PDA

View Full Version : Why Ubuntu never uses the word Linux ?



dempl_dempl
May 1st, 2008, 02:44 PM
Hi,

I believe we've all noticed that.
On every CD cover, Startup-splash, on that small image on top of this forum, you can't see that Ubuntu is Linux.

Of course, Ubuntu is not the only one. Most of Linux distros don't show they're actually linux distros :) .

What I've seen so far, only Slackware shows Loading Linux logo, and not anything like "loading Slackware" .

What do you think about it?

Cheers!

seatex
May 1st, 2008, 02:50 PM
I wouldn't agree that they don't use the word "Linux".

When I click on System, About Ubuntu, the fourth sentence is, "Ubuntu is an entirely open source operating system built around the Linux kernel."

dempl_dempl
May 1st, 2008, 02:55 PM
Have you seen the CD cover?
Just look at the upper-left Logo on this forum.
During startup, do you see Loading Linux 2.6.12 , or Ubuntu ?

Sporkman
May 1st, 2008, 02:55 PM
Hi,

I believe we've all noticed that.
On every CD cover, Startup-splash, on that small image on top of this forum, you can't see that Ubuntu is Linux.

Of course, Ubuntu is not the only one. Most of Linux distros don't show they're actually linux distros :) .

What I've seen so far, only Slackware shows Loading Linux logo, and not anything like "loading Slackware" .

What do you think about it?

Cheers!

Are they really "linux", or are they "open source operating systems that happen to use the linux kernel", hmm??

Wrap your mind around that. :)

seatex
May 1st, 2008, 02:58 PM
Have you seen the CD cover?
Just look at the upper-left Logo on this forum.
During startup, do you see Loading Linux 2.6.12 , or Ubuntu ?

I've always downloaded - never seen the CD cover firsthand. It probably should be mentioned on the CD cover though.

original_jamingrit
May 1st, 2008, 02:58 PM
They probably want to avoid having to choose between calling it Linux and GNU/Linux (http://www.gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html). If they called it one or the other, some people might complain.

The concept of what a OS is really depends on your perspective.

dempl_dempl
May 1st, 2008, 03:00 PM
Are they really "linux", or are they "open source operating systems that happen to use the linux kernel", hmm??

Wrap your mind around that. :)

Kernel is the most important part of the system. And the largest one .

Ubuntu is a collection of programs.

Ubuntu wouldn't be as half as user friendly if it was "wrapped around" some other kernel :) .

Anyway, it doesn't matter. Ubuntu is Linux Distro , and it should make it clear bit more often :)

Xanatos Craven
May 1st, 2008, 03:08 PM
Because constantly having to say that something is made up of so and so parts just to keep authors and fans of said parts from getting butthurt is irritating. Ubuntu is Ubuntu, not Ubuntu GNU/Linux/GNOME/Firefox/etc.

days_of_ruin
May 1st, 2008, 03:10 PM
Kernel is the most important part of the system. And the largest one .

Ubuntu is a collection of programs.

Ubuntu wouldn't be as half as user friendly if it was "wrapped around" some other kernel :) .

Anyway, it doesn't matter. Ubuntu is Linux Distro , and it should make it clear bit more often :)

I don't see what the kernel has to do with user-friendly.
As long as the computer doesn't crash it can be as user-friendly as possible.

picpak
May 1st, 2008, 03:21 PM
Front page of ubuntu.com:


Ubuntu is a community developed, Linux-based operating system that is perfect for laptops, desktops and servers. It contains all the applications you need - a web browser, presentation, document and spreadsheet software, instant messaging and much more.

SuperSon!c
May 1st, 2008, 03:24 PM
well, you have to admit, just the word "linux" either scares people or they look at you like O_o so not over-advertising that it's linux-based is probably on purpose to ease those sort of folks into their new OS.

nrs
May 1st, 2008, 03:26 PM
Kernel is the most important part of the system. And the largest one.

OpenOffice.org alone is probably twice the size of the Linux kernel. What good is a kernel on its own? (What good is userland on its own?)

Sporkman
May 1st, 2008, 03:28 PM
Kernel is the most important part of the system. And the largest one .

Ubuntu is a collection of programs.

Ubuntu wouldn't be as half as user friendly if it was "wrapped around" some other kernel :) .

Anyway, it doesn't matter. Ubuntu is Linux Distro , and it should make it clear bit more often :)

The kernel is important, but it doesn't necessarily make the system.

For example, would you consider Debian "linux"? Well then:

http://www.us.debian.org/ports/#nonlinux

;)

notwen
May 1st, 2008, 03:37 PM
Ubuntu - Linux for Human Beings

BigSilly
May 1st, 2008, 03:58 PM
Ubuntu - Linux for Human Beings

I was just going to add this myself. It's all over the CD when you get one from Shipit, and even the home page is listed by default as "Ubuntu - Linux for Human Beings". Well, it is in my bookmarks anyway. :D

It's pretty clear from the outset that Ubuntu is Linux. I don't think you can accuse them of any fudgery anywhere.

Sporkman
May 1st, 2008, 04:25 PM
I don't think you can accuse them of any fudgery anywhere.

...'cause we don't cotton to fudgery round here!

