Does Linux Need Popularity?

[Snowboi]

Mark Shuttleworth - UDS KEYNOTE - Sets expectation for 200 million ubuntu users within 4 years.

The real question is does ubuntu need more people ?
does it need to apply to a wider audience in which it should simplify itself to the majority of users or should it keep up with the geekier users ?

If it would be majorly used by the not so geeky audience then more support would be put to the majority, after all you always need to look at the majority.

Would you still use ubuntu if it was simplified ?

Is the security of linux currently able to withstand the majority desktop share in terms of hackers, viruses, and exploits?

I personally think yes it could, possibly keep an "advanced" mode for advanced users and keep a "simple" mode for new users.

There would have to be much more applications developed for new users in order to use the full freedom that linux has to offer, of course since this is much simpler to new users then to use a terminal, coming from a windows background the world has become reliant on graphics managers.

What do you guys think?

[Witch Lady]

Well, I think that the more users the better :P

Make it simple for everyday use but keep the advanced options in the back is generally what is Ubu doing even now, afaik.

[Primefalcon]

The more users the better!

[KiwiNZ]

Mark Shuttleworth - UDS KEYNOTE - Sets expectation for 200 million ubuntu users within 4 years.

The real question is does ubuntu need more people ?
does it need to apply to a wider audience in which it should simplify itself to the majority of users or should it keep up with the geekier users ?

If it would be majorly used by the not so geeky audience then more support would be put to the majority, after all you always need to look at the majority.

Would you still use ubuntu if it was simplified ?

Is the security of linux currently able to withstand the majority desktop share in terms of hackers, viruses, and exploits?

I personally think yes it could, possibly keep an "advanced" mode for advanced users and keep a "simple" mode for new users.

There would have to be much more applications developed for new users in order to use the full freedom that linux has to offer, of course since this is much simpler to new users then to use a terminal, coming from a windows background the world has become reliant on graphics managers.

What do you guys think?

Before you seek numbers seek perfection.

[Primefalcon]

Before you seek numbers seek perfection.
Perfection is impossible, as far as usability goes, we're already there and security and stability wise we're way ahead of the curve

[KiwiNZ]

Perfection is impossible, as far as usability goes, we're already there and security and stability wise we're way ahead of the curve

Seeking it, is not impossible. Aim for less and you achieve less.

Ubuntu is not stable and is not more secure than it's competitors.

[karlson]

Mark Shuttleworth - UDS KEYNOTE - Sets expectation for 200 million ubuntu users within 4 years.

The real question is does ubuntu need more people ?


I think we are missing the goal of even having a desktop is to be able to gain share of the market dominated by Microsoft, so does it need more people absolutely. Methinks that 200 million is a little ambitious but not out of the realm of possibilities.



does it need to apply to a wider audience in which it should simplify itself to the majority of users or should it keep up with the geekier users ?


Well unless you want to come up with 200 million geeks in 4 years then yes you need to simplify the GUI and administration interfaces, etc, etc, etc. Personally if it was left to the geeks only the best GUI we would have would probably be fvwm95 if that. I am thinking more more of MWM or TWM, but nonetheless we need people who are not geeks to test the "viruses" us geek put out there as software.



If it would be majorly used by the not so geeky audience then more support would be put to the majority, after all you always need to look at the majority.


You're completely right, but all of us want to eat, so why not get paid to support the people who don't know UBUNTU from FEDORA from SOLARIS.



Would you still use ubuntu if it was simplified ?


Absolutely. I don't use UBUNTU because it's simple or hard but because it does what I need it to and prevents issues with majority of viruses that I don't want to deal with.



Is the security of linux currently able to withstand the majority desktop share in terms of hackers, viruses, and exploits?


Sure for the simple reason that Open Source community can run through the issue and get a fix out before most commercial products can do the same.



I personally think yes it could, possibly keep an "advanced" mode for advanced users and keep a "simple" mode for new users.


IMHO the advanced mode = Shell
SIMPLE MODE = GUI.




There would have to be much more applications developed for new users in order to use the full freedom that linux has to offer, of course since this is much simpler to new users then to use a terminal, coming from a windows background the world has become reliant on graphics managers.

What do you guys think?

More applications absolutely need to be developed. The issue with all Desktop systems is the application support and right now the biggest application by far present on practically every system running Windows is Office, so OpenOffice, which is the closest thing to a replacement should be keeping up with it but as all of us know writing an Office suite ain't cool or glamorous for the geeks because VIM/EMACS/KATE do the job geeks need as far as text editing just as well. Same goes for GIMP vs. PhotoShop, just to stay on the most common. Comparisons could go on and on but in general it's useless.

That's my 2 cents....

[karlson]

Before you seek numbers seek perfection.

I'd have to strongly disagree as perfection in this case is unachievable without significant numbers of people reporting problems requesting features, etc...

[karlson]

as far as usability goes, we're already there

As compared to whom?

[Primefalcon]

As compared to whom?
As compared to the other popular Operating systems out there which would be windows and macs.

The only thing that is lacking is 3rd party software support and frankly we wont that until we have more users, and the only way to get users is for pre-installation by vendors and I am been hearing comments made by Shuttleworth and Jono that, that is exactly what they're trying to do!

[Quadunit404]

Seeking it, is not impossible. Aim for less and you achieve less.

Ubuntu is not stable and is not more secure than it's competitors.

Quoted for truth.

[Dustin2128]

Before you seek numbers seek perfection.
Hm, seeking only numbers seemed to work well for windows 95 ;).
Why can't we do both at the same time? Make 11.10 the best ubuntu yet. Not that I think that's likely- best ubuntu yet was still hardy imho.

[TheNosh]

best ubuntu yet was still hardy imho.

See, things like that shouldn't be tolerated. The current one should always be the best one. That's how development is supposed to work. If it doesn't, then something is wrong.

Vista started out worse than XP. It had a few new features, but it was a little buggy and it was hell on hardware. The first service pack addressed a lot of that, and made it better, but the damage to its name had been done, so most people wouldn't touch it.

When that happens with Ubuntu, people mention that old versions were better, and act as if there's nothing wrong with that.

