ubuntu evangelism

[sfw5000]

I just converted co-worker number two to ubuntu at home. this is a guy who, when i first told him about linux, said, "why would you ever want to do that?"... well, I handed him an ubuntu CD and told him absolutely nothing about linux or how to do anything. He went home and installed it on his 1Ghz AMD system and came in this morning just glowing and raving about how amazing it was. He's now going to dump Windows on his primary machine and try to get his wife using ubuntu as well. He ordered 4 CDs to give to his friends. Yeah!

I think it's a real testimate to Ubuntu that this guy not only knew NOTHING about linux, but was skeptical to start with, and he just popped the CD in, was up and running in 20 minutes, and says his machine is vastly better than it ever was under windows.

Sam

[zenwhen]

The "average Joe" computer user usually has no major attachments to any particular piece of proprietary software. This is because the "average Joe" doesn't care who made his software as long as it works. He knows who Microsoft is, and knows that nearly everyone uses their products.

Barring the "everyone uses it so I have to use it too" mentality, there shouldn't be much of a reason for Mr. Joe B. Average to stick with their Windows install once they see the tightly HIG compliant, highly efficient Gnome 2.8 desktop and OpenOffice.org productivity suite. Joe is going to be able to click a few buttons and set up his Inkjet printer.

Project Utopia, Gnome 2.8, and careful human interface compliance come together in Ubuntu to create an environment that smack Average Joe in the face, and makes him say "wow". Not "wow this is pretty", (though it is :)) but "wow this is useful".

That is the difference between Ubuntu and distros like Suse, Fedora, and LiveCD's like Knoppix. Ubuntu, and it live CD show you a desktop that is configured for productivity, not flash. Sure, you CAN rice out an Ubuntu install and butcher the Gnome desktop and replace it with KDE, or some other desktop. That is your CHOICE, and it is wonderful that you have it. But Joe is going to be dropped into Gnome 2.8. He isn't going to be scared away by 20 options in every menu. He is going to be given sane default settings, and will probably never change them unless he gets involved in customising his desktop.

If he does that, he may just realise the joys of Open Source. I think that is what we all want. I think that is what the software world needs.

Ubuntu Evangelism isn't even hard. My cousin is the absolute perfect example of the "average Joe". I pointed him to the Warty release torrent about a month ago, and he hasn't touched Windows since. I gave him a few pointers and now he struggles every day to avoid getting pulled into my world of nerdiness and Linux.

He will lose. MUAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[sfw5000]

I totally agree. A lot of people just use windows because that's what their computer comes with... Once they see the alternative they see that it is better. Ubuntu is the first distro I have seen, though, where you could just hand it to someone who has never heard anything about linux and boom! They can just use it. He never even looked at a command line. Linux enthusiasts will always want to dig deeper, but I definitely think that spreading linux as a desktop OS replacement for Windows, will require a simple user interface and a system where the console is optional.

[az]

I think people see open source software as a communist non-business hobby.

They don't seem to realise that there is big money to be made in the field. Canonical, for example, has a $100 000 budget for bounties (specific problem-solving) this year (or is it for the next release? - six months)

People, I guess, confuse free software with freeware. Free software has principles (gnu.org) while freeware always seems to have some catch (Opera web browser with included advertising, for example)

[zenwhen]

I was so interested in Ubuntu that I downloaded it for a week straight over my dialup connection. After that battle, I am quite proud of my Ubuntu install, and have a vested interest in the future of said OS.

Actually, I downloaded it twice. I downloaded the first preview release that had issues with dialup connections. Even that didn't hinder me. :mrgreen:

[jdodson]

I was so interested in Ubuntu that I downloaded it for a week straight over my dialup connection. After that battle, I am quite proud of my Ubuntu install, and have a vested interest in the future of said OS.

Actually, I downloaded it twice. I downloaded the first preview release that had issues with dialup connections. Even that didn't hinder me. :mrgreen:

wow thats hardcore. i downloaded mine at work and it took around 30 minutes. i love ubuntu, usually i install a zillion other distros to test them out, but i have stayed with this one for a month, which is a long time. i think ubuntu is easy and it does 'just work' for many needs of people. when you start adding things like cheap ass printers and hardware into the mix, things start getting messy though.

