks Ubuntu's reputation, my prediction.

I'd have to say that Lucid is definitely going to boost Ubuntus reputation greatly, it's an amazing realease and it's still beta stage.

[Frogs Hair]

Hi,
I agree with Dayofwords, keep those applications in the repository , but make it clear to new users that they have those options . That could be accomplished on the Ubuntu .org site. I feel the same way about torrents and p2p options.

[gradinaruvasile]

;9054409']Yes, but since Network Manager does the job nicely for most cases (I beleive even static IP is configurable now?) why would you want to use /etc/network/interfaces? A lot of people connect to different wirelesss networks, and I don't think anyone thinks editing/replacing config files is simpler than using NM.

Its not that Network Manager cant do that, its the fact that it has its own world, separate from the Linux networking. There are cases when some handmade configurations (ifconfig and all) are needed and then it gets in the way.

Wicd on the other hand is compatible with these changes (though not with the interfaces file) - it plays along without interfering (90% of the time). For wireless connectivity i found it better than Network Manager - more stable, no random disconnects, also it works flawlessly with wireless autoconnect even when not logged in (X is not required to run).
I wish the NM people had made it more modular in design, incorporating working stuff like gnome-ppp - which works with USB modems in a stable way.

All in all I dont see Network Manager to be a good app - it has features, sure, but do they work? - Wireless is flaky (compared to Wicd), USB modems are much worse (Gnome-PPP worked for me), VPN is flaky (random failed to start messages, i gave up on it) + there is only 1 instance allowed. The other features i did not test. But these are the basic features.

BTW i too turned to Debian (testing) since ubuntu 9.10 came out(9.04 was the most stable Ubuntu version i saw). And it is better (for me) than Ubuntu (save the live cd).
Here is why
- many programs just did not work in Ubuntu (at least not stable), the whole thing was hit and miss sometimes - vlc, pidgin, gnome-ppp, guayadeque, audacity, power-management/screensaver. In Debian, these programs have a tendency to work correctly.

I found everything i had in Ubuntu minus preinstalled stuff like wireless tools/kernel headers/terminal package hinting system.

- the programs in the repos are better maintained (and most are in the main repositories), they contain the latest versions (if not the repos, then in backports) - in Ubuntu i had to install n PPAs if you wanted to keep them up to date, leading sometimes to broken dependencies
- no default PulseAudio experiments on "stable" versions
- no default annoying black notification system - i really like the default Gnome notifications (be it rounded yellow or grey square, but have the close button dammit)
- no default Compiz - it is buggy +/or slow in some circumstances/cards. Enabling by default may cause problems that are not inherent to xorg.
- more common sense in selecting default applications - Pidgin, Ekiga, Remmina etc.
- no 6 months upgrading (that will or will not work entirely)

All in all it has a more spartan feel. I like the default theme (clearlooks) with desktop and all (i used it in Ubuntu also). Simple and polished.

[BigSilly]

I agree with the "Ubuntu is Linux for Human Beings" point of view. I don't use some of those things that you mention, but many do and it makes sense to have them there to make the Ubuntu experience friendlier. Otherwise, what's the point of Ubuntu?

Ubuntu is easy going. I'd very much like it to stay that way personally. For a more complicated option for the more technical user, there are many, many alternatives out there. Not least of all, as has been mentioned, Debian, and many others. To me, if Ubuntu isn't what you want from a Linux distro, why use it?

[doas777]

well, every release needs new features, in addition to under-the-hood improvements. personally i could care less about the new features, but many complain tht we are going nowhere if we don't advertise them. the minutia of the patches and improvements would bore even the most stoic of us to tears.

so yeah, you hear aobut the new features, but they are not all that makes lucid differant from karmic.

[purgatori]

I couldn't agree with the OP more. Karmic was a disaster for me: it broke many things (things that I depend on for work, no less), and reduced functionality in a number of key areas. Now I'm actually afraid to upgrade to the next version of Ubuntu in anticipation of the fresh new horrors that have been promised for us in Lucid.

Sure, you can avoid using Gnome, et. al. altogether, get rid of GDM, and Pulse and all the other nonsense, but even then, don't necessarily expect things to work the way they should.