BomjKolyadun
May 1st, 2008, 05:10 PM
Linux kernel is a little part of all system. Yes, it is necessary, but Ubuntu could be made with other kernel, like GNU Hurd(when it will be done of course), but with not Linux kernel it would be Ubuntu like before, because for user in general not necessary what kernel used in OS.

swoll1980
May 1st, 2008, 05:24 PM
Ubuntu - Linux for Human Beings

I can't believe it took till the 2nd page for someone to add that

egwest
May 1st, 2008, 05:41 PM
'Ubuntu-linux for human beings'

It is also on the stickers that come with it, the nice pretty stickers, one of which I put on the case of my notebook computer!

heartburnkid
May 1st, 2008, 05:55 PM
Why does Mac OS X never say anything about Mach?

Why does Windows Vista never say anything about NT?

If you ask me, Ubuntu and the other Linux distros are significantly more open about their kernel than other OS's. The information's there; they don't need to beat you about the head and shoulders with it.

ezsit
May 1st, 2008, 06:50 PM
Are they really "linux", or are they "open source operating systems that happen to use the linux kernel", hmm??

Wrap your mind around that.

Linux IS the kernel, end of story. All Linux distributions are the Linux kernel plus open source software. The rest of the distribution IS open source software, but not Linux.

k99goran
May 1st, 2008, 07:26 PM
Kernel is the most important part of the system. And the largest one.
I drive a Ford carburetor car.

Ubuntu is a collection of programs.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. Ubuntu is Linux Distro , and it should make it clear bit more often :)
I don't think that Ubuntu will ever compete with Windows or OS-X if it's considered just a "collection of programs" or just another distribution of Linux. I think that it needs to (and to a good degree has) grow out of being just another Linux distribution and become an operating system in it's own right.

swoll1980
May 1st, 2008, 07:31 PM
Linux kernel is a little part of all system. Yes, it is necessary, but Ubuntu could be made with other kernel, like GNU Hurd(when it will be done of course), but with not Linux kernel it would be Ubuntu like before, because for user in general not necessary what kernel used in OS.

Now you sound like a Richard Stallman interview

Murrquan
May 1st, 2008, 08:03 PM
I think calling Ubuntu "Linux" is both incomplete and dishonest. It doesn't tell you what it really is, and it starts all kinds of incorrect assumptions forming in people's minds.

Ubuntu is "a Linux-based operating system." It's not Fedora, Slackware, or what-have-you. It's Ubuntu. And I don't know about you, but I'm not trying to get my friends and family to use Linux. I'm trying to get them to use Ubuntu. Because I know how to support it, I know how it works, and I know that it was designed for nontechnical users.

Moreover, the word Ubuntu means something. And we might do well to be reminded of that sometimes.


* * *

Calling it GNU/Linux is like calling yourself "Pancreas / Me."

Even if you don't think so, even if you look at it in the most positive light -- in a way that's respectful to Mr. Stallman and the GNU project -- it's sort of like people in Scandinavian history, who call themselves "Name Dadsson" or something. Where their surname is derived from their male parent. You have your parent's genes as sure as a Linux distro has GNU code.

There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but think about it. Do you refer to yourself by both first and last name in casual conversation? Do you refer to anyone else like that, routinely?


* * *

People who hear you say "I use Ubuntu" and want to know more don't need to be educated on the history of the free software movement. All they need to know at first is that it's fast, it's free, and it's awesome. The rest can come later.

Tiede
May 1st, 2008, 08:10 PM
hmm... I thought ubuntu's motto was:
"Linux for human beings"?
Was I wrong?
And I think it's pretty clear to everyone since the intaller says so... So did the hoary hedgehog cd I got in the mail 2 and 1/2 years ago... Oh, the wonderful memories!

MongooseCage
May 1st, 2008, 08:11 PM
Isn't Linux just the kernel? Kinda like DOS or something?

dempl_dempl
May 1st, 2008, 09:10 PM
I don't see what the kernel has to do with user-friendly.
As long as the computer doesn't crash it can be as user-friendly as possible.

Module Hot-plug, HAL , separation of X from kernel etc. etc. Making fancy interface around it is easier part.

dempl_dempl
May 1st, 2008, 09:20 PM
OpenOffice.org alone is probably twice the size of the Linux kernel. What good is a kernel on its own? (What good is userland on its own?)

Kernel is the brain.
OpenOffice are the arms.

HAL or Memory management have, perhaps , the same amount of code as, say,
WYSIWYG editor , but it has a lot more theory behind it.

Average Kernel writer is by far better programmer than average
Open Office Writer ( hi hi, I meant the programmer, not the program :) ).
You can find a guy writing for Open Office anywhere [ ok , not on the street :) ] . Kernel ( and any core programmers ) are far more hard to find.

vexorian
May 1st, 2008, 09:20 PM
Kernel is the most important part of the system. And the largest one .
I hope not, it is actually the smallest one.

Sure it is important, but with just the kernel ubuntu would be a command line OS? Err, sorry I forgot, bash is not part of Linux either. Ubuntu uses the word Linux every once in a while, I think the deal is that it doesn't insist in making you believe it is Linux.


Have you seen the CD cover?
Just look at the upper-left Logo on this forum.
It would be utterly lame to put the word Linux in any of those places.

spamzilla
May 1st, 2008, 09:20 PM
Linux IS the kernel, end of story. All Linux distributions are the Linux kernel plus open source software. The rest of the distribution IS open source software, but not Linux.

DING DING DING we have a winner!

I was going to say more or less the same thing, but instead I'll just quote a decent post for emphasis :)

dempl_dempl
May 1st, 2008, 09:23 PM
Isn't Linux just the kernel? Kinda like DOS or something?

Nope. DOS is not just a kernel.

I don't want to go into details, but let's say that kernel + BASH are something like DOS,
although that's not completely true, but let's say it's near enough for analogy :)