[zenwhen]

Well, my cheap-ass HP 656c worked OOB. :)

[HiddenWolf]

Great story, and I know it to be true. Had similar experiences myself. :-)

[jdodson]

Well, my cheap-ass HP 656c worked OOB. :)

HA, good point, then again my pc is cheap ass(last 4 years at a university using handme down computers which has worked out well actually). i am planning to build my next machine, which will be a rockin box. something like a AMD 64 3000+ish gig of ram, 150+g hd, etc, etc, etc. first nice computer i will ever own. finally i can edit video in an expedient manner :D

[dataw0lf]

Honestly, I'm not one of the many 'distribution roamers', ie the guys who wander aimlessly around looking for a distro. However, after much pondering, I decided to make the leap from Debian to Ubuntu after extensive testing on one of my older boxes. Now its inherited the coveted space on my workstation. :)
dataw0lf

[Magneto]

And remember if we can get children and those just starting out using computers to use Linux then the initiation will be significantly easier.
The flagship Microsoft home OS is 4 years old. Add a all-in-one entertainment package that includes all the media codecs + rythymbox or amarok + gmplayer + realplayer10 to Ubuntu and most windows users won't care about switching. BUT
when was the last time firefox crashed when you tried to view some video embedded in a page? Last time you couldnt see a webpage correctly?
Seemless interoperability is the main detractor for most moving to Linux and that will be overcome in the next 2-3 years.
Most people who aren't techies don't want to have to use wine/cedega or do a whole lot before playing a game.

[jwb]

I think people see open source software as a communist non-business hobby.

Wait- it's not?!?!

Oh, man....... do I have egg on my face. I was all ready for like, you know, a revolution, and all. Workers unite..... all that jazz.

Maybe just some socialist trappings? A Marxist leaning or two?

Dang...... gotta do something with these red flags and all...... maybe bullfighting! Yeah! That'd be cool!

:D

[zenwhen]

I think there's a line we need to be aware of.

Being useful to Windows users.
----LINE HERE----
Becoming Windows.

There comes a point where we need to consider the costs/benifits of pandering to Windows users who refuse to adapt even the slightest bit.

[TravisNewman]

Well it is communist, in its purest form. It's everybody writing software for everybody. The root word of communism is community. Communism as a government doesn't work well, however, as we've seen. That aside, as I've said before, my fiancee uses Ubuntu very happily, and she's always been terrified of Linux (though after seeing me compile for days on end in Genoo, who could blame her?) If a distro can do that, it's gotta be good ;)

[sfw5000]

I think there's a line we need to be aware of.

Being useful to Windows users.
----LINE HERE----
Becoming Windows.

There comes a point where we need to consider the costs/benifits of pandering to Windows users who refuse to adapt even the slightest bit.

I think it's more helping windows users realize that there is a choice. A viable choice other than the one option they see in any store they try to buy a computer at. I don't think anyone is suggesting actually trying to immitate windows, but just to help people realize that linux can be every bit as (if not much more so) easy to use as Windows.

[dataw0lf]

I think there's a line we need to be aware of.

Being useful to Windows users.
----LINE HERE----
Becoming Windows.

I think your analogy is a bit off here. I truly doubt if Linux will ever become Windows, simply because of the Open Source movement and licenses such as the GPL and the BSD. Windows is terrible, in a large part, because of the monoply Microsoft holds.
dataw0lf

[zenwhen]

I think your analogy is a bit off here. I truly doubt if Linux will ever become Windows, simply because of the Open Source movement and licenses such as the GPL and the BSD. Windows is terrible, in a large part, because of the monoply Microsoft holds.
dataw0lf

I think we just disagree on something here. Windows isn't just bad philosophically. It's bad period. It is insecure, has months old unfixed bugs, and is burdened by a burgeoning load of crapware choices.

My point is that software can be both OPEN and BAD. We need to avoid that. Moving towards Windows like ideas and software to mollycoddle Windows users is a bad idea.

Ubuntu/Linux should be easy to use. It should be easy to use in its own way.

Useful and Windows-like are not synonymous.

[jwb]

I think we just disagree on something here. Windows isn't just bad philosophically. It's bad period. It is insecure, has months old unfixed bugs, and is burdened by a burgeoning load of crapware choices.

