Amusingly noobish Brainstorm idea: End Ubuntu

[Luke has no name]

http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/10007/

Make hardy the last Ubuntu release ever and from then on work on merging remaining Ubuntu developers, changes, ideas, bugs, users etc back into Debian. Don't work on Ubuntu, just work Debian instead. There was no need to fork in the first place, please fix this. Canonical can make money Debian fine, they don't need a forked distro and forked community to make money.

This person understands nothing of the 'similar but different' goals, different software standards, etc. of the two distros. Or that Ubuntu doesn't necessarily rely on Canonical at all.

Rofl.

[YaroMan86]

http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/10007/

Make hardy the last Ubuntu release ever and from then on work on merging remaining Ubuntu developers, changes, ideas, bugs, users etc back into Debian. Don't work on Ubuntu, just work Debian instead. There was no need to fork in the first place, please fix this. Canonical can make money Debian fine, they don't need a forked distro and forked community to make money.

This person understands nothing of the 'similar but different' goals, different software standards, etc. of the two distros. Or that Ubuntu doesn't necessarily rely on Canonical at all.

Rofl.

What are the chances this post was made by a Debian fanboy? (Its no secret that hardcore Debian folks generally dislike Ubuntu for all around accompishing what Debian couldn't. Fill in the blank, Ubuntu is frequently referred to as "Debian with _________.")

[Luke has no name]

What are the chances this post was made by a Debian fanboy? (Its no secret that hardcore Debian folks generally dislike Ubuntu for all around accompishing what Debian couldn't. Fill in the blank, Ubuntu is frequently referred to as "Debian with _________.")

class?

Ubuntu is quite literally the child of Debian. It's younger, more modern, cutting edge, do-able (lol) but retains all the best (and worst) of the parent.

[YaroMan86]

That's probably the strongest benefit of the six month upgrade cycle. I think Debian almost had a vaporware release at one point. (Sarge, I believe.)

Not to say that Debian is lousy, but I thing Ubuntu is basically Debian but implemented better. It's been said that the Debian Project is in a small amount of trouble. And I bet some Debian developers like to blame the distro that pretty much perfected what Debian was going for, that being Ubuntu and derivatives.

Now I find myself saying "Debian for servers, Ubuntu for the desktop." And I'd likely not be far off the mark.

[Luke has no name]

I find myself saying "Ubuntu for the server, Ubuntu for the Desktop". the server team has been doing an amazing job, and they are truly dedicated to their work.

I wouldn't be surprised if Canonical backed Debian, should it come under real trouble. Since the Debian devs are the backbone of Ubuntu, It would be tough, if not impossible to keep Ubuntu at its current pace without Debian.

[kinematic]

Not to say that Debian is lousy, but I thing Ubuntu is basically Debian but implemented better.

If that's really what you think you've got a lot of learning to do.

[LaRoza]

Not to say that Debian is lousy, but I thing Ubuntu is basically Debian but implemented better. .

Ubuntu is based on non stable version of Debian, so the Debian stable uses older and more tested software. Try Debian Unstable for the modern software.

[original_jamingrit]

I can think of a few Debian users that would hate the idea of merging Ubuntu and Debian, as well.

[kk0sse54]

I can think of a few Debian users that would hate the idea of merging Ubuntu and Debian, as well.

:lolflag::lolflag::lolflag: try posting that suggestion on their forum

[yorkie]

How about going to the extreme merge all Linux variants into one united Distro simply named Linux.
Then maybe Hardware Manufactors will take notice, and support Linux as a viable O/S.

[madjr]

giving opinions on this is a waste of time.

inst there something better at brainstorm?

[the yawner]

How about going to the extreme merge all Linux variants into one united Distro simply named Linux.
Then maybe Hardware Manufactors will take notice, and support Linux as a viable O/S.

Singularity event eh?

[RiceMonster]

How about going to the extreme merge all Linux variants into one united Distro simply named Linux.
Then maybe Hardware Manufactors will take notice, and support Linux as a viable O/S.

How about not.

[MichaelSwengel]

http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/10007/

Make hardy the last Ubuntu release ever and from then on work on merging remaining Ubuntu developers, changes, ideas, bugs, users etc back into Debian. Don't work on Ubuntu, just work Debian instead. There was no need to fork in the first place, please fix this. Canonical can make money Debian fine, they don't need a forked distro and forked community to make money.

This person understands nothing of the 'similar but different' goals, different software standards, etc. of the two distros. Or that Ubuntu doesn't necessarily rely on Canonical at all.

Rofl.


*cough cough* $#$#@ no. The point of having many linux distros is to be different. We don't want what Debian has. If we did, we would use Debian. Ubuntu is made what it is by its community, it's look and feel, and the support we have - not to mention the philosophy to which Ubuntu is devoted. Not all distros have that background.

Besides...Debian isn't designed to be "Linux for Human Beings." It's just "Linux for."

[perce]

I think Debian almost had a vaporware release at one point. (Sarge, I believe.)


Yes and now: Sarge took three years to be released as stable, but it exited as testing. I used it in 2004, and it was more stable than Ubuntu is today (at least on my laptop). The only reasons why I switched were that documentation for Debian was very bad at that time, and that I found Ubuntu's brown theme relaxing for the eye.