All the negative views of Vista are the reason Windows 7 is so polished. If people would treat canonical anywhere near as bad for messing up as they treat Microsoft for doing the same, they might actually get their act together and release something of quality.

[karlson]

As compared to the other popular Operating systems out there which would be windows and macs.

The only thing that is lacking is 3rd party software support and frankly we wont that until we have more users, and the only way to get users is for pre-installation by vendors and I am been hearing comments made by Shuttleworth and Jono that, that is exactly what they're trying to do!

I would disagree with you on the first one there were several issues I have run into with both major desktops on Linux, that are not there on Windows or MAC, One of them was configuring screensavers, especially if you xscreensaver installed, 3GL previews of the more elaborate ones. Another one I have documented here:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=8057193

Again I could give more examples, but I don't think it's necessary here.

As far as preinstalling the Linux Desktop from the vendors certainly will give UBUNTU popularity but these little quirks need to get solved because the "grandmas" of the world don't want to think about why the sound that is supposedly supported isn't working or why there are 2 entries in to configure the screensaver...

[karlson]

See, things like that shouldn't be tolerated. The current one should always be the best one. That's how development is supposed to work. If it doesn't, then something is wrong.


I'd say that the next one is the best one and current one is better then the previous one.

[linuxyogi]

Hardware support is a major issue. Both my printer & Scanner didn't work in Linux.

[Dustin2128]

Not hard with natty being a, no offense, buggy, bloated mess. My fondness for hardy is not just good memories of it being my first windows wipe install- I do actually run it on an older pentium 3 machine and it flies. Not only that, it's totally stable. Post-lucid is nearly as bad as windows. Lucid's alright, hardware support is great, and it's fairly stable- but pretty bulky by comparison to hardy. Linux mint is where the future is- or would be if they had a nice big company sponsoring it for OEM installs. I'm worried ubuntu would give linux a bad name in the current state.

[KiwiNZ]

If this crazy obsession of needing to roll out a sixth monthly dose of mediocre and more time was spent on development and testing and allowing Developers to complete their tasks with a higher ,much higher level of quality control then ubuntu could produce a product that could lead the popularity drive beyond the 1%.

[unknownPoster]

If this crazy obsession of needing to roll out a sixth monthly dose of mediocre and more time was spent on development and testing and allowing Developers to complete their tasks with a higher ,much higher level of quality control then ubuntu could produce a product that could lead the popularity drive beyond the 1%.

Exactly. No one criticizes Debian or RedHat for waiting years between Stable releases.

I'm fairly certain that no one criticizes Microsoft or Apple for waiting either.

[Dustin2128]

If this crazy obsession of needing to roll out a sixth monthly dose of mediocre and more time was spent on development and testing and allowing Developers to complete their tasks with a higher ,much higher level of quality control then ubuntu could produce a product that could lead the popularity drive beyond the 1%.
For once, I agree with you completely. I personally think that the non-LTS releases need to be labeled as beta software, whereas the LTS releases would focus absolutely on stability, with new features backported.

[Legendary_Bibo]

If this crazy obsession of needing to roll out a sixth monthly dose of mediocre and more time was spent on development and testing and allowing Developers to complete their tasks with a higher ,much higher level of quality control then ubuntu could produce a product that could lead the popularity drive beyond the 1%.

I <3 you KiwiNZ

[Primefalcon]

I agree the 6 month solid release data is kinda silly, and I think the LTS release should be the default to download but they should also should have a longer wait time before release!

With the others kinda of being considered feature beta's or whatever.

However even if Ubuntu was perfect (which is impossible), unless it's sold pre-installed, it still would not get any extra significant marketshare. Pre-installation is the only route there that will work

[TheNosh]

I'd say that the next one is the best one and current one is better then the previous one.

The next one is buggy and unstable, otherwise it would be released, and it would be the current one.

[Quadunit404]

If this crazy obsession of needing to roll out a sixth monthly dose of mediocre and more time was spent on development and testing and allowing Developers to complete their tasks with a higher ,much higher level of quality control then ubuntu could produce a product that could lead the popularity drive beyond the 1%.

Posts from you like this is why I wish this forum had a +/-rep function so bad. I always seem to agree with what you say.

Quality control is indeed the key to success. Canonical, with their tight six month release schedule, cannot achieve this. I don't see people criticizing Red Hat, Debian or Novell for taking several years between releases - in fact, I see people praising them for such a release schedule. They have the right idea - they have quality control and wait until a new release of their respective distros work before release. But Canonical? Not so much. If only they'd drop their six month release schedule...

[Dustin2128]

I agree the 6 month solid release data is kinda silly, and I think the LTS release should be the default to download but they should also should have a longer wait time before release!

With the others kinda of being considered feature beta's or whatever.

However even if Ubuntu was perfect (which is impossible), unless it's sold pre-installed, it still would not get any extra significant marketshare. Pre-installation is the only route there that will work
That's the thing- there is a very high likelihood that there are currently serious talks with OEMs about pre-installing ubuntu, Not the half hearted dell kind either- Shuttleworth having said he wants ubuntu on something like 200 million machines in a few years. This would have been great... 3 years ago when ubuntu didn't suck. Now? If canonical hadn't dropped excessive linux branding, I'd be worried about linux's good name. As I said before, linux mint on OEM installs would be ideal.

@Quadunit404
If we had a reputation system, I'd be a class 7 rambling linux neckbeard.

[8_Bit]

Linux needs OEM deals and pre-installed systems from well-known brands or it will not gain popularity.

It also needs clever marketing that conveys a clear message that you can do practically of the same things on Windows, in Linux. We need to make absolutely certain that something like this (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=1804496) doesn't re-occur.

[Dustin2128]

I also think ubuntu needs to show a bunch of things that cannot be done on windows. Maybe targeting a different market. Scriptability, customizability (though Shuttleworth seems determined to have this one flushed), and modularity are all options.

[8_Bit]

Maybe targeting a different market

Let's not forget the whole point of Ubuntu in the first place. It is not an operating system targeted at computer experts who need that advanced stuff you mentioned. It's targeted for computer newbs and regular joe shmoe's.

