Has Ubuntu lost it's Ubuntu?

[3rdalbum]

ok, but what is with the people do not want or can not buy such hardware? the question was lost ubuntu its ubuntu
is it useabe for cheaper hardware, too; is it possible to use it without wasting energy?

Ubuntu 13.04 works well on my netbook - 1.6 GHz single-core Atom with 1GB Ram and slow Intel graphics. Ubuntu has never been a lightweight distro for old computers. People used to claim it was, but it NEVER was.

[clearblue]

yes, ubuntu is called to be good for old hardware and it is/was better than others that use KDE.

With my 2D-onboard its hard to use unity, switching to this overview-screen is one of the worst. But it could be i overdraw, cause i really dislike unity.

[Maverick Meerkat]

I have found your Ubuntu.
There is a music video for the Ubuntu 10.10 UDS that has a great feel.
I actually downloaded the OGG file listed in the description and play it anytime I need some "Ubuntu".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_75rGr5vENs

I'm sending this from my phone, so I hope the link works.

I think of this video as the Ubuntu Anthem.
I get a good feeling each time I watch it.
One of the parts I get the biggest charge from, is seeing the groups of Ubuntu users with their Ubuntu banners.
I also enjoy seeing the old circle of friends, people hand in hand.
Maybe it's just me.

I love Ubuntu and the work everyone has done to make it usable by someone like me, who's not really all that computer literate.

You are Ubuntu.

[alexfish]

Hi all ,

if all read present statitics ,as in disto's , as a kernel + the bits which we get free , most on based on ???..

then posible Canonical have leading edge as in vision , suppose younger generations do not understand what this means ..

In simple terms Freedom to use Technology , as in in days long ago .. nothing has really changed , Exception been Greed..

Contribute back which is given free has more rewards than having to pay for something U had had already done....

make that stance and stick together .

Ubuntu has given this Slot ...

I speak from past to present .. time to get things right for which in past has been all of wrong , as regards the between 'Stagnated' . move foward + use your instinct, we are born with it . and it does not cost.. Think about it..

BR

Alex

[1clue]

The result would be chinese make their own thing - they can not use our software and we can not use the chinese one

No, they're using the same software we are for the most part. They're fixing problems with internationalization, and they're compiling the software to fit what's common in China.

You can take whatever piece of hardware you want, download something like Gentoo, compile your kernel for your specific hardware and install your specific software on it and nothing else if you want. I have on several boxes. It's still all the same software, it's just compiled to my spec and has the features I want.

ok, but what is with the people do not want or can not buy such hardware? the question was lost ubuntu its ubuntu
is it useabe for cheaper hardware, too; is it possible to use it without wasting energy?

You really don't get it? Don't install that part. Don't put in fancy hardware or fancy drivers, don't install the extra glitzy parts. It doesn't cost extra money to try something else.

My whole point is that there are dozens or even hundreds of distributions out there, some of which are not listed because they don't have enough of a following. There are literally dozens of unofficial Ubuntu variants.

Some of the Ubuntu variants are specifically designed for lightweight hardware. Go install one of those if you have lightweight hardware. Why complain if one of them is aimed at people with expensive computers? It's all the same software repository.

To be frank about it, you can probably install almost all that heavyweight software on a minimal system, it will just run slower.

Affirmative
so it fits all ;confused

Each variant of Ubuntu, for example, is a starting point. Each variant has a written list of priorities for that variant. If I want a 'heavier' starting point I choose a variant with the same stated priorities that match my desires. If you want a 'lighter' starting point then you can choose a different starting point. It's called picking a distro.

every Distro needs a lot of work - thats why it would work much better if there is less

That's like saying no car is perfect, that's why it would work much better if everyone drove the same exact model. It might theoretically be true, but that's not how the world works.

Linux for itself is exotic. We could discuss a lot more about cars or for example the campatibility of suzuki motorbikes.

How is Linux exotic? I would call it grass roots, which is just about as un-exotic as you can get.

[1clue]

yes, ubuntu is called to be good for old hardware and it is/was better than others that use KDE.

With my 2D-onboard its hard to use unity, switching to this overview-screen is one of the worst. But it could be i overdraw, cause i really dislike unity.

I hate to disagree, but the first version of Ubuntu came out with gnome-desktop. I remember what gnome-desktop was like when it came out. I wasn't using Ubuntu at the time, but I tried gnome desktop on my not-too-incredibly-old hardware at the time. It was slow to the point of being not much fun anymore.

Mainstream Ubuntu has been for recent hardware. Other variants have come around to support lightweight and older hardware. Look on the about-ubuntu page.

http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu

[tjeremiah]

I would like to see what becomes of Unity 8 on a desktop.