My point is that software can be both OPEN and BAD. We need to avoid that. Moving towards Windows like ideas and software to mollycoddle Windows users is a bad idea.

Ubuntu/Linux should be easy to use. It should be easy to use in its own way.

Useful and Windows-like are not synonymous.

All true, to a degree.

However, don't overlook what makes Windows useful to so many people. Despite all the problems you outlined- all valid- it does make so many things very simple for lots of people.

Wouldn't want to see it becoming Windows..... but it wouldn't hurt to capitalize on the pluses that do exist in Windows from a user perspective.

Take for instance the file open dialogs. The Windows dialogs are actually pretty logical and useful. Gnome's still aren't quite there yet. The best I can asceretain, it's because no one wants it to be too Windows like. But if they happen to hit on the right solution- hey..... use it.

In other words- don't throw out the baby with the bath water.

[zenwhen]

I suppose I like the current bath water just fine and dont want to take a bath with Windows users if it means I have to change the water to suit them and not me.

Because they stink.

Wait, I mean I like Gnome's file open dialogs. #-o

[Magneto]

What made windows the dominant OS? Macs have a windowed GUI.
Price, availability/affordability of hardware that it could utilize and applications.

Linux is free.
Linux runs on any system a person will use in their home.
You can either run the winblows app of choice in Linux now or run an equivalent -most times free of charge.
Linux/GNU application development is a monumental jump in systems development and no capitalist enterprise will be able to stop the avalanche of open source

The bath water is crap like Redhat is currently doing.

The baby is the opensource ideology. Look at how Novell has jumped on board, and now they have a breath of life instead of waiting to die watching MS snatch marketshare. Look at Sun. Solaris 10 is free.

I honestly believe that as opensource computing goes on it will impact our society. The power of thousands of people reasoning is much better and efficient than the power of a few hundred 9-5 developers.

Take a good look this movement will change our world.

[TravisNewman]

The bath water is crap like Redhat is currently doing.
Indeed. That's at least part of the bath water. Monopolizing on Open Source, while allowed by the license, is just not very nice *L*
I think the die-hard open sourcers (most of us posting here, I'd imagine) realize this and won't support RedHat... I'm just afraid that new users are going to say "well it's backed by a corporation that's been around for a while, so it must be good!"



The baby is the opensource ideology. Look at how Novell has jumped on board, and now they have a breath of life instead of waiting to die watching MS snatch marketshare. Look at Sun. Solaris 10 is free.
I don't know exactly what happened here (on both counts). Novell now has Novell Linux Desktop right? But they also bought out SuSE as well, right? SuSE is kinda in the RedHat group, since you can't download cd images, and if you want it for free you basically have to download each package. I haven't bothered trying Novell Linux Desktop... how is it, as far as useability, power, and license?

Second, I know Solaris is now free, but is it free as in free beer and as in free speech?



I honestly believe that as opensource computing goes on it will impact our society. The power of thousands of people reasoning is much better and efficient than the power of a few hundred 9-5 developers.
That's the power of open source, really. The best applications will always come out of open source, for that and many other reasons.


Take a good look this movement will change our world.
This, I disagree with you. It already HAS changed the world.

[castrojo]

The bath water is crap like Redhat is currently doing.


Right. Like paying all those developers working on GNOME, the kernel, X, glibc, dbus, hal, etc. etc.

What crap. How dare they!

[jdodson]

Monopolizing on Open Source, while allowed by the license, is just not very nice *L*
I think the die-hard open sourcers (most of us posting here, I'd imagine) realize this and won't support RedHat...

i support redhat/fedora as they have done good things for the free software community. there is nothing wrong with shrinkwrapping free software and selling the support to go with it. i guess i just dont see any open source monopoly, we all have choices, companies dont have to go with redhat/fedora, there are plenty of other alternatives. comparing redhat to a monoply is a bit unwaranted as redhat doesnt have 97% of the linux server and esktop world.