The experts and techies are just here for the ride, I'm sorry to say. :P

Let's leave that other stuff to Gentoo and Arch maintainers to market. Getting Linux to regular people is hard enough as it is for Canonical. Besides, I think most people who need scriptability and customization already know about Linux, may have even tried it, or at least aren't ignorant about its power.

[Dustin2128]

Think about it- it's a good reputation. Amazingly easy for even your normal person to use- but very powerful if you know what you're doing. The best of both worlds.

[disabledaccount]

Think about it- it's a good reputation. Amazingly easy for even your normal person to use- but very powerful if you know what you're doing. The best of both worlds.+1
Well balanced and reasonable opinion, it's surprising that so many peoples here can't or maybe won't accept this.

[Dustin2128]

+1
Well balanced and reasonable opinion, it's surprising that so many peoples here can't or maybe won't accept this.
Indeed, ubuntu's current business plan seems to be "Forget existing user base! Lure in new people with teh shinies!". Although, I'm not saying that wouldn't work, I just dislike the direction my old distro's going in. Ubuntu 8.04 introduced me to the wider world of linux, and that's something I can never forget. In fact, it's the only damn reason I'm still hanging around on this oversensitive forum.

[ninjaaron]

Linux doesn't need popularity.

Ubuntu's raison d'être is popularity, so while it might not technically "need" it to continue existing, the whole thing is sort of meaningless if they don't at least have plans for growing the user-base. Whether Ubuntu is actually a worthwhile project is another matter. It doesn't make a huge difference, probably, but if FOSS can give corporate software giants a run for their money, it will push innovation and competition, and the consumer will benefit. I think that's good. I don't know if that's what Shuttleworth's goal is, but I get the impression he's a little more idealistic than I am. I already have a proper religion. I don't need to worship FOSS.

[ninjaaron]

oversensitive forum.

Hell to the yes. Preach it.

[KiwiNZ]

Linux doesn't need popularity.

Ubuntu's raison d'être is popularity, so while it might not technically "need" it to continue existing, the whole thing is sort of meaningless if they don't at least have plans for growing the user-base. Whether Ubuntu is actually a worthwhile project is another matter. It doesn't make a huge difference, probably, but if FOSS can give corporate software giants a run for their money, it will push innovation and competition, and the consumer will benefit. I think that's good. I don't know if that's what Shuttleworth's goal is, but I get the impression he's a little more idealistic than I am. I already have a proper religion. I don't need to worship FOSS.

Canonical needs ubuntu to be popular, it helps the profit and loss accounts and balance sheet.

[NightwishFan]

Indeed, ubuntu's current business plan seems to be "Forget existing user base! Lure in new people with teh shinies!". Although, I'm not saying that wouldn't work, I just dislike the direction my old distro's going in. Ubuntu 8.04 introduced me to the wider world of linux, and that's something I can never forget. In fact, it's the only damn reason I'm still hanging around on this oversensitive forum.

I have similar sentiments. I have moved on but not rashly or in bitterness. Unity was not part of my decision to move on as I actually like the interface as of 10.10. The compiz unity seems to have potential as well. I really just want to contribute/use a project I can put a lot more faith in. Even just one that is slightly (well a lot) more conservative.

As for why I post here is these forums are full of folks I am qualified to help out. I also am well known here which is good.

[ninjaaron]

Canonical needs ubuntu to be popular, it helps the profit and loss accounts and balance sheet.

Server side support is already profitable. Desktop is the leech on cash. Canonical could easily cut the desktop loose to the community like Red Hat.

But it's really circular logic in the end. While Ubuntu's popularity would help Canonical, Canonical exists to make FOSS, particularly Ubuntu, competitive in the mainstream. This company doesn't have to be hemorrhaging. It is a choice they make (or rather, 'he makes') base on their ideology and a somewhat naive belief that it may one day pay off. I'm not saying it won't, just saying the odds probably aren't equal to the pay-out. If Canonical were a public company, there is no way they would focus the kind of resources they do on development and popularity of the desktop.

I'm not saying their wrong, I'm just saying that Canonical's priorities are clearly not centred on the balance sheet. Maybe that's a good thing?

[KiwiNZ]

I have been working with ubuntu since it was first announced I have seen it reach it's apex of popularity trends which given current trending was about 12 months past.

I fear that with the last few editions it started a trend toward it's nadir.

With any product popularity is key to existence and given the nature of Open source popularity retention is vital if a project is going to retain it's developer base.

[KiwiNZ]

Server side support is already profitable. Desktop is the leech on cash. Canonical could easily cut the desktop loose to the community like Red Hat.

But it's really circular logic in the end. While Ubuntu's popularity would help Canonical, Canonical exists to make FOSS, particularly Ubuntu, competitive in the mainstream. This company doesn't have to be hemorrhaging. It is a choice they make (or rather, 'he makes') base on their ideology and a somewhat naive belief that it may one day pay off. I'm not saying it won't, just saying the odds probably aren't equal to the pay-out. If Canonical were a public company, there is no way they would focus the kind of resources they do on development and popularity of the desktop.

I'm not saying their wrong, I'm just saying that Canonical's priorities are clearly not centred on the balance sheet. Maybe that's a good thing?

Canonical's priority like any enterprise is the balance sheet. Mark Shuttleworth made several hundred million dollars having a focus on the balance sheet. Canonical's aim is profitability with ubuntu and related services.

[ninjaaron]

Canonical's priority like any enterprise is the balance sheet. Mark Shuttleworth made several hundred million dollars having a focus on the balance sheet. Canonical's aim is profitability with ubuntu and related services.

I'm not saying Mark isn't a business wizkid or he's not trying to make money. All I'm saying is that if it were his top priority, he might be doing some things differently. It isn't exactly a secret that he's got an ideological dog in this fight.

[XubuRoxMySox]

Mister Shuttleworth wants to create and market a drop-in replacement to compete with Microsoft Windows for ordinary consumers. No Linux distro has achieved that yet (hardware issues, etc), and it may be completely unrealistic, but one kinda can't help but think it's an admirable goal, and certainly no one has come closer to it than Ubuntu so far.