[ghindo]

I find myself saying "Ubuntu for the server, Ubuntu for the Desktop". the server team has been doing an amazing job, and they are truly dedicated to their work.I can understand the advantages Ubuntu has over Debian when it comes to the desktop, but what advantages does Ubuntu have when it comes to the server? I'm not too well-educated on the subject, but it seems like there wouldn't be too many differences between the two.

[loell]

whats this thread all about? ;)

is it,

A. Bashing a brainstorm idea?
B. Bashing Debian?
C. an eventually yet another Ubuntu vs Debian subject?
D. All of the above?


and no there is no E that says none of the above because its got to be one or several of the four choices. :lolflag:

[Tundro Walker]

*cough cough* $#$#@ no. The point of having many linux distros is to be different.

Also, the side benefit is that it's a bit like natural evolution, too. Several variants experimenting with different things, until eventually the "best" (or several best, as the case usually is) beat the others out to become the de facto way to handle that problem / task. The "best practices" then get rolled into the other variants, making them better while they experiment with other things.

EG: Ubuntu came out with Wubi ... depending on how well that experiment goes, other Linux distros may pick up on the idea. Or, another distro may re-invent it in a better way.

I think this is what makes the Linux distro's better than Windows ... more people exploring & merging good ideas back into the genetic pool, so to speak, instead of one monolith company dictating the direction of evolution.

[MichaelSwengel]

until eventually the "best" (or several best, as the case usually is) beat the others out to become the de facto way to handle that problem / task. The "best practices" then get rolled into the other variants, making them better while they experiment with other things.

Exactly! Not everyone wants the same thing. In the pursuit of enhancing the user experience, problems are encountered and fixed. New protocols are created. New programs surface. The system is made more reliable. If we all used one distro of Linux, the drive to customize the interface would be an entirely different animal altogether. By appeasing the innate desire of Linux users to use and customize their software and be different, we are fueling the evolution of the next generation computing platform.

Plus, many new users wouldn't want to start with Debian and customize the OS. They wouldn't know how. They would rather pick a distro that starts off with the most of what they want - like Ubuntu.

THAT is why it will never happen. Ubuntu and Debian parted ways long ago. The child doesn't want to be the parent. The child must make a name for itself. It's name is Ubuntu.

[koenn]

Besides...Debian isn't designed to be "Linux for Human Beings." It's just "Linux for."
Well, no.
Debian is "Linux for everything, everywhere"
Ubuntu is, basically, a subset of Debian. Ubuntu could very well be called "Debian - Beginners Remix", or "Debian, Easy Desktop Edition"



Plus, many new users wouldn't want to start with Debian and customize the OS. They wouldn't know how. They would rather pick a distro that starts off with the most of what they want - like Ubuntu.

I recently did a Debian 4 default "Desktop environment" install. It installs through a 5 clicks GUI installer, and if it wasn't for Ubuntu's distinctive brown look, it would be hard to notice a difference between a Debian desktop system and an Ubuntu desktop system.
They only other difference is in the programs that are installed by default, but that's what synaptic is for ; even on Ubuntu, the first thing people learn is how to add software.

[tubezninja]

I really would like to know what the motive is behind this brainstorm. I mean, we can speculate, but the whole idea just seems horribly uninformed about what BOTH Debian and Ubuntu are about.

Also: I know I make a typo here and there, but doesn't ANYONE heed their browsers' spellcheck when brainstorming? :)

[MichaelSwengel]

I'm not saying it's difficult to use or install. That's not the issue. It may be one of the easiest, in fact. HOWEVER. That said, it is NOT Ubuntu and Ubuntu is not Debian. Each distro has elements to offer users that would lead to someone choosing one over the other. Begginers would not know how to customize a given distro to what he/she wants. Thus, he will choose that which is closest out-of-the-box.

I have nothing against Debian. I'm sure it's a fine OS with a good community. However, I prefer Ubuntu. And, of course, there are others with differing views.

We will never fully agree. The best we can do is agree to disagree respectfully. This is why we need separate distros.:guitar:

[init1]

What are the chances this post was made by a Debian fanboy? (Its no secret that hardcore Debian folks generally dislike Ubuntu for all around accompishing what Debian couldn't. Fill in the blank, Ubuntu is frequently referred to as "Debian with _________.")
I don't dislike Ubuntu because of any accomplishment, but because it crashes more often than Debian Etch does.

[MichaelSwengel]

it crashes more often than Debian Etch does.

What's your basis of comparison? I've been using Ubuntu for about 1 year now and have NEVER had a crash.

[Trail]

How about going to the extreme merge all Linux variants into one united Distro simply named Linux.
Then maybe Hardware Manufactors will take notice, and support Linux as a viable O/S.

No need, or in other words, that is already the situation.

The hardware manufacturers have to interface with the linux kernel, which is already universal. A driver written for a kernel version should work with all distros that use that kernel version.

[MichaelSwengel]

The hardware manufacturers have to interface with the linux kernel, which is already universal.

To quote "FPS Doug" (Youtube it up) ... "Boom! Headshot!"

Good call, Trail.