SuSE is kinda in the RedHat group, since you can't download cd images, and if you want it for free you basically have to download each package. I haven't bothered trying Novell Linux Desktop...

redhat allows any person to download and use fedora and it has a 6 month release cycle. fedora is made from purely free software/open source components. if you want a more stable server os, you have to pay for RHES, however with free software there is a cool benifit. you can use projects like whitbox or centos that have built RHES from source for nothing! thats right, red hat enterprise linux for $0 with all the updates and patches from redhat recompiled by whitebox or centos straight to you for nothing. here again is the difference between microsoft and redhat, redhat continually gives back to the community, microsoft continually sucks the life from the community. as far as companies go, redhat isnt that bad, they are just currently the market leader or linux servers. however this is changing.

[Magneto]

the biggest changes have yet to come

[jdodson]

Right. Like paying all those developers working on GNOME, the kernel, X, glibc, dbus, hal, etc. etc.

What crap. How dare they!

i agree with your sarcasm, redhat does much to further the cause. we get all the perks of the work for $0, gotta love the GPL! 8-)

[zenwhen]

Though I will never again let NLD, Suse, RH, or FC touch my computer, I very much apreciate their contributions to the OSS community.

Keeping with the bathwater anaology... companies like RedHat, Novell, and Canonical (the one company doing it right as far as a desktop Linux distro goes) are the ones who pay the heating bill so we can heat the water. :D

[jdodson]

Though I will never again let NLD, Suse, RH, or FC touch my computer, I very much apreciate their contributions to the OSS community.

Keeping with the bathwater anaology... companies like RedHat, Novell, and Canonical (the one company doing it right as far as a desktop Linux distro goes) are the ones who pay the heating bill so we can heat the water. :D

for sure. by the way, what does NLD stand for?

[zenwhen]

NLD stands for Novell Linux Desktop (http://www.novell.com/products/desktop/?sourceidint=homepage_announcement1).

[jdodson]

NLD stands for Novell Linux Desktop (http://www.novell.com/products/desktop/?sourceidint=homepage_announcement1).

right, good ol copy of java desktop, which is just gnome stripped down and branded.

[zenwhen]

Its basically Suse with Gnome.

[TravisNewman]

OK yes, but Fedora is barely above beta. It's basically redhat's testbed. I think that redhat isn't a bad company necesarily but they've lost sight of what they started maybe... I understand the stable server/support argument, but you still have to pay for even the lowest product on the redhat tier. If it weren't for that, I wouldn't really have anything against them. I think that even Ubuntu should have a paid version, exactly the same as the version you download, but maybe with a few months free telephone tech support and a book, like what comes with Mandrake/RedHat and all those... It's a lot more convenient for some people to buy it, and a lot of people feel more comfortable with a manual, AND a lot of people feel more comfortable with a telephone tech than with a forum or mailing list. But if Ubuntu decided to buy up another distro/project and use them for their testbed, only releasing free versions through them, I would probably find a new distro.

[zenwhen]

I would assume that at some point Canonical plans to make a bit of cash for their contributions to OSS with Ubuntu. I won't blame them one bit.

If Ubuntu remains a great Gnome/Debian based distro with a one disk install on a six month release cycle, I don't think I will need to go anywhere. :)

[az]

"I would assume that at some point Canonical plans to make a bit of cash for their contributions to OSS with Ubuntu. I won't blame them one bit. "

Get real. Canonical is not a church. I am sure that was the plan from Warty release onward. Canonical is a business, not a group of feel-good hippies who can afford to spend months doing pro-bono work.

Every cd mailed is probably better publicity than Britney Spears doing pepsi adds. And I am sure that they are doing the math carefully to figure out what is the best investment for them with that.

This is not a bad thing. Making money is good (for business).

[zenwhen]

Did you even read my post? I said I supported it. What is your problem?

[jdodson]

"I would assume that at some point Canonical plans to make a bit of cash for their contributions to OSS with Ubuntu. I won't blame them one bit. "

Get real. Canonical is not a church. I am sure that was the plan from Warty release onward. Canonical is a business, not a group of feel-good hippies who can afford to spend months doing pro-bono work.

Every cd mailed is probably better publicity than Britney Spears doing pepsi adds. And I am sure that they are doing the math carefully to figure out what is the best investment for them with that.