If I could, I'd jump ship, but I was foolish enough not to create a separate /home partition this time around, so I'm kinda stuck with it :(

EDIT: I am not a 'tech head', nor do I pretend to be, I simply want an OS that lets me work as efficiently as possible. Right now, Ubuntu is crammed to the gills with junk that only gets in the way of that objective, rather than making things 'easier' or more 'accessible' -- both of these should always take a back-seat to efficiency, anyhow.

[aztektum]

To the couple of posts that are reminding me there are other options, yes I realize this.

Part of me has a hard time recommending Ubuntu to new users though, including family and friends, if the default state is loaded up with filler that not many of those people will use.

I just feel like it's moving from being something that was built to provide an easy way to make Linux something you can use into "Here is what we think you should use."

It is a difference between "convenient and user-friendly" and "coddling and in your face".

[Regenweald]

The people that are mad that Ubuntu has all this 'social' stuff by default, maybe do not have anyone to socially network with ? I removed *all* that social from the start stuff and have been systematically been reinstalling them based on need, surprising to me I found a use for them. I'm not captain social, but it is more convenient to have clients for all that online stuff discretely built in to the status bar than it is to have a browser open with a bunch of tabs maximising and minimizing every 2 secs. You have the entire desktop to work, and if someone hollers, you get a nice lil fading notification and you can choose to holler back.

In an OS ecology where you can literally remove any package you chose and remake the entire OS to you exact specs, It is exceedingly stupid to claim a switch based on a default config. You boys are just way too I337 for Ubuntu. Mosy on along :)

[user1397]

That's why I now install ubuntu minimal and just add what I want/need.

That doesn't mean that the default ubuntu install isn't great for most people.

[ratcheer]

I have a broad and deep technical background. I have programmed mainframe data access routines in assembler language. I have used UNIX since it was first becoming available in the very early 80's. I have been an Oracle database administrator on the HP-UX, AIX, and Solaris platforms. And, I have managed DEC machines where I had to control them with physical front-panel switches using octal codes.

But, I like the direction Ubuntu is going. It not only makes things easier for me, it is also what Ubuntu has to do to have any hope of competing with Windows on the desktop. Linux does not have to remain arcane to be superior.

Tim

[snowpine]

Yeah, I mean the past 6 years is really nothing, being offered installed by a major computer manufacturer (Dell) wasn't like a milestone for Linux or anything, and the reputation of being the most popular desktop Linux distribution is just handed out by monkeys anyway.

If this "ruins" Ubuntu's reputation, then who the hades will take it's place? Second place in Distrowatch is not consistently one distro and usually there is a wide margin between 1rst and 2nd place.

If it is good, people will write bad reviews about Ubuntu for a couple of weeks. If it is bad then they'll write bad reviews for a couple of months! If it is abyssmal then they will write bad reveiws for 6 months!


I agree that Ubuntu is resilient enough (both as a community and as a marketing effort) to recover from one bad release. But I do not think bungling two releases in a row (one of them being LTS!) would be good for the brand. Therefore, I have high hopes for Lucid!

I do not have a crystal ball to predict the hypothetical next #1 distro if Ubuntu fails. My gut tells me that as more Ubuntu derivatives shift to Debian (Mepis, Eeebuntu, Crunchbang, rumors of Mint) the "Debian is too hard for a noob" myth will begin to evaporate. But I agree Debian is not currently seen as a "Windows alternative," and as far as I know that is not even remotely a goal of the project. So I do not have a prediction beyond April. :)

[Dragonbite]

I agree that Ubuntu is resilient enough (both as a community and as a marketing effort) to recover from one bad release. But I do not think bungling two releases in a row (one of them being LTS!) would be good for the brand. Therefore, I have high hopes for Lucid!

Ya know, I've been hearing about how bad 9.10 is (which reminds me of people talking about 8.10) yet I really haven't seen it! It may have been worse right after it was released, but I was surprised to find nothing screwing up for me. Maybe I'm just lucky :)!

Of course it could also have been that all those people complaining about Vista were suddenly "out of work" when Windows 7 came out that they needed something to be ****ed off at and fed the flames? I dunno.

I agree, though, that being an LTS release it needs to be more solid than the non-LTS releases and any bugs/issues that come out need to be addressed and fixed swiftly and publically.

[undecim]

Hell no. It's great to have a system that isn't too technical. There's hundreds out there that are. Ubuntu has increased linux popularity and that'll get us all better support.

+1

Just look at how popular Linux is today. It's not that far behind Apple in by most surveys/statistics, and if you consider the number of severs, supercomputers, and non-internet connect computers that usually don't get counted, I would say that it's quite a bit ahead of Apple.