But like others have said, I think the 6-months-ready-or-not release schedule hurts rather than helps towards that worthy goal. I stick to the LTS releases and always advise new users to do the same. And if I could advise Mister Shuttleworth I would suggest that the LTS releases be the default offered for download and CD/DVD.

But, in his very own words, Mister Shuttleworth is a "benevolent dictator for life." Ubuntu is not nor ever was intended to be a community-built nor community-driven distro! Neither are most other distros, by the way. Still, his work "tames" mighty, awesome Debian Linux and makes it usable by ordinary non-geeky kids like me. Others try to do the same thing (Mepis, Knoppix, Mint, etc) but so far have not enjoyed the same success and popularity that Ubuntu has. Perhaps the difference is marketing, and perhaps marketing and publicity is what the 6-month schedule is really all about.

-Robin

[TheNosh]

I already have a proper religion. I don't need to worship FOSS.


Hell to the yes. Preach it.

Irony \\:D/

...Unless part your proper religion is that this forum is over-sensitive.

[ninjaaron]

Oh noes! I'm a religious person who used a quazi-religious expression in a secular context! The irony is overwhelming!

[Gremlinzzz]

Mark Shuttleworth - UDS KEYNOTE - Sets expectation for 200 million ubuntu users within 4 years.

The real question is does ubuntu need more people ?
does it need to apply to a wider audience in which it should simplify itself to the majority of users or should it keep up with the geekier users ?

If it would be majorly used by the not so geeky audience then more support would be put to the majority, after all you always need to look at the majority.

Would you still use ubuntu if it was simplified ?

Is the security of linux currently able to withstand the majority desktop share in terms of hackers, viruses, and exploits?

I personally think yes it could, possibly keep an "advanced" mode for advanced users and keep a "simple" mode for new users.

There would have to be much more applications developed for new users in order to use the full freedom that linux has to offer, of course since this is much simpler to new users then to use a terminal, coming from a windows background the world has become reliant on graphics managers.

What do you guys think?

The question does Linux need popularity?
yes:D
Simpler the better saves time for the non-techs :D

[3Miro]

Popularity is the goal of Canonical. The long term goal of Ubuntu is to become the dominant system.

There will always be smaller and more obscured (even perhaps "elitist") distributions, for those that don't want to use a main-stream system. Except that if Ubuntu becomes dominant, this would mean that things like drivers and games would be made for all distributions. Victory for Ubuntu would be a win for all distributions.

Obscurity is a nice security feature, however, people usually overestimate its contribution to the overall superior security of Linux. Linux is inherently more secure then windows and major distributions like Ubuntu and Fedora can become dominant today, without suffering in terms of security (in fact this will improve the overall security of all computers in the world). The security topic has been beaten to dead multiple times on this forum, check the recurring discussions.

[karlson]

I also think ubuntu needs to show a bunch of things that cannot be done on windows. Maybe targeting a different market. Scriptability, customizability (though Shuttleworth seems determined to have this one flushed), and modularity are all options.

That's all nice but consider this:

How many people from the Windows user base know what a theme is and how to change it? So if you are targeting UBUNTU as a replacement for Windows you have to tell people what could be done on Linux easier then windows without having to learn anything.

[castrojo]

I have been working with ubuntu since it was first announced I have seen it reach it's apex of popularity trends which given current trending was about 12 months past.

Link to your numbers please?

[karlson]

Linux needs OEM deals and pre-installed systems from well-known brands or it will not gain popularity.


OK. I'd say you should consider that there is one major thing that Ubuntu lacks which should be available for any commercially available Operating systems and that is Support and Training.
Most OEM's that deploy Linux(RedHat, SuSE) do have support but most of it goes Level 1 and beyond that it gets forwarded back to the OS distributor. Looking at the Support Web Page it needs to get much better, for Ubuntu to be better commercially viable.

[karlson]

Think about it- it's a good reputation. Amazingly easy for even your normal person to use- but very powerful if you know what you're doing. The best of both worlds.

I think we got the marketing down.

[Snowboi]

In regards to the six month release cycle, i feel that the purpose is testing. Ubuntu itself is always being developed and "improved" especially with the new unity interface. I feel that when 11.04 was released that it was not fully ready to hold the majority market share. Its purpose was to test the new unity interface.

[XubuRoxMySox]

In regards to the six month release cycle, i feel that the purpose is testing. Ubuntu itself is always being developed and "improved" especially with the new unity interface. I feel that when 11.04 was released that it was not fully ready to hold the majority market share. Its purpose was to test the new unity interface.

Probably true, but it should be stated prominently on the web site. I always stick with the LTS versions until they reach end-of-life, then go the next LTS. At least 'til I get enough "mad-geeky-techno-skills" to play with the experimental stuff.

-Robin

[dyltman]

I guess ubuntu needs more users to be profitable, which it is not right now.

[Primefalcon]

OK. I'd say you should consider that there is one major thing that Ubuntu lacks which should be available for any commercially available Operating systems and that is Support and Training.
What? Reallly?

first go here: http://www.ubuntu.com/support/training

then go here.... http://www.ubuntu.com/business/services/overview

[Dustin2128]

Linux doesn't need popularity.

Ubuntu's raison d'être is popularity, so while it might not technically "need" it to continue existing, the whole thing is sort of meaningless if they don't at least have plans for growing the user-base. Whether Ubuntu is actually a worthwhile project is another matter. It doesn't make a huge difference, probably, but if FOSS can give corporate software giants a run for their money, it will push innovation and competition, and the consumer will benefit. I think that's good. I don't know if that's what Shuttleworth's goal is, but I get the impression he's a little more idealistic than I am. I already have a proper religion. I don't need to worship FOSS.
Shuttle's not as much an idealist as a pragmatist- especially compared to the likes of RMS. He's not a free software fanatic and includes closed source software when it makes ubuntu work better. I'm not quite an rms level free software maniac, so I don't have much of a problem with that.

Also NWF, you make me feel guilty for not helping more. I can do a gentoo install with my eyes shut, I can help a few poor ubuntu newbies.

