Ubuntu: 1/3 of Installs, Upgrades Result in Fail?

[RiceMonster]

I wonder how much MicroSloft is paying him.



-Yos

Do you honestly believe "MicroSloft" is paying some guy to write a blog? Scroll down and look at some of the other blog posts and it makes your conspiracy theory look even more ridiculous.

[Dougie187]

Looks like the spreadsheet came from here. The author simply copied the columns at the end.

If it really did come from here, the author must have missed the disclaimer at the top.

[YosefKaro]

I left a comment there but will see if this guy will allow it on his blog; I also used the 'contact me' at the left to send him an email.

-Yos

[clanky]

How on earth could this writer even possibly come up with such statistics? Especially since every one ubuntu CD can be used to install ubuntu on numerous computers. What a bogus article this is. Have a look for yourselves here

-Yos

That one CD could install an OS which works on one PC, but not on another, I guess it depends on your definition of fail (i Don't have time to read the article) if you mean that it doesn't work flawlessly without further fixes then 30% is probably right, if you mean that it is fundamentally flawed then it sounds very high.

[Dragonbite]

So where are his numbers for the other distributions and how often they fail?

Without a comparison, the whole value of the data becomes moot. Doesn't matter if he tries smoothing it over with an account for Fedora and openSUSE's failures.

[toupeiro]

*shrug*

I have a machine that I've upgraded on every release since 6.10 and its still running. Yes, a few things have broke (httpd.conf, postgres and mysql configs) from time to time but nothing that I would say was a dramatic show-stopper. I couldn't dream of upgrading a windows machine and getting the same success rate.

[ZankerH]

How is it that the overwhelming majority of the people complaining about poor install/upgrade results are completely new users clueless about GNU/Linux, while most of everyone who has the slightest clue about what's happening in their system has had a mostly flawless upgrade?

[mivo]

How is it that the overwhelming majority of the people complaining about poor install/upgrade results are completely new users clueless about GNU/Linux, while most of everyone who has the slightest clue about what's happening in their system has had a mostly flawless upgrade?

Because they don't use the "upgrade" button and just do a fresh install. Beginners and "just users" do. Also, more experienced people have a separate /home partition, so doing fresh installs isn't a huge issue. However, the Ubuntu installer does not create a separate /home partition, and most people who are new to Linux will not use the option to manually partition the disk (they don't know how to and the installer offers no information about it or explains the advantages).

It's one of my gripes with Ubuntu, by the way. That is, the combination of the unreliable (broken) upgrade feature paired with no option to use a pre-defined partitioning layout. It could be something simple like this:

a) Use the entire disk and create one large partition.
b) Use 12 GB for the core system and the rest of the disk for your personal files.
c) Use the partitioner for manually setting up partitions ("?" for more information)

Seems simple enough.

[ZankerH]

Seems simple enough.

Reading the documentation before you install an operating system you've never used before seems simple enough.

[mivo]

Reading the documentation before you install an operating system you've never used before seems simple enough.

Link me to something on the official Ubuntu site that is compact, covers the basics and is comparable to Arch's Beginner Guide in one, easy-to-read-and-understand document. And, if there is such a link, is it prominently featured on the download page?

That aside, the audience that Ubuntu wants to appeal to is not IT experts and people used to having to read technical documentation before installing an OS. They are mostly people who are used to either purchasing a computer with a pre-installed OS or to just having to insert a CD/DVD.

The Ubuntu installer also contains no recommendation to first read up on the OS. Not even the partitioner includes any links.

If the distro wants to appeal to (and be successful with) a larger number of desktop users, basic stuff like this needs to be covered.