Right now, the only thing Apple has going for it is user friendliness. Once Ubuntu reaches Apple-level friendliness levels, we can consider it a serious alternative to Microsoft's OSs. Then, we start converting LOTS of people. Companies will begin to realize that it will be profitable to support Linux, and hence it will be easier and be more well-known.

We can break Microsoft if we keep going. It's just a matter of really getting into the market and everything else will escalate from there. To do that, we need a system that laymen can use, because laymen are a majority.

[flyfishingphil]

I started looking at Ubuntu in '08 and held off from installing. Probably had something to do with perusing the forums and seeing 12k of problem pages. Finally broke down and did a dual boot with 9.10 (Karmic Koala). Nice to find that you no longer need to know ms/dos, or have a book about 3' thick with command lines, to do pretty much whatever you want.

I think Ubuntu is really working on setting up a system that pulls the wind from the "WINdogs" sails. For someone like me, that is a total "non-programmer", I find Karmic Koala to be a very easy to use OS. No problems found, yet, and I hope that continues.

Still doing lots of research to see if I can find easy ways to get it to "talk" to a printer, a Garmin GPS, SOny Ericsson phone, but that seems to be about all that I need to do.

Like was said earlier, if it's not the right one for you there are other distros that have a lot less at startup and you can spend all of the time you want getting it to the level you want. (Old friend of the Win 3.1 & ms/dos days spent 16 hours installing Win95. It took me 63 minutes. He did a "custom" install and went over everything in ms/dos before he installed it.)

As a newbie to Unix/Linux I find Ubuntu to be just the "user friendly" OS that is needed today for those that spent years stuck with Windogs.

[bash]

I use Ubuntu now since the end of '06 and been registered in the forums since early '07. And since then these sort of topics and replies about Ubuntu going downhill or what is all wrong with it have crept up about every 6 months around release time.

Normally featuring argumentation along the lines, that the previous version was great, stable and all-around-fluffy-kittens, the current fails, is a huge step backwards and that the coming one doesn't look like it will remedy this.

I have hear people complain how bad a release was and then 6 months later people suddenly all found it so stable and brilliant and the new version became the incarnation of fail.

So all in all I would have been disappointed if none of these kinds of posts would show up now that Lucid is getting close to release.

[MisfitI38]

Ubuntu is why desktop linux is where it is today..

And where is that, by your estimation?
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/chartfx62/temp/CFT0331_01204526AA9.png

[wojox]

Ubuntu Aaay!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/51/Fonzie_jumps_the_shark.PNG

[BrokenKingpin]

I have no problem with Ubuntu including social networking applications, I just think the work effort should be focused elsewhere first. I would prefer the effort be spent on stabilization and GUI utilities for configuration.

[AllRadioisDead]

Ubuntu should learn from Fedora's installer.

[rottentree]

Hi,
I agree with Dayofwords, keep those applications in the repository , but make it clear to new users that they have those options . That could be accomplished on the Ubuntu .org site. I feel the same way about torrents and p2p options.

I think the majority of computer users whom Ubuntu is supposed to target don't poke around their OS unless they really have to and probably won't visit the Ubuntu site just for fun. They won't suddenly think: "Aw man I totally have to integrate Twitter into my desktop!" or whatever even if they use it daily.

[Dragonbite]

I have no problem with Ubuntu including social networking applications, I just think the work effort should be focused elsewhere first. I would prefer the effort be spent on stabilization and GUI utilities for configuration.

I see you are running Kubuntu. Just wondering if your preference on the effort being spent on stabilazation and GUI utilities are influenced by Kubuntu's reduced support from Canonical compared to Gnome?


Ubuntu should learn from Fedora's installer.

It would be great if Ubuntu offered an "official" installation DVD with everything including a nice installer for those people who don't like the default applications included in the LiveCD.

When fooling around with Fedora and openSUSE I primarily use the LiveCD instead of the DVD just because it's easier and quicker and I can always post-install make changes.

[Regenweald]

I have no problem with Ubuntu including social networking applications, I just think the work effort should be focused elsewhere first. I would prefer the effort be spent on stabilization and GUI utilities for configuration.

I disagree, people chat and interact every day. They need that stuff from the get go. What are these "stability issues" i keep hearing about ? because I have next to none, and I'm on the beta.