[Primefalcon]

Also NWF, you make me feel guilty for not helping more. I can do a gentoo install with my eyes shut, I can help a few poor ubuntu newbies.
Then... get to it man I was status reports by the hour!


just jk'ing of course, and I share your pragmatist viewpoint I prefer open if possible but if it cant be done reasonably well... well, at the end of the day I need something that works

[Linuxratty]

Hardware support is a major issue. Both my printer & Scanner didn't work in Linux.

Not to mention my personal pet peeve Nividia drivers problems. This problem has followed me relentlessly.


. I don't see people criticizing Red Hat, Debian or Novell for taking several years between releases - in fact, I see people praising them for such a release schedule. They have the right idea - they have quality control and wait until a new release of their respective distros work before release. But Canonical? Not so much. If only they'd drop their six month release schedule...

Yes! And now FF is making the same lame brained mistake.

[Primefalcon]

Not to mention my personal pet peeve Nividia drivers problems. This problem has followed me relentlessly.



Yes! And now FF is making the same lame brained mistake.
Some people can do it right... Look at Google's Chrome browser

[moster]

Can somebody eplain mee how ubuntu suppose to become popular just by preinstalling it on new computers when:

1. newer ubuntu versions are beta quality
2. old "stable" ubuntu are what the name say. Old. Who want freakin firefox 3.0?!

Make old stable ubuntu run new shiny software and voila. Like 2 years old win7 running all new stuff... click setup exe and all done...

[ninjaaron]

Shuttle's not as much an idealist as a pragmatist- especially compared to the likes of RMS.

Well, I won't argue with you there. Course, RMS is the lunatic fringe; slightly more crazy Michael Moore, and a bit less than, say eco terrorists.

[wolfen69]

Ubuntu is not stable and is not more secure than it's competitors.

That's your opinion. For me, it's been the most stable OS I've ever used in 25 years. Plus, if you're going to compare, compare apples to apples, and oranges to oranges. In other words, preinstalled linux vs. preinstalled windows/OS X. Please, hard empirical data, not casual observations.

But anyway, I don't care how many people use ubuntu/linux. It is what it is.

[3Miro]

Can somebody eplain mee how ubuntu suppose to become popular just by preinstalling it on new computers when:

1. newer ubuntu versions are beta quality
2. old "stable" ubuntu are what the name say. Old. Who want freakin firefox 3.0?!

Make old stable ubuntu run new shiny software and voila. Like 2 years old win7 running all new stuff... click setup exe and all done...

11.04 introduced the biggest changes in a single Ubuntu relese and naturally it is less stable than the others. Would you call 10.10 a beta? Have you used 9.04 or 9.10? Those were as stable and usable as any LTS.

A case can be made that Canonical can backport more software than waht they currently do (like Firefox). However, you can get FF 4 for 10.04 via unofficial ppa (in comparison with windows, all windows software is like an unofficial ppa),

[XubuRoxMySox]

Can somebody eplain mee how ubuntu suppose to become popular just by preinstalling it on new computers when:

1. newer ubuntu versions are beta quality
2. old "stable" ubuntu are what the name say. Old. Who want freakin firefox 3.0?!

Make old stable ubuntu run new shiny software and voila. Like 2 years old win7 running all new stuff... click setup exe and all done...

Backports! The LTS versions are built from Debian Testing, while the in-between releases are built from Debian Unstable.

You can do a minimal Ubuntu install (CLI-only, like a Debian net-install), then add whatever GUI you like (I would install Xfce rather than "xubuntu-desktop," for example), and just the applications you want. Lots of folks are running the latest versions of Firefox etc on Lucid using backports.

And Lucid is rock-stable right now. The Debian Testing it was built from has since been released as "Squeeze," which is Debian Stable.

3 years of support on the desktop, built from Debian Testing, backports available for updating applications. Best of everything.

-Robin

[aaaantoine]

Does Linux need popularity? No. Do I want it to have popularity? Yes.

Why? Because I'm selfish and cheap. ;)

With more users come more contributions and more funding from hardware and software developers.

[sarcasmrules]

Guys! Check this out - Google Insights show that the popularity for Ubuntu peaked way back in October 2007, and Cuba, Russia and Italy were the countries that searched for Ubuntu the most. Perhaps Shuttleworth should try and get Ubuntu to some of these countries.

http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=ubuntu&cmpt=q

[karlson]

What? Reallly?

first go here: http://www.ubuntu.com/support/training

then go here.... http://www.ubuntu.com/business/services/overview

Contrary to the popular opinion I know about those pages and have actually gone through them so let's start let me give you a viewpoint of someone who had to go through the motions of evaluating various vendors as a deployment platform.

Training:

http://webapps.ubuntu.com/course_locator/
Only has UK and Netherlands listed as countries with courses available and UK has no courses coming up whatsoever, so this begs the question of what about the US? Not to mention other big markets like Japan, India, China?

http://www.ubuntu.com/support/training/course-descriptions
The courses have a good amount of material in them but they still are not geared for people who might have some experience using a Linux or UNIX operating system already, where is the stuff for n00bs? And furthermore the biggest thing about it is where is the cost of a course? I don't think that the instructor works for free...

Support:

I've gone through the services offered and my concerns about that are as follows:

1. Server services. From the description I think it just offers varying levels of system administration support, such as deployment/repository/services, etc. Where is technical support? Namely if something goes wrong most companies at least in the US want to be able to pick up the phone and call someone rather then email and wait for response.

2. Contact Canonical. Where is the phone number(s)? I mean Contact Canonical will respond within 2 working days? This may work for smaller companies but some of the larger ones don't like to wait and if I working for someone trying to determine what vendors we would be looking at for project implementation Canonical would be out of contention


I do understand that setting up things like this is expensive but for wider adoption in the business it needs to be done.

[NightwishFan]

Can somebody eplain mee how ubuntu suppose to become popular just by preinstalling it on new computers when:
I can explain it. :rolleyes:


1. newer ubuntu versions are beta quality
More or less. You got me here. :)


2. old "stable" ubuntu are what the name say. Old. Who want freakin firefox 3.0?!
Your specific example is (slightly) incorrect. I know for a fact Ubuntu generally keeps up with new versions of Firefox. Lucid right now has version 3.6. Versions 4 and 5 are not a lot more upgraded than 3.6. Besides software does not all of a sudden cease to work once newer versions come out. You are a victim of something called marketing. Marketing forces our heads spin around and think that we need version 4 because version 3 is completely useless in comparison.