[clearblue]

No, they're using the same software we are for the most part. They're fixing problems with internationalization, and they're compiling the software to fit what's common in China.

And? What did i say about the result of this.

You can take whatever piece of hardware you want, download something like Gentoo, compile your kernel for your specific hardware and install your specific software on it and nothing else if you want. I have on several boxes. It's still all the same software, it's just compiled to my spec and has the features I want.

What has this to do with ubuntu?

You really don't get it? Don't install that part. Don't put in fancy hardware or fancy drivers, don't install the extra glitzy parts.

You are the only one who don't get it.

It doesn't cost extra money to try something else.

It costs. time ...

There are literally dozens of unofficial Ubuntu variants.
Some of the Ubuntu variants are specifically designed for lightweight hardware. Go install one of those if you have lightweight hardware. Why complain if one of them is aimed at people with expensive computers?

Try and error, if even 0815 is buggy ...

It's all the same software repository.

Thats really a nice thing.

To be frank about it, you can probably install almost all that heavyweight software on a minimal system, it will just run slower.

No, thats not so easy. The desktop-concept doesn't make sense | it doesn't work at all | lack of RAM | power-consumption | connection to small (this is actually not only an issue of oversized software, but makes it worse - ubuntu, like much other distros, consumes to much bandwith | ...

There is no voodoo needed to provide a good desktop, even on very low hardware. There really should be a choice for the user to easily switch to a oldstyle desktop. Lot of people with fast hardware would like to get ultrafst too.

Each variant of Ubuntu, for example, is a starting point. Each variant has a written list of priorities for that variant. If I want a 'heavier' starting point I choose a variant with the same stated priorities that match my desires. If you want a 'lighter' starting point then you can choose a different starting point. It's called picking a distro.

This doesn't work.
- When i do a update of a LTS and i become a other desktop, totally different, > i can chose nothing. (there is, atleast now, possibility to get old behaviour back - but a switch is still missing in 1204lts)
- Only one variant is supported best by carnonicial, and even that is far away from perfect
- It is a lot of work to chose the best variant and software. Everything needs other config. User need extra knowledge.

That's like saying no car is perfect, that's why it would work much better if everyone drove the same exact model. It might theoretically be true,

That is extreme. You know i didn't mean and wrote less not one. Not a distribution for every country, every gender, every for less 1 year old hardware.

If someone in the last corner of africa can help the distro i use, i want him to be able to do so!

That is what i thought when i dicovered the word ubuntu and that circle of friends.

[1clue]

And? What did i say about the result of this.

Don't mean to get personal at all, but this could be interpreted that way: What YOU said has nothing to do with it. What matters are the license terms on the software. There are explicit clauses in the license saying that anyone at all can take the software, modify it, and either submit those modifications back into the original repository or keep them separate and offer a new product, so long as the software remains free. There is absolutely nothing that says what all the software needs to come from the same place, and in fact there are carefully crafted points which ensure that no such requirement can ever be put in, and that it always remain free under the terms of each license used.

You need to spend some time reading Open Source license agreements. It's not hard to understand, but it's the DNA of all free software.

What has this to do with ubuntu?

Nothing, and everything. Ultimately, Canonical did exactly that, starting with Debian in order to get Ubuntu. Canonical does not own very much of what you call Ubuntu. If you actually understand the process then maybe you won't make outrageous demands like that everything come from one place.

You are the only one who don't get it.

Seriously, you're the one who doesn't get it. This isn't a monarchy. Anyone can create their own distro, but in order for it to be large enough to be listed in any of the lists you might find on the net, it has to have a significant number of people contributing to it, and even more people using it.

If everyone were using exactly the same brain, and if everyone were using minimal hardware, and nobody liked the desktop concept, then MAYBE you might be right. But there's all sorts of hardware that runs a Linux kernel, from a Raspberry Pi to an IBM mainframe, to clustered supercomputers you find on top500.org. Each of the 7 billion or so humans on the planet has his or her own brain, and they all work a little different. You're going to tell them there should only be one distro?

You're raging at the nature of Open Source. That is an utter waste of time. If you don't like how it works, then perhaps Ubuntu is not the place you should spend your time. I think you should figure this out. It's worth knowing, and it will either help you get your system working the way you hope, or it will help you alter your expectations to something more achievable.

It costs. time ...

So? It costs time to pick the smart phone you buy too, do you complain about that? Do you just go to the car lot and buy a car without looking at all the options? In what way is computer software different?

Try and error, if even 0815 is buggy ...

You evidently could stand to figure out product life cycles work too, and how software teams decide which bugs get fixed and which ones don't.
EVERY software team has a list of known bugs. When they figure out what causes it, they decide when/how/if to fix it. I don't know the specifics about the bug you're talking about, but you could probably go search the bug tracker and find out if they intend to fix it, or if there's a work-around. This might make your life a lot better.