We use Ubuntu linux cause it's stable! Ubuntu Linux isn't stable! :confused:

[chrisinspace]

I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to move towards the needs of average Windows users. A lot of people enjoy the social network nonsense, so it makes sense to include it in the "friendly" distribution. It's easier for the experienced user to run a bunch of commands to get rid of the fluff they don't want than new users needing to install stuff they might not know is available.

Ubuntu is the first Linux distribution that has made me feel comfortable enough to use it full-time. Even though I've had to do my share of poking at Pulseaudio to get everything to behave, I'd trust they have some idea of where they're going with this.

I agree completely. I use the latest version of Ubuntu for my laptop because I want the bells and whistles. I reinstall the OS on that system with each release, so I like that all of the apps are integrated and part of the native installation. I remove as much of what I don't need as I can. While I wish I could uninstall Evolution and some other utilities, it's not the end of the world. I delete the shortcuts and don't use the apps.

For a server dedicated to a specific purpose, I tend to use Debian and install only the components I need. I like their more modular approach. There seems to be fewer dependencies to deal with, but it takes more work to get things just right.

For each job, there is an appropriate tool. I'm not going to say "if you don't like it, don't use Ubuntu", but if you really want to fine-tune your machine, you could as previously suggested go with the minimal install and then configure things the way you want them.

I think Mark Shuttleworth and Canonical have done a fantastic job of bringing Ubuntu, and Linux in general, more recognition. I have heard a lot of great things about Lucid and I can't wait until it releases.

[gemmakaru]

I think most of the karmic defaults are great but I have no problem adding the stuff I really want. As for social network stuff I just just the browser for all that stuff. Maybe I'll try a few apps maybe not. Choice is great. I love the way lots of stuff just works without too much effort, want, get, have. It's nice to not have to be a programmer in order to use stuff, get enough of that at work.

[castrojo]

I have no problem with Ubuntu including social networking applications, I just think the work effort should be focused elsewhere first. I would prefer the effort be spent on stabilization and GUI utilities for configuration.

You (and the OP) are assuming that the person who wrote gwibber is interested in working on GUI utilities and configuration.

At the end of the day Ubuntu is a collection of upstream software from around the OSS ecosystem, and one day someone saw gwibber and said "hey that's pretty awesome, we should integrate that."

The person who wrote gwibber wrote gwibber, if they hadn't then them not writing it would not have made them improve hardware support for instance, at the end of the day people work on what they want to work on, and if it's awesome we ship it, we don't tell them "you should be writing gui tools for GNOME instead."

[BrokenKingpin]

I see you are running Kubuntu. Just wondering if your preference on the effort being spent on stabilazation and GUI utilities are influenced by Kubuntu's reduced support from Canonical compared to Gnome?

That is out of date, sorry. I was running Kubuntu for about a month, then went back to Ubuntu (because I do not like KDE).


You (and the OP) are assuming that the person who wrote gwibber is interested in working on GUI utilities and configuration.
No I am not. Integrating these applications takes time from the Ubuntu developers (packaging, testing, etc.), when that time could be spent integrating different applications (such as GUI utilities), or hacking away at the bug backlog.


What are these "stability issues" i keep hearing about ? because I have next to none, and I'm on the beta.

We use Ubuntu linux cause it's stable! Ubuntu Linux isn't stable! :confused:
Maybe stability was the wrong word. I would just rather them tackle the bug backlog than add new features, especially on an LTS release. This is personal preference though. Stability is relative I guess; I would say Ubuntu is less stable than other dostros because of the short release cycle.

[witeshark17]

i rather have the social stuff as installable, not default This is my view as well. :KS

[Regenweald]

But judging from the popularity of Facebook and just about every other social site and messaging network, Social people seem to outnumber unsociable ones. Thusly, they are catered to. As soon as they install, boom! they can tweet that they just completed the install and Ubuntu Rocks!/Sucks! (whichever is applicable to the user) meanwhile those that do not need it Can:
Uninstall via the friendly Software Centre
Use the minimal cd and only install what they need
Ummm, not use the social stuff ? (needs you to enter your account details doesn't it luv? else it wont work :rolleyes:)

[mikewhatever]

You have choices, nothing stops you from using another distro or OS ;)

+1.

If the OP is not happy with some of the default components, why not install the CLI system and build up on that? I guess this is yet another, complaining for the sake of complaining threads.