Make old stable ubuntu run new shiny software and voila. Like 2 years old win7 running all new stuff... click setup exe and all done...
That is certainly possible even under linux. I can download Google Chrome or Google Earth newest versions for my Debian laptop just as easy as Windows. The point of a repository is security (packaged by the same folks that make the OS) and stability (this means software is unchanging folks; not bug free). If you want to run random_trojan_blogblaster.exe feel free. At least it will be an up to date version. :)

[madjr]

I can explain it. :rolleyes:


More or less. You got me here. :)


Your specific example is (slightly) incorrect. I know for a fact Ubuntu generally keeps up with new versions of Firefox. Lucid right now has version 3.6. Versions 4 and 5 are not a lot more upgraded than 3.6. Besides software does not all of a sudden cease to work once newer versions come out. You are a victim of something called marketing. Marketing forces our heads spin around and think that we need version 4 because version 3 is completely useless in comparison.


That is certainly possible even under linux. I can download Google Chrome or Google Earth newest versions for my Debian laptop just as easy as Windows. The point of a repository is security (packaged by the same folks that make the OS) and stability (this means software is unchanging folks; not bug free). If you want to run random_trojan_blogblaster.exe feel free. At least it will be an up to date version. :)

+1

but i still think ubuntu needs to be semi-rolling for all software possible (except for new kernels or alpha software that may break things)

[Linuxratty]

Some people can do it right... Look at Google's Chrome browser

This is true.

[NightwishFan]

+1

but i still think ubuntu needs to be semi-rolling for all software possible (except for new kernels or alpha software that may break things)

I think a better option is to make it easier for upstream sources to package things. Rolling is not an option for someone who needs a reliable system. I do not even just mean bugs; They will need to rely on the same software being there or the same versions being there.

A good example is Debian Unstable used to have the old version of the Gnome Shell and then all of a sudden the packages and support for it were removed for one reason or another. This simply cannot happen on a production system or one that someone has to give support for.

[Jacobonbuntu]

.....depends on what you want Linux to be. The growing amount of good and mature software for Linux is the result of at least some kind of popularity, and the fact that software developers have a "broader audience" in mind, I guess.

Linux getting really popular might also have a downside; traditionally Linux users are more involved (and contributing in one way or another) to their OS than commercial users of mainstream systems. Inviting the "masses" in might change that attitude in general. The majority of people are used to being a "customer", and don't want to play an active role. I don't mean to say an ugly thing, but it is the simple truth.
Apart from that, I don't see it happen so soon. Judging to these forums, I see a lot of people passing by. frustrated because of..., yes of what actually?
They need a pre-installed computer (they deserve it :)) from the shop, and they need to complain to their supplier, who gets payed to listen to that. Why would you want to make them use Linux?

[Primefalcon]

well there are things like the firefox stable ppa... but yeah

and @karisan

Training:

http://webapps.ubuntu.com/course_locator/
Only has UK and Netherlands listed as countries with courses available and UK has no courses coming up whatsoever, so this begs the question of what about the US? Not to mention other big markets like Japan, India, China?
damm that does suck :-(

[Snowboi]

Some people can do it right... Look at Google's Chrome browser

Completely agree, not to meantion Chromium as well which is updated daily and imo the best browser out there. :popcorn:

As well relating to the rolling releases, it was once mentioned that ubuntu would become a rolling release are there any downsides to this that anyone can mention? Change the operating system but keep its ability to run software designed for other versions (possibly like wine being able to switch between windows xp and windows 7)

[cariboo]

Contrary to the popular opinion I know about those pages and have actually gone through them so let's start let me give you a viewpoint of someone who had to go through the motions of evaluating various vendors as a deployment platform.

Training:

http://webapps.ubuntu.com/course_locator/
Only has UK and Netherlands listed as countries with courses available and UK has no courses coming up whatsoever, so this begs the question of what about the US? Not to mention other big markets like Japan, India, China?

http://www.ubuntu.com/support/training/course-descriptions
The courses have a good amount of material in them but they still are not geared for people who might have some experience using a Linux or UNIX operating system already, where is the stuff for n00bs? And furthermore the biggest thing about it is where is the cost of a course? I don't think that the instructor works for free...

Support:

I've gone through the services offered and my concerns about that are as follows:

1. Server services. From the description I think it just offers varying levels of system administration support, such as deployment/repository/services, etc. Where is technical support? Namely if something goes wrong most companies at least in the US want to be able to pick up the phone and call someone rather then email and wait for response.

2. Contact Canonical. Where is the phone number(s)? I mean Contact Canonical will respond within 2 working days? This may work for smaller companies but some of the larger ones don't like to wait and if I working for someone trying to determine what vendors we would be looking at for project implementation Canonical would be out of contention


I do understand that setting up things like this is expensive but for wider adoption in the business it needs to be done.

I'm not sure how far you looked into the matter, but there are Ubuntu partners all over the world, offering training, see this page:

http://webapps.ubuntu.com/partners/training/

If you check the web address of the US partner, you'll see they offer training in the US, and there is even a phone number.

As far as support goes, if you look at what you get, you'll see at the bottom of the list it says premium service engineer optional, it would seem to me that this is the guy that would help the user solve their problem. When you pay for support you do get a phone number to contact Canonical.

Can you imagine if there was an easily available phone number, how mnay phone calls they'd get from people looking for free support.

[jasonrisenburg]

In 2007, I got my first computer, a ibm 300. The os was ubuntu 7.04. I loved it. I used ubuntu till my wife drove me crazy and i switched to xp a year later. it only lasted for a week till I dual booted. Then windows 7 came out and I tried that, but I kept reinstalling ubuntu( and kept breaking) because I liked how I could customize it. How I could make it mine. I still fumble through bash and my py is horrible, my c is horrendous. But I love my Ubuntu. It makes me feel good. As of rightnow, there is a 4 year old operating 10.04 netbook. She loves it. along with her older sis 12, 9 yr old bro and 6 yr old bro.