This is not a bad thing. Making money is good (for business).

odd as daniels a ubuntu developer states quite clearly in many places they will never charge for ubuntu period.

however dont take my word on the matter:

http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2886

anyways, what is wrong if the ubuntu folk were hippies doing work for a $0 price tag? absolutely nothing. if you have some proof to show for your assertations about cannicial, please show it, as far as the website states, they "might" be charging for support. however that isnt even official as far as i can tell.

btw ubuntu has one of the coolest community philosophies around. from its inception it has been like a 'church' and so has the gnu/linux revolution. ever heard of the church of emacs :wink:

[adbak]

I've heard talk that Canonical won't be charging for Ubuntu, and I believe that, as that would kind of go against the spirit of ubuntu.

Don't forget the *illionaire Mark Shuttleworth is backing all this.

Huzzah!

[Magneto]

odd as daniels a ubuntu developer states quite clearly in many places they will never charge for ubuntu period.

however dont take my word on the matter:

http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2886

anyways, what is wrong if the ubuntu folk were hippies doing work for a $0 price tag? absolutely nothing. if you have some proof to show for your assertations about cannicial, please show it, as far as the website states, they "might" be charging for support. however that isnt even official as far as i can tell.

btw ubuntu has one of the coolest community philosophies around. from its inception it has been like a 'church' and so has the gnu/linux revolution. ever heard of the church of emacs :wink:
as long as they dont get on that church of dr bob crap like some folks with slackware
I'd probably be willing to pay a small fee for Ubuntu or Gentoo but not for any other distros.
With some time on the block Ubuntu will gain in paying(support) customers.

[Magneto]

I've heard talk that Canonical won't be charging for Ubuntu, and I believe that, as that would kind of go against the spirit of ubuntu.

Don't forget the *illionaire Mark Shuttleworth is backing all this.

Huzzah!
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/maintop1.jpg

[ashley_v]

Personally I prefer the less people that use Linux/Unix/BSD/etc the better. Can you imagine if everyone with a pc ran some form of Linux? Linux on every desktop, server, and every household.

Next generation compromises will happen in the mind and not inside your pc. Corporations will abuse it for their own success and the super elite will own a superhuman cluster of atomic brain waves that flood the net seeking out the weak!

All your brains will belong to us!

[mr_ed]

http://www.ubuntulinux.org/support/paidsupport/

Don't forget that they're offering paid support.

[TravisNewman]

Shuttleworth (from one article I've read, and Internet articles are always candidates for taking with a grain of salt) loved Linux and the Open Source movement and wanted to give back to it as much as possible. Granted, there have to be ways to make money, and I'm sure they will, and they should, but not at the expense of everyday users, I don't think,

[Magneto]

Although Shuttleworth's site does promote business, it seems to be done with a philanthropic slant. That is a different perspective than other companies in "business" and probably due to the fact verisign gave him more money than he can spend.

Have you guys ever seen a distro come out with this much popularity? Although the case could be made that this is only packaging of Debian's popular OS. But I have used Debian and it's the packaging and philosophy that Ubuntu is projecting that has me using it, otherwise I'd still be using Slackware (I still use it but not as much as I had been).

[jdodson]

http://www.ubuntulinux.org/support/paidsupport/

Don't forget that they're offering paid support.

i just saw this today too, last time i checked, this was not the case. however that was a few weeks ago, ubuntu being so new is changing rapidly, hard to keep up. however, the mainline fact, ubuntu will always be free of cost for anyone.

[TravisNewman]

They were offering paid support when I found out about Ubuntu (wish I could remember exactly when that was, but it was at least 3 weeks - 1 month ago)

[jdodson]

They were offering paid support when I found out about Ubuntu (wish I could remember exactly when that was, but it was at least 3 weeks - 1 month ago)

hmmm strange, when i checked the site which could have been more than a month ago, they said they were ironing out the details, but a third party was offering support? oh well, thats old hat now anyway.

[Magneto]

hmmm strange, when i checked the site which could have been more than a month ago, they said they were ironing out the details, but a third party was offering support? oh well, thats old hat now anyway.
When I first started using Ubuntu the only mention of money was if you wanted support through Canonical or other support providers- there wasnt any others at the time.


Absolutely Free of Charge

Ubuntu is Free Software, and available to you free of charge. It's also Free in the sense of giving you rights of Software Freedom, but you probably knew that already! Unlike many of the other commercial distributions in the Linux world (Libranet, Lindows, Xandros, Red Hat) the Ubuntu team really does believe that Free software should be free of software licencing charges.

im downloading we invented rap :)