No, thats not so easy. The desktop-concept doesn't make sense | it doesn't work at all | lack of RAM | power-consumption | connection to small (this is actually not only an issue of oversized software, but makes it worse - ubuntu, like much other distros, consumes to much bandwith | ...

There is no voodoo needed to provide a good desktop, even on very low hardware. There really should be a choice for the user to easily switch to a oldstyle desktop. Lot of people with fast hardware would like to get ultrafst too.

So your personal requirements have changed, OR you originally picked the wrong distro, and you expect the distro that you chose to change to fit your requirements, even if it has been aimed at desktop systems since day one. Is that it? Because according to the documentation right on ubuntu.com, the main variant (Ubuntu) has always been aimed at mainstream full-featured hardware.

This doesn't work.
- When i do a update of a LTS and i become a other desktop, totally different, > i can chose nothing. (there is, atleast now, possibility to get old behaviour back
- but a switch is still missing in 1204lts)
- Only one variant is supported best by carnonicial, and even that is far away from perfect
- It is a lot of work to chose the best variant and software. Everything needs other config. User need extra knowledge.

It works fine, and has worked for well over a decade in my experience.

You've encountered a bug that affects you. Maybe you should start a thread, if you haven't already, with the details of your problem. Normally speaking, you can install anything you want, and remove stuff you don't like.

One variant: Not true at all, and who says it has to be Canonical anyway? Each variant is by definition a moving target and therefore cannot possibly be perfect. Also each user has specific ideas about how they want things, and no distribution is likely to ever exactly match that opinion.

Yes, it's a lot of work to choose the best variant. It starts with browsing web sites, then picking a few and boot off the iso image. If that works well for you, you might choose to install it in a VM so you can test drive it, or maybe even right on your hardware.

Linux in general, and this includes Ubuntu, is for people who like to mess with computers. As easy as Ubuntu is, it's still more complicated to manage than a Mac. A Mac has exactly one choice, and it's designed for people who can't even spell Computer. Linux is for people who know something. In order to know something, you have to learn it and that takes time and effort.

I know that sounds sarcastic but I seriously think you don't understand something and I'm trying to explain it to you. This is like choosing the car you want to buy. You don't just go seat-of-the-pants into it and then drop $30k on it. There are a lot of details, a lot of shopping, and a lot of examination on what you need.

That is extreme. You know i didn't mean and wrote less not one. Not a distribution for every country, every gender, every for less 1 year old hardware.

Actually you wrote "one" several times. Canonical can only support one...

It's not a distro for every country. It's a distro for a group of people with common needs or preferences. That said, how many countries are going to want a distro that is out-of-the-box tailored for Chinese language running on older hardware? On the other hand, a Spanish-speaking distro on older hardware would cover a significant portion of the planet.

If someone in the last corner of africa can help the distro i use, i want him to be able to do so!

That is what i thought when i dicovered the word ubuntu and that circle of friends.

You're confusing Ubuntu with "Meet the Fokkers".

But yes, anyone anywhere who has an idea, a desire and the means can contribute to pretty much any distro they want. Chances are though, any part of Africa that might be described as the last corner probably doesn't have an Internet connection or even electricity, and is therefore unlikely to contribute.

But realistically, people from a culture so foreign from yours are unlikely to share your preferences for a computer work flow. People on this thread are complaining about brown desktops, that's both the easiest thing to change and also a core thing that needs to change from culture to culture. Colors can have wildly different meanings depending on which culture uses them. For example in the USA white is for celebrations and weddings and joy, and black is for funerals and mourning. In Vietnam, white is for funerals and mourning, and black is for weddings and joy. If something so simple can be opposite, how can you expect any really big correlation between USA preferences and some other culture for the rest?

Aesthetic design is an important factor in the usability of a computing environment. These culture-specific distros I'm talking about, that's enough of a reason right there to branch off.

I've been using Linux since about 1996. It took me awhile to pay attention to what was going on with distros and source code and how it all worked, but taking the time to figure that out was well worth it.

[Roasted]

I'm not sure how much of "It's all locked down" is Ubuntu/Canonical and how much is Gnome. Remember the hated Unity runs on Gnome. Gnome-shell has the same lack of custom options as Ubuntu/Unity though gnome-shell does support extensions which help. As long as Xfce, KDE and LXDE are viable options we can customize away and still enjoy the refined aspects of Ubuntu like hardware support & huge repository.

Speaking as a recent Gnome Shell adoptee over Unity, I will say that the level of customizability with Gnome definitely surpasses Unity. With Unity, you have a few tweak tools to do some simple things, but the available extensions for Gnome really make it feel like there's more to build on from the stock install... which is something I like. Just my 2c though.