Ubuntu is hopeless

[Mike'sHardLinux]

SeePu, I would be very curious to know what distro you end up with! Good luck! I think it is fun trying out other distros.

[Lemmy's Wart]

Okay, I give up, finally. I'm throwing in the towel. I am switching to a different distro on a permanent basis.

I watched a video in which it was outlined how little Ubuntu contributes to Linux, especially the kernel. Also, very little to xorg. Ha, partly explains why Ubuntu is the worst distro for using an older laptop and older ati card.

There's a zillion threads of 'how to's' or people posting what to do so that they can use the full extent of their older Radeon card. But, it's so convoluted and sporadic, it's unreadable. You guys really need to get some people who can figure out which 'solution' works and apply it to confirm. Then make or contribute to a sticky. Else, it's just a bunch of random garbage everywhere that will waste people's time. This lack of organization and apathy is what Ubuntu is all about as far as I'm concerned.

Yeah, my perspective is negative but I think it's well justified and I have tried various 'fixe's, submitted bug reports but this was all just wasted time. I can find other noob distros or I can just figure I need to read a bit more and dig a bit for a fix in Debian or use Fedora, Mandriva which will have much better results. I've had a much richer or promising experience with their live Cds.

Ubuntu prides itself on being a desktop linux distro that can introduce ******* users to Linux. That's well and dandy but that seems all they care about. Canonical and Ubuntu seem determined to just use all their resources on marketing and the basic desktop. As long as it works on brand new spanking hardare, they are satisfied. There is no contribution or resources used to further develop Linux in general or support older hardware. They leave problems and issues to the rest of the community to 'fix.' I don't believe in this and I find it to be neglectful and an attitude of apathy and indifference.

Ubuntu is good for an intro to Linux and nothing more, imho.

You need Windows 7 my friend, all here will swear by it's miraculous healing qualities. Once you adopt Windows 7 your life will never be the same.

Did I forget to mention (cue massive fanfare) Windows 8, more of the same with a higher asking price. How could you go wrong? Windows 7 is mediocrity by comparison.

I was on the phone to Bill Gates this morning and he assured me that Windows 9 will be the one. The one what he never elaborated upon. But I am assured it shows promise.gl

[danbuter]

Why the hell does everyone think a distro should be contributing to the kernel or x.org, or it isn't doing anything and shouldn't be supported? That's not a distribution's job. Ubuntu packages up a lot of good programs, and makes them easy to use. It also has done a LOT of work in marketing, especially with Dell. And I'm pretty damn sure Ubuntu has submitted lots of patches to programs other than the kernel. But I guess those don't count.

[danbuter]

Some of us may consider it a hindrance because for the most part it attracts people GNU/Linux are better off without (notably those who don't realise that it takes some work)

So you're saying only nerds should use linux, because it proves you're in the nerd elite?

[howefield]

So you're saying only nerds should use linux, because it proves you're in the nerd elite?

C'mon on down.

Since when did knowing something might need some work make you a nerd ?

You are extrapolating more than you should from his words. imho.

[SteveHillier]

ubuntu does suck, manufacturers need to release linux drivers, a bunch of nerds programming in their spare time will never be able to fix everything that doesn't work in this OS. mark shuttleworth (the god who founded ubuntu) needs to step it up and apply pressure to the big companies to support the linux movement and to stop sleeping with microsoft.

So Ubuntu sucks does it. Why, because manufacturers don't create the drivers. I think there is some whacky logic in this post.

[toupeiro]

I'll never understand stances like this OP. I run RHEL at work doing very demanding tasks. Truthfully, there is nothing specific to RHEL about those tasks, I could do them on ubuntu just fine. When I am at home, I duplicate many things I do at work in ubuntu. So, this argument never floats with me. the biggest technical differences between the linux versions are package delivery and cosmetics. If its GNU/Linux under the hood, its GNU/Linux under the hood. Your ATi drivers are going to suck across the board because all the distro's are either using the same open source drivers, or you're using the same proprietary driver in ubuntu that you will in Fedora, SuSE, Debian, or whatever you try to run from here...

[hoppipolla]

As soon as I see the commercial world rival KDE, Bash, apt-get, Amarok, Compiz, the Linux kernel, Apache, the choice of free software and GUIs and stuff I have on here etc etc... I'll be one step closer to admitting Linux/Ubuntu sucks! xD

[Dullstar]

Speaking of Win7, I counted Windows versions.

1 - Windows 1
2 - Windows 2
3 - Windows 3.1
4 - Windows 95
5 - Windows 98
6 - Windows 2000
7 - Windows ME
8 - Windows XP
9 - Windows Vista
10 - Windows 7

Ironically, the seventh Windows version happens to be ME. Windows 7 is actually Windows 10.

[Tipped OuT]

Speaking of Win7, I counted Windows versions.

1 - Windows 1
2 - Windows 2
3 - Windows 3.1
4 - Windows 95
5 - Windows 98
6 - Windows 2000
7 - Windows ME
8 - Windows XP
9 - Windows Vista
10 - Windows 7

Windows 1
Windows 2
Windows 3 (and Windows NT)
Windows NT 4
Windows 2000
Windows Vista
Windows 7

The kernel for XP, Vista and 7 are written off of the NT kernel. 2000 and XP are a similar kernel (you can call them the same for all intents and purposes). The Windows 9x family (95, 98, 98se, ME) are not written from the NT kernel. When ME died, so did the 9x kernel.

So now, rather than having a home OS line (9x) and a business OS line (NT), we just have XP Home and Pro, Vista (home versions) and Business, and now we have Windows 7.