[aztektum]

I guess I take the stance that, out of the box, your system should be neutral, like block of fresh clay. It makes it feel, to me, that I am taking this lump of clay and making it into what I want or what works for me as the user.

Also, I can't help but feel like Facebook, Twitter, etc are popular *now* but may not be later. By spending dev time coding apps to cater to the "hip new thing" world is taking away from time spent on creating apps/features that Ubuntu truly needs to push it onto desktops all over.

Another thing, I tried to get some people using Karmic. However their favorite thing on Facebook are pointless Flash apps which didn't completely work (Farm/town/ville/whatever the primary example. Firefox and Chrome had issues w/ the Adobe player and Gnash; not responding to clicks, missing widgets as examples). As a platform, Ubuntu doesn't seem to be fully inter-operable with services Canonical has deemed important enough to integrate with by default. Maybe these are fixed in Lucid, I haven't tried the beta, but if they're not, the focus seems a bit off. Selling features that are not fully supported could damage it's image.

All said, I've thought about it over the last couple days and I'm confident I'll be giving Lucid a pass. I've been running Arch in a Virtualbox to get a feel for it, but will probably flip to Debian for the time being.

[NightwishFan]

You may be a bit misinformed but your decision is a valid one regardless. Use what works for you, as we all do. As for those games, do they use flash? Flash is a proprietary technology and is completely out of our (and Canonicals) hands if it works or not. Personally, I use the experimental flash from this PPA. It seems to work better than the one in the repos using Ndiswrapper.

https://launchpad.net/~brandonsnider/+archive/experimental-flash

[aztektum]

+1.

If the OP is not happy with some of the default components, why not install the CLI system and build up on that? I guess this is yet another, complaining for the sake of complaining threads.

I have options, yes, but I've been using Ubuntu, helping spread Ubuntu, teaching people how to use it for a few years. So when I'm all about Ubuntu, everything is copacetic.

I'm communicating my opinion on a project that, in my own way, I've supported for a few years now. It's a project that relies on its community for feedback and input, positive or not so much so.

Although if expressing a contrary opinion makes one a black sheep, who is going to want to speak up? How do we get anywhere if, at the first sign of disagreement, we all throw up our hands, take our ball and go play by ourselves?

[NightwishFan]

I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with Ubuntu. You must know though that the Ubuntu project is not a democracy. They rely on our support and input but in the end Canonical has the final word. I am sure they take solutions to heart though. They would not release something if the majority of people out there had no use for it. Like was said, it is still open for customization, you can feel free to remove anything you do not want. I hope that your opinions are heard, and it all works out for you!

[aztektum]

You may be a bit misinformed but your decision is a valid one regardless. Use what works for you, as we all do. As for those games, do they use flash? Flash is a proprietary technology and is completely out of our (and Canonicals) hands if it works or not. Personally, I use the experimental flash from this PPA. It seems to work better than the one in the repos using Ndiswrapper.

https://launchpad.net/~brandonsnider/+archive/experimental-flash

Misinformed about what? How well Flash works? I sat and tried to use it myself after the person explained the issue. It straight up did not work.

It's *ultimately* out of Canonical's hands, but surely someone could approach Adobe and say "Hey, what can we do here?" or they could put devs onto making Gnash work better, which would benefit more rather than those devs building a UI to interact with Twitter for the subset of users that care.

[NightwishFan]

I am not attacking you. I did not mean to assume you did not know what you are talking about, forgive me.

I agree, I too have no use for either flash or gwibber. I just realize I still have a choice about what is installed in Ubuntu. The pool of developers would be no less, Canonical does not build all of this software itself as you know. They took a piece of software and included it. I am sure trying to get the best desktop experience is their vision, and they will attend to what they can. Like I said previously, us community members still have a voice, and I am quite sure they want to hear us. Developers may post here though the brainstorm might be a better place for such a suggestion. Tell them your ideas or even implement them yourself if you can. Make it a better desktop experience for all of us.

[plainswolf]

I'm a long time, dedicated windows user since 1994.. I never would have considered Linux had it not been for Ubuntu, it's popularity and user friendliness. I'm still quite new to Linux but loving it more every day.

I'm no computer genius but know my way around one a little better than average. If Ubuntu wasn't as user friendly as it is I would've never messed with it as long as I did nor finally installed it as my stand alone O.S. I'm not into much fluff but Fluff sounds easy enough to get rid of and it does appeal to potential new users. But its user friendliness is its biggest selling point.

