He didn't bash Ubuntu with his question.

I agree totally and using this method of analysis I believe you have over reacted.

I'm not going to chase him around LQ and analyse his posting style. He asked a question I answered it. You have a problem with me answering his question the way I did so now you're going to keep going until you think I agree with you, it isn't gonna happen. Move on, build a bridge, and get over it.

If it looks like someone wants an opportunity to call someone a troll, acts like someone looking for an opportunity to call someone a troll, someone calls someone a troll, then it is probably someone who has nothing better to do than call someone a troll.

Like I said in my previous post "I answered what I believed to be a valid question, you quoted me to have a go at the OP. Leave me out of your "disappointment" of Gor0!" If you keep going I can only assume you want an argument with me.

What problem? I quoted one sentence from a post, that happened to be yours, to add a different point of view for the benefit of everyone reading the thread. A post that includes a reference to something you wrote does not need to be only about you. It can even have no reference to you. (In this case it is the former.)
Why is it necessary to chase anyone around? I have simply been reading many threads.
Yes sir! Your wish is my command.

Some people would even go so far as to believe your indignant (over-)reaction to someone pointing out the "possibility" of a flame thread is a victory for the troll.

2 members found this post helpful.

The fact you feel the need to keep replying to me speaks volumes. You just happen to concentrate on Gor0 and use a simple comment by someone who isn't part of your campaign in order to have a go at him. There is a report button maybe you should use it, I know I am considering it.
Many threads that have Gor0 in them.
Obviously my wish is not your command and this is just a sarcastic remark.
I have not made any indignant over reaction. I have asked you to "Leave me out of your "disappointment" of Gor0". With regards to "indignance" I believe your post display more indignance at the fact Gor0 even posted this question as though it somehow interferes with you. You have a choice not to post or read any thread he starts I suggest you excercise it. I am now going to excercise my choice and not reply to you again in this topic.

The only flaming here is you picking at someone for posting a question. If he has behaved badly in other threads then have a go at him there but calling him names here in this thread when you admit it is only a "possibility" this is a flame thread is an over reaction.

I entered this topic to answer a question, you entered it telling Gor0 how to get more flame attraction. Rhetorical questions for you (in other words don't worry about answering them cause I already know the answer), What is your purpose here in this topic? I mean really, why enter a topic just to encite a flame war unless you are itching for an argument?.

It is not like i hate Ubuntu, it is more not liking the Unity desktop environment and the choices Canonical made and the way they afre pushing Ubuntu.

On the other hand, Canonical was indeed the first company ever succeeding in bringing Linux to the desktop. While other distro's were more concerned about stability and further ongoing development, Canonical launched Ubuntu as a "Linux for dummies" operating system. And that was a huge succes for Canonical! Despite the fact that Debian, Slackware, OpenSuse/Suse and a few more are around much longer, they never achieved what Canonical did making Ubuntu a leading distro in Linux world. I admit, Canonical never contributed to the Linux kernel like Debian or OpenSuse/Suse, but with Ubuntu they cleared the path of brining Linux the desktop for every user out there for each and every Linux distro.

Really? That is very interesting, since for the majority of its existence Ubuntu was little more than a brown Debian with bugs.
The truth or falseness of that claim aside, abandoning stability in favour of the opposite will make an OS more attractive? I would have thought stability would attract more people, but what do I know?

You assume being the biggest is the goal of those other systems. If the goal of Debian and Slackware was to have as many users as possible, they would not sacrifice eye candy and so-called "user friendliness" in favour of stability.

Well it does take two to make an argument...

By the way, I think it's ok that you replied. I'm all for freedom of speech.

1 members found this post helpful.

^ And the OP was successful in starting a flame war!

Regards.

.
It wants at least three characters.

What is the expected outcome of this thread? What does anyone expect to gain from talking about it further, considering the title?

For the following reasons don't install or recommend Ubuntu.

1. Development of Ubuntu is led by Canonical, Ltd. a UK-based "trading" company which generates revenue through the sale of "technical support" and "services."

2. By installing users agree to allow Ubuntu's parent company Canonical to collect user search data and IP addresses and to disclose this information to third parties including Facebook, Twitter, BBC and Amazon.

3. The adwares and spywares introduced in Ubuntu violates user's privacy and is one of the rare occasions in which a free software developer persists in keeping a malicious feature in its version of a program.

4. Whenever user searches the local files for a string using Ubuntu desktop, Ubuntu sends that string to one of Canonical's servers.

5. Ubuntu has received widespread objection from the open source community for violating free system distribution guidelines.


6. Canonical disgruntled upstream open source developers by introducing Mir, their own display server not derived from X11 or Wayland.

7. Ubuntu's policy prohibits commercial redistribution of exact copies of Ubuntu, denying the baseline freedom.

8. Ubuntu is basically Debian with extra "cool" look and is not binary compatible with Red Hat Enterprise Linux and CentOS which are used for most scientific development.

In case anyone wastes their time replying to this copypasta:

Source 29/05/2013: http://www.linux.org/threads/do-not-use-ubuntu.3977/

For those who want to waste their time replying - go ahead.

3 members found this post helpful.

I used Ubuntu for 2 years till they changed the system, became so slow it drove me nuts and gave up and went back to Plain Debian.

When did it slow down? With the introduction of Unity? Unity, KDE and probably Gnome 3 (not sure because I have never used it) require tremendous resources, so need powerful hardware. It is not an Ubuntu-only problem. It is one manifestation of the problem with any system centred around a single GUI. But Comical chose that route of development to make their system unique. They succeeded, but that success has a cost. It removes people with older and/or less powerful computers from their potential user base. However, for those who still like the system, there is Xubuntu. (At least for now.) I wonder how much the move to Unity has increased the number of people using the X variant.

When they mode that huge shift in format with new version, dont recall the date, the whole interface changed. Unity, I thingk that was it.

Unity is like KDE. People either love it or hate.