LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General
User Name
Password
Linux - General This Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.

Notices


Closed Thread
  Search this Thread
Old 08-18-2014, 08:04 AM   #61
Randicus Draco Albus
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2011
Location: Hiding somewhere on planet Earth.
Distribution: No distribution. OpenBSD operating system
Posts: 1,709
Blog Entries: 8

Rep: Reputation: 634Reputation: 634Reputation: 634Reputation: 634Reputation: 634Reputation: 634

Quote:
Originally Posted by herbpagel View Post
I was irked when they came up with Unity, because I felt I lost some control over how the GUI worked. It looked like they wanted an OS for people who needed a GUI like Windows or Mac. I got used to it.
That is one of things that bothers many people. The Windows-like attitude of telling people what they want, instead of giving them what the they want. I remember an interview with Mark Shuttleworth when Unity was foisted onto Ubuntu's users. He said, "After people use it for a while, they will learn to like it." (Perhaps not an exact quote, but very close.) Although the folks at Comical are not the only ones with that attitude. Gnome developers have a similar attitude. We know what you want and need, even if you do not realise it. Use it and you will learn to like it, because we say so. Most Ubuntu users acquiesced and learned to like it, but such bullying is not liked, even resented, by many others.

Last edited by Randicus Draco Albus; 08-18-2014 at 08:06 AM.
 
Old 08-18-2014, 09:48 AM   #62
replica9000
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Distribution: Debian Unstable
Posts: 1,059
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 227Reputation: 227Reputation: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randicus Draco Albus View Post
That is one of things that bothers many people. The Windows-like attitude of telling people what they want, instead of giving them what the they want. I remember an interview with Mark Shuttleworth when Unity was foisted onto Ubuntu's users. He said, "After people use it for a while, they will learn to like it." (Perhaps not an exact quote, but very close.) Although the folks at Comical are not the only ones with that attitude. Gnome developers have a similar attitude. We know what you want and need, even if you do not realise it. Use it and you will learn to like it, because we say so. Most Ubuntu users acquiesced and learned to like it, but such bullying is not liked, even resented, by many others.
One time I compared a debootstrap install between Debian and Ubuntu. Unless you want a extremely basic install, Unity packages get brought in as dependencies.
 
Old 08-18-2014, 01:41 PM   #63
initramfs
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2014
Posts: 27

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I did use ubuntu when it entered the linux world and for the first few years.

But today, ubuntu is different from it's earlier days and it's not for me. It's hard to explain why. I do however like the derivatives of ubuntu like Mint, Zorin OS and maybe others.

Last edited by initramfs; 08-18-2014 at 01:44 PM.
 
Old 08-18-2014, 02:02 PM   #64
rtmistler
Moderator
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Distribution: MINT Debian, Angstrom, SUSE, Ubuntu, Debian
Posts: 8,904
Blog Entries: 13

Rep: Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randicus Draco Albus View Post
That is one of things that bothers many people. The Windows-like attitude of telling people what they want, instead of giving them what the they want. I remember an interview with Mark Shuttleworth when Unity was foisted onto Ubuntu's users. He said, "After people use it for a while, they will learn to like it." (Perhaps not an exact quote, but very close.) Although the folks at Comical are not the only ones with that attitude. Gnome developers have a similar attitude. We know what you want and need, even if you do not realise it. Use it and you will learn to like it, because we say so. Most Ubuntu users acquiesced and learned to like it, but such bullying is not liked, even resented, by many others.
I agree a lot there. However, anyone have experience developing GUI's? I have and for me it's just a few screens to satisfy a product need, rather than a whole desktop. In some minor defense, you get frustrated; but I do feel being proactively pushy about your desktop that's a sweeping change from other ones is overdoing it. The best GUI I ever did; meaning ease of design and implementation was one where the client had previously hired a graphic artist to create the multiple layered drawings and basically they had designed their GUI completely as part of that process. Therefore all I had to deal with was the very minor "can'tcha make that blue and add a button there?" The whole process of style, color, "look" is infinitely, I say INFINITELY frustrating unless you are driving it completely. Therefore when you have a team, and of course Marketing, Sales, Support, and Management involved, it can be extremely frustrating. Again, that's "an application" not an entire desktop where the desktop needs to support styles, customization, etc. So in the end, when you finally have something to release, you're half proud about it, half defensive about it, and probably some part arrogant because you got it all done in spite of ....