[Stancel]

I'm a long time, dedicated windows user since 1994.. I never would have considered Linux had it not been for Ubuntu, it's popularity and user friendliness. I'm still quite new to Linux but loving it more every day.

I'm no computer genius but know my way around one a little better than average. If Ubuntu wasn't as user friendly as it is I would've never messed with it as long as I did nor finally installed it as my stand alone O.S. I'm not into much fluff but Fluff sounds easy enough to get rid of and it does appeal to potential new users. But its user friendliness is its biggest selling point.

Same here (ex-Windows user) :D I like that Ubuntu is user friendly. It's also safe from viruses, which is a major plus. and of course, definitely a lot faster.

Ubuntu is not perfect though, but it's certainly better than the competition.

[Paqman]

Particularly, I don't see the importance behind the integration of social media in Lucid. Services like Facebook and Twitter are useful to a lot of people, I suppse (not really a fan myself), however will that be the way of the future? Likely no.

I disagree. Email and IM are already widely in use. Twitter and the like are just another tool to add to the box. Integrating them into a single system is not just useful, it differentiates us from other OSes.

[madnessjack]

I disagree. Email and IM are already widely in use. Twitter and the like are just another tool to add to the box. Integrating them into a single system is not just useful, it differentiates us from other OSes.
I'm sure that like myself, the majority of casual geeks out there get more Tweets and FB notifications a day than they do emails- especially with these smart phones taking off.

[murderslastcrow]

There's always Minimal installation. You know, with Debian around, I never really feel upset about 'where Ubuntu's going'. It has a focus, and I think it's a very good focus, on simplicity and the average consumer, and it's helping out quite a bit, and not keeping you from anything. The options are endless.

Sometimes I feel like we're a bit spoiled as Linux users- we get something so good for free, and so somehow it's natural only to expect impossible things of it. Why not see what good there is in it?

Again, like I said, there's always Debian.

[Dragonbite]

I guess I take the stance that, out of the box, your system should be neutral, like block of fresh clay. It makes it feel, to me, that I am taking this lump of clay and making it into what I want or what works for me as the user.

So when you want to decorate your living room do you make your artwork and nick-nacks yourself? Some people do (my living room is adorned with my wife's artwork), but not everybody wants to.

Ubuntu caters to those people that don't want to in part because there are so many other distro's that allow you to so there is little sense in "reinventing the wheel".

One of the great things about Ubuntu, though, is that it is still Linux and still provides a lot of room for customization and modifying things to your tastes.


Also, I can't help but feel like Facebook, Twitter, etc are popular *now* but may not be later. By spending dev time coding apps to cater to the "hip new thing" world is taking away from time spent on creating apps/features that Ubuntu truly needs to push it onto desktops all over.

There's a balance. You could have the most stable system in the world but if it doesn't DO anything you want then what's the use?

Ubuntu can try and gather and please the masses now so there is a community to work towards and draw from, or they could work for technical expertise and get bought out by Oracle ( a' la Sun)!

[MooPi]

I'm not a fan of the full install and think most if not all of the dissenters in this thread could use the minimal install to personalize their own Ubuntu as I have. It doesn't have all the bells and whistles of the full install but it is mine and I know every app that's in use. No fluff no mess and it all works for me. If your hard core or just want something fresh and different I suggest a dive into the unknown. Besides the Ubuntu repository is full of wonderful and useful applications that don't make it into the generic build.

[SonOfOdin]

Meh, uninstall the fluff. Recompile the kernel. Create an image/live USB thumbdrive. Problem solvered.

[MasterNetra]

Frankly I'm not surprised with all this I mean remember the whole point and goal of Ubuntu is to cater to those who are new to linux. So why is it a surprise that its choices reflect this? Ubuntu most certainly has not jumped the shark, they are only refining the system in the direction that they had always plan to go.

[l-x-l]

NO!!! (Answering the OP's question)

[NightwishFan]

Ubuntu is a Linux distribution with a focus on usability. Esentially it should be easy for new users and customizable enough for experts. Do not like that sudo is set up? Run an alternate install on "expert mode". It is also developed for netbooks, low power ARM, servers, on and on. Any official variant Canonical has both community and customer focus for. It is what I want and why I respect it.

[Perfect Storm]

Ubuntu is geared to the masses, and the masses use social networking sites and "shiny stuff".