[silvestros]

Perfection is impossible, as far as usability goes, we're already there and security and stability wise we're way ahead of the curve
Agree, we just need more companies support (drivers etc..)

[Bandit]

Does Linux Need Popularity?

Another way to look at it also..


Does Linux Need More Kids?


The paradox is we need it and dont want it.
Want the industrial/commercial support for new games and drivers no doubt.
But doe we really want a whole bunch of shmucks that see their self and elite windows users and now they installed linux via Wubie and now think they are now elite linux users. **whutz a terminal**

[JC Cheloven]

Thinking at the limit of the aforementioned popularity: Imagine MS suddenly disappearing, and all brands in the world deciding to ship ubuntu in all their pc's, just tomorrow. Then people would start purchasing the pc's with that OS preinstalled.

Do you think ubuntu could afford to get exposed to that situation in this very moment? I don't think so. "Dirty linen should not be washed in public".

I mean, Maverick 10.10 and Jaunty 9.10 have been outstanding (for me) in terms of stability, while I remember Hardy 8.04 LTS was a big disappointment for a lot of people here in the forums. Lucid 10.04 LTS could/should have been better, and Natty 11.04 seems to please only a few people. Not to mention the occasional mess a software update produces to some people, or that a particular app may not work as it did in the previous release.

No pattern, no LTS valid clue, just a lottery. This is something to solve before exposing ubuntu too much, IMO.

[karlson]

I'm not sure how far you looked into the matter, but there are Ubuntu partners all over the world, offering training, see this page:

http://webapps.ubuntu.com/partners/training/

If you check the web address of the US partner, you'll see they offer training in the US, and there is even a phone number.


I did look at it before I posted as well, here is the thing.
If you look at their site I can see that they offer listed courses on the same day across the country. Either they have so many experts that they can do this or this is simply taught pretty much as an academic lecture, which for an expert level course is a significant problem, but that may be just me.




As far as support goes, if you look at what you get, you'll see at the bottom of the list it says premium service engineer optional, it would seem to me that this is the guy that would help the user solve their problem. When you pay for support you do get a phone number to contact Canonical.


Ok I can see that.




Can you imagine if there was an easily available phone number, how mnay phone calls they'd get from people looking for free support.

How about for sales? 2 days to get an answer back from the sales team? I am willing to wait for a quote for 2 days but not for someone to talk to me...

[Snowboi]

How about for sales? 2 days to get an answer back from the sales team? I am willing to wait for a quote for 2 days but not for someone to talk to me...

Agree, they need to readily open up to business's.
Maybe put that it is a Business ONLY phone line.

Also strangely typing in "canonical phone number" On my search engine comes up with a microsoft website :lolflag:

[wolfen69]

No pattern, no LTS valid clue, just a lottery. This is something to solve before exposing ubuntu too much, IMO.

I disagree with every fiber of my being.... :o 10.04 overall was a great release.

If linux had the corporate backing that windows or mac had, it would be near unbeatable. Google, HP, and many other companies are proving that linux is the way to go. Just because linux is not #1 on the desktop, doesn't mean it's not viable for most things. Heck, most things already run on linux. I don't see windows running on too many embedded devices.

I think linux has come a long way in the past 7 years. As far as people still having problems, I wish I could help you. It works perfect for me, and that's all that matters. The same thing should matter to you, whether you are a windows, mac, or bsd user. It just doesn't work that way in real life.

I've been blessed over the years with 100% compatible equipment, and have had linux experiences second to none. That's all I can comment on is my own experiences. So far it's been near perfect. And if windows or mac has been near perfect for you, good for you! That's what it's all about last time I checked.

I hope we can agree to disagree, yet respect each other. Afterall, it's only a tool to get things done. And a lot of those things are the same, and universal.

[el_koraco]

No pattern, no LTS valid clue, just a lottery. This is something to solve before exposing ubuntu too much, IMO.

The title is not "does Ubuntu need more popularity", but "does Linux need more popularity".

[pommie]

If Linux, whatever flavour, all of a sudden gained 50% market share, who is going to pay for the dramatically increased bandwidth of the repo's, there would have to be ad support for them or they would become a cash sink hole.
So while I think that Linux deserves a bigger share, lets race ahead slowly :D

Cheers David

[TheNosh]

If Linux, whatever flavour, all of a sudden gained 50% market share, who is going to pay for the dramatically increased bandwidth of the repo's, there would have to be ad support for them or they would become a cash sink hole.
So while I think that Linux deserves a bigger share, lets race ahead slowly :D

Cheers David

You know how OEMs pay a small license fee for windows? Well canonical and other such companies could charge a similar fee to ship machines with their distro pre-installed. Sorta like Redhat licensing, but just upfront for pre-installation, and likely cheaper.

The demand would have to be there first, though. You can't ask OEMs to pay to preinstall something the masses don't want. Once popularity is gained, though, it's possible.

...Unless of course I've misunderstood something here, which is entirely possible given that I'm neither a developer, nor an OEM employee, so I pay little attention to the ins and outs of most of that sort of thing.

[JC Cheloven]

... I hope we can agree to disagree, yet respect each other. Afterall, it's only a tool to get things done. And a lot of those things are the same, and universal.
Hey, of course we can! Please forgive me if sometimes I am "too affirmative" in my wording, which I'm affraid is due to a lack of mastering the subtleties of the language.

I don't use currently anything but gnu linux (ubuntu, different flavours), as I manage to get things working when something goes wrong. But as time passed, I collected a share of about 30 not computer-savy "converted people" which mainly depend on me (now and then) to solve issues. I have the feeling they wouldn't be abe to seamless use ubuntu without me. That's why I suspect it would be better to wait before giving ubuntu preinstalled to that people. Fortunately other "converted people" are using it by their own :)

As to the rest, it's much more than a tool for me. It's about freedom, about sharing and about building together. Something that is worth. When something isn't quite as it should, I like to say: "well, it will improve if we use it".