Bingo!
When I look around at my non-tech friends/family/other this is actually the thing they do with their computers.

[Vorian]

AI! Is that a KDE banner?
I never thought I'd live to see the day!

[Perfect Storm]

AI! Is that a KDE banner?
I never thought I'd live to see the day!

Aye, it took awhile after many many years of Gnome to switch to KDE. I think it was at the time of KDE4.2 I switched. :popcorn:

Check out my kde video (in my signature).

Nice to see ya again Vorian ^_^

[Doctor Mike]

Just for the record, 9.10 was a pain that helped me begin to understand the amount of work that goes into a distribution and, also helped me to understand why it is worthwhile. My copy of 9.10 may not be flawless, but it is at least as stable as my copy of XP, which is really not a bad recommendation. I'm testing the beta now (simple desktop) and have not reached the same level of stability, but it appears to be developing quite nicely.

[NT4usB]

Getting more "Windows" like, every release.
Certianly less 'fun' to tinker with than Breezy was.
I tried Debian (and Fedora, and ???) trying to get Intel graphics to work on a new box I built. The short time I tried it, Debian struck me as 'how a distro should work'.
All of my Linux revolves around MythTV so I'm reluctant to venture far from home, even to try MythTV on another distro.
I learned Linux building my first Mythbox years ago.
Now that a fresh release is out there, may be time to try Myth on another distro...

[Vorian]

Aye, it took awhile after many many years of Gnome to switch to KDE. I think it was at the time of KDE4.2 I switched. :popcorn:

Check out my kde video (in my signature).

Nice to see ya again Vorian ^_^

Sweet!

The desktop's looking hot.

Like I said in someones blog post recently...

"I foresee the day when this phrase will be heard when talking about Linux.

"You can always try Ubuntu. It's like Kubuntu, but without the K. Not as many people use it. It also takes a while to get used to".

:P"

[NightwishFan]

I wish Ubuntu and Kubuntu would sort of merge, and just be Ubuntu (either with Gnome or KDE like SUSE). That makes much more sense.

I like KDE, the desktop is great, but the programs and configuration are not to my liking. Everything seems just a bit cartoony in its placement and looks. When I use it I always have the plastic theme on so it looks similar to kde3.5. I also do not want to use the one theme AI uses, because it has to be common.

[Doctor Mike]

Getting more "Windows" like, every release.
Certianly less 'fun' to tinker with than Breezy was.
I tried Debian (and Fedora, and ???) trying to get Intel graphics to work on a new box I built. The short time I tried it, Debian struck me as 'how a distro should work'.
All of my Linux revolves around MythTV so I'm reluctant to venture far from home, even to try MythTV on another distro.
I learned Linux building my first Mythbox years ago.
Now that a fresh release is out there, may be time to try Myth on another distro...But felix, you use to date my sister...

[Vorian]

I also do not want to use the one theme AI uses, because it has to be common.

We all have our likings. Air is good, Arorae is also another nice choice, I use skulpture kuz it's hawt!

http://machine-crusade.net/shell.png

[J_Stanton]

It's alot easier for tech heads to remove things then it is for the main stream to install them. That's the way I see it. Ubuntu is geared to the mainstream, and we know this, so why do the tech heads get so butt hurt. Use Debian if you want an unpolished, bland utility.

well said. if ubuntu wants to appeal to more non-geeks it needs these things integrated to appeal to the masses. don't like it? don't use it.

[NT4usB]

But felix, you use to date my sister...

Which one? (crs these days...)

I once rode a train from Montreal to catch a plane out of YOW...

[Wiebelhaus]

This is why I use Debian now.

Yea man , I guess that's the way I feel about it now , Ubuntu is feature packed while Debian is vanilla.

[MasterNetra]

A side note, though in beta, Lucid is the first modern distro to not do a black screen of death for no reason at all under most normal usages. Still some issues, like it black screening and dying when the ant spotlight preview in screen-saver preferences is ran. And their is still a issue with text being cut off at certain areas of the screen totally driver issues no doubt. All on my old desktop though. Only real issue on my laptop is that the bcm driver doesn't function from live-cd or even vanilla install. I usually end up installing STA from CD.

[ndefontenay]

You get a black screen of death if you switch user to another and then back to your account.

[Ijan]

I would agree with the OP but also with some stuff said in his refutation.

Maybe my impression is that what he describes is more of a general Desktop-Linux problem than specifically an Unbuntu problem.

I would agree that the Ubuntu user experience is often bungled by lack of usability, coherence and stability but not worse than others. I too would gladly sacrifice half a dozen of "now even more" integrated applications for less dialogues that present "delete" in the place the ones before put "save" and such as this is what IMHO kills a smooth (and professional) work flow.

On the other hand I would agree that the "better" alternatives presented by some ATM still imply that you do *a lot* of configuration work on your own which is ok if you use one or two GUI-tools and configure your system around them and keep that config updated as they change but not more.

If you just need low-level CLI-tools or maybe one or two main tools you can AFAICS use what ever distribution you prefer but if you sometimes need the whole desktop of high-level clutter (and don't have the time to bind everything to emacs and get ninja, zen or whatever at using it) many people I know still end up with Ubuntu.

If the low-level stuff really got broken that would most certainly change but I didn't feel Ubuntu to stand out here in a negative way in the past.

[c00lwaterz]

Ubuntu is for everyone, and I think they are made for us to do our everyday task. There are many distros we can choose from. Not only ubuntu but there are some good distros that are making their system more easy to use for beginners. This might be the steps or chance for people to learn linux until such time they are so much comfortable.

I am not new to ubuntu but I am noob to linux. I use windows while learning little by little in the linux world. A taste of linux that I always try to wait for distro and I won't give up on fixing some issues in my computer with linux. Ubuntu was introduced to me when I work in software laboratory. They inspired me to use ubuntu. They also show me the difference between windows and Linux.

Now in my years on this Linux, I have tried different distros such as linuxmint, ubuntu, mandrake, fedora, opensuse, kubuntu and etc. Ubuntu gave me the comfort so until now I am hoping for ubuntu to give me chances to learn more little by little.

I cannot learn all the big stuff with linux because of I am not super science. I am only average guy who wants to learn Linux the way they are but with the help of friendly OS (ubuntu) and people around here in the community.

I appreciate some people here replied on my posts even it is post on wrong category. I am no genius but trying to learn.

[demosthene1]

I am rethinking my main distro if Ubuntu is going to emphasize the social networking thing. I use Facebook to check family stuff once in a while, that's about it. Why the special apps? Just use your browser if you want to go to Facebook or twitter. I can't see the reason for the integration into the OS except to jump on a popular and fleeting fad. Maybe it will make Ubuntu more popular...with some.

I've been playing around with Mandriva. Every once in a while I remember it is out there and that it was fun. Been around a long time. It is really solid now with the 2010 version. It is just itself, not trying to be a millennial generation passing whim, and I like that.

[Dragonbite]

Alright, I've been reading about these social apps but honestly I don't know if I understand what all the hub-bub is about?!

Is it like that notifier icon on the panel that includes Empathy and Evolution? Is it the status selector under the username (where you go to shutdown)? What is *it*?

[Regenweald]

Alright, I've been reading about these social apps but honestly I don't know if I understand what all the hub-bub is about?!

Is it like that notifier icon on the panel that includes Empathy and Evolution? Is it the status selector under the username (where you go to shutdown)? What is *it*?

A couple of apps that allow you to access whatever chat/tweet/social accounts you have, directly from the desktop. Their powers combined do too much to take away from Ubuntu's non-mainstream and geek difficulty factor. Thusly, they are hated by some in the 'linux community' boo hoo.

[Jose Catre-Vandis]

That's why I now install ubuntu minimal and just add what I want/need.

That doesn't mean that the default ubuntu install isn't great for most people.


Too right. Just download AltCD press F4 on bootup and install CLI. Then start building......

[Doctor Mike]

Which one? (crs these days...)

I once rode a train from Montreal to catch a plane out of YOW...Mary-Anne.
Me think you know many million years ago when the earth was new and the dogs roamed free...

[artcancro]

Since the folks at Canonical are now trying to force "Unity" down our throats, I'd say yes -- Ubuntu has jumped the shark.

Since my desktop is now running on Xfce I see no reason why I can't just run a stock Debian install now.

And I've been a happy Ubuntu user since 2006.

[red_Marvin]

So, why aren't you running a debian install then?

Or, on the other hand, is having to change the default
desktop environment that big a hurdle that you actually
consider changing?

Use what works for you, brand loyalty for no rational
reason is likely only detrimental to your experience.

[Perfect Storm]

Necromancing. Thread closed.