Cheers

[Snowboi]

If Linux, whatever flavour, all of a sudden gained 50% market share, who is going to pay for the dramatically increased bandwidth of the repo's, there would have to be ad support for them or they would become a cash sink hole.
So while I think that Linux deserves a bigger share, lets race ahead slowly :D

Cheers David

Depends on distro and which servers they use i guess...

[Primefalcon]

@Pommie
Your forgetting Ubuntu is commercially supported by Canonical. And if Ubuntu got a much larger marketshare. More business would be getting support, which would mean more money for canonical....

[Dustin2128]

The way I see it, the main problem is people buying and not understanding it. When they buy a macbook, they know they can't run windows apps. When they buy a generic looking laptop running ubuntu, they won't always- indeed, rarely ever know it right off. Basically: ubuntu, and more generally, linux machines need to be understood.

[DawieS]

Yes, Linux needs popularity. This will greatly enhance the support base from hardware and software vendors, and make Linux even more of a pleasure to use.

IMO, the only way to achieve this is to start with the kids (like MS did, brainwashing them that MS is the beginning and the end, as far as an OS goes).

If our children grow up in schools where they are exposed to different versions of Linux, they will start demanding their favourite games to run on Linux. There are already a few Linux gaming vendors out there, but not nearly enough. The gaming industry is today what drives the computing world.

This effort has to come from the top down, and NOT the other way around. The schools themselves will gladly accept Linux as part of the computing curriculum, when instructed to do so. What needs to be done, is that a high powered delegation, representing the main Linux distributions, entertain a government delegation for supper, followed up by a few presentations the next day, explaining all the advantages of implementing Linux at schools and other government institutions. Once the process is kick-started, it will take off by itself.:wink:

[handy]

Yes, Linux needs popularity. This will greatly enhance the support base from hardware and software vendors, and make Linux even more of a pleasure to use.

IMO, the only way to achieve this is to start with the kids (like MS did, brainwashing them that MS is the beginning and the end, as far as an OS goes).

If our children grow up in schools where they are exposed to different versions of Linux, they will start demanding their favourite games to run on Linux. There are already a few Linux gaming vendors out there, but not nearly enough. The gaming industry is today what drives the computing world.

This effort has to come from the top down, and NOT the other way around. The schools themselves will gladly accept Linux as part of the computing curriculum, when instructed to do so. What needs to be done, is that a high powered delegation, representing the main Linux distributions, entertain a government delegation for supper, followed up by a few presentations the next day, explaining all the advantages of implementing Linux at schools and other government institutions. Once the process is kick-started, it will take off by itself.:wink:

Russia & China are committed to Linux in schools, something may happen in India.

Big numbers for Linux there though.

[ninjaaron]

The gaming industry is today what drives the computing world.


Interesting theory. Are there any facts to support it?

[handy]

I would have thought that multimedia is at least going to be what drives the computer world. Many people aren't in the slightest bit interested in games, but they do like movies of all kinds & other shows.

All of this is converging in the household entertainment area with devices that take centre stage like large screen TVs having the ability for internet connectivity built right into them.

[DawieS]

I would have thought that multimedia is at least going to be what drives the computer world.
Yes, but only since recently, and as a direct result of all the R&D that went into gaming, driving down hardware prices and making PC's a household item, now affordable by everyone.

Remember the 80's when the only decent graphic's boxes were Unix machines, and only a few could be afforded by large corporations, where they were forced to run graphical applications? The rest of the workforce had to work via text terminals on a mainframe. I remember some of these Unix machines costing +R1 000 000.

The mainframes and Unix machines eventually lost the race to PC's, purely as a result of numbers. Their total R&D is now dwarfed in comparison to PC's, mainly as a result of gaming.

[Dustin2128]

Interesting theory. Are there any facts to support it?
Well, besides gaming, you can do most modern stuff on an old pentium 3 with a decent video card.

[Snowboi]

Windows is committed to user familiarity and software (Most products are designed for windows and it continues to be like that). Mac is the alternative operating system, and it is commonly used for its simplicity and ilife. How is linux viewed in society? (for example if you were to ask somebody on the street about linux what would they say?)

[3Miro]

(for example if you were to ask somebody on the street about linux what would they say?)

There are several groups. By far the largest group is the one that would answer: "What is Linux?"

I see a lot of people that know what Linux is, they know it is good, but they think it is for servers only as it lacks good DE. All of those people (that I know of) are Mac users. They were right to think that 8 years ago, but I don't see a modern Linux DE as in any way lacking to OSX or Windows.

Then there are the serious Linux users that know what they are talking about (a minority compared to the above two groups).

Finally you get the fantrolls that like one OS or another, their system is perfect, every other system is complete garbage and people that use other systems are retards. Fantrolls exist for all systems. Furthermore, it is hard to measure the number of fantrolls out there as they are way too loud for their numbers.

[ninjaaron]

Well, besides gaming, you can do most modern stuff on an old pentium 3 with a decent video card.

Except, say, pull it out of your pocket on the bus and have instant access to broadband anywhere.

Course, if we define progress in "the computing world" solely as the development of more powerful hardware for rendering graphics, and maybe a new medium of interface here or there (were we to go out on a limb and say the Kinect was developed solely as a gaming interface and the other uses are secondary... I don't know, but I guess it could be).

I'd say that if any single thing is driving the "computing world" at the moment, it's the redefinition of the mobile platform, closely followed by the democratisation of media distribution (youtube, picasa, blogspot, twitter, itunes store, etc. plus the mass availability of professional grade photo, video and music editors).

Games are great, and it's not difficult to see how they have contributed to the rapid development of high-end hardware, but it's not the market that any of the major players are scrambling to control.

[TheNosh]

Games are great, and it's not difficult to see how they have contributed to the rapid development of high-end hardware, but it's not the market that any of the major players are scrambling to control.

From the hardware standpoint, ATI, Nvidia, Intel, and AMD aren't major players?

And one of the "major players" I'm sure you were talking about, let's not forget that Microsoft has the Xbox, and that their Games for Windows service tries to rival that Valve's Steam.

Microsoft sees gaming as worth investing effort in. Windows is the most widespread OS. While there is certainly more than one factor driving the world of computing, I do not take these two things as unrelated.