Quote:
Originally Posted by replica9000 View Post
One time I compared a debootstrap install between Debian and Ubuntu. Unless you want a extremely basic install, Unity packages get brought in as dependencies.
I also agree a lot here. I pretty much feel that a full blown desktop distro has a lot of bloat within it and I accept that without complaint. If I wanted a sparse distribution, I'd install one like that. I don't, I want most of the common desktop stuff already there. However when you install and then you have to customize a ton just to get a desktop you like, then you are better off finding a whole other distribution which is just one you like. Someone mentioned that they like the Ubuntu derivatives like MINT, I agree in fact that's why I tried MINT and did end up liking it.

I know I sound contradictory here because I do regularly say I have little problem with Ubuntu. I am concluding that really the thing I don't like about Ubuntu is Unity. That's a pretty big thing unfortunately.
 
Old 08-27-2014, 07:06 AM   #65
gor0
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2014
Distribution: quad BOOT!
Posts: 549

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 65
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1316

Quote:

Losing graciously
Friday, February 14th, 2014

With Bdale Garbee’s casting vote this week, the Debian technical committee finally settled the question of init for both Debian and Ubuntu in favour of systemd.

I’d like to thank the committee for their thoughtful debate under pressure in the fishbowl; it set a high bar for analysis and experience-driven decision making since most members of the committee clearly took time to familiarise themselves with both options. I know the many people who work on Upstart appreciated the high praise for its code quality, rigorous testing and clarity of purpose expressed even by members who voted against it; from my perspective, it has been a pleasure to support the efforts of people who want to create truly great free software, and do it properly. Upstart has served Ubuntu extremely well – it gave us a great competitive advantage at a time when things became very dynamic in the kernel, it’s been very stable (it is after all the init used in both Ubuntu and RHEL 6 and has set a high standard for Canonical-lead software quality of which I am proud.

Nevertheless, the decision is for systemd, and given that Ubuntu is quite centrally a member of the Debian family, that’s a decision we support. I will ask members of the Ubuntu community to help to implement this decision efficiently, bringing systemd into both Debian and Ubuntu safely and expeditiously. It will no doubt take time to achieve the stability and coverage that we enjoy today and in 14.04 LTS with Upstart, but I will ask the Ubuntu tech board (many of whom do not work for Canonical) to review the position and map out appropriate transition plans. We’ll certainly complete work to make the new logind work without systemd as pid 1. I expect they will want to bring systemd into Ubuntu as an option for developers as soon as it is reliably available in Debian, and as our default as soon as it offers a credible quality of service to match the existing init.

Technologies of choice evolve, and our platform evolves both to lead (today our focus is on the cloud and on mobile, and we are quite clearly leading GNU/Linux on both fronts) and to embrace change imposed elsewhere. Init is contentious because it is required for both developers and system administrators to understand its quirks and capabilities. No wonder this was a difficult debate, the consequences for hundreds of thousands of people are very high. From my perspective the fact that good people were clearly split suggests that either option would work perfectly well. I trust the new stewards of pid 1 will take that responsibility as seriously as the Upstart team has done, and be as pleasant to work with. And… onward.
 
Old 08-27-2014, 08:42 AM   #66
herbpagel
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2014
Posts: 9

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Question curious about distros

The "why everyone hates Ubuntu" thread has piqued my curiosity. I have tried a few other distros, but haven't installed any others. I probably could double boot and keep my present Ubuntu. What I am asking is if I install another version of Linux, would the installation have the option of keeping all of my files like documents, etc.? Could I migrate to another form of Linux without losing everything. I felt I lost some control when I let Unity take over.
 
Old 08-27-2014, 08:55 AM   #67
Randicus Draco Albus
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2011
Location: Hiding somewhere on planet Earth.
Distribution: No distribution. OpenBSD operating system
Posts: 1,709
Blog Entries: 8

Rep: Reputation: 634Reputation: 634Reputation: 634Reputation: 634Reputation: 634Reputation: 634
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbpagel View Post
What I am asking is if I install another version of Linux, would the installation have the option of keeping all of my files like documents, etc.?
I keep my personal files on a separate partition. When I have two systems, they can share the partition. (In addition to multiple sets of back-up copies, of course.) You could also have the second system use copies of files on an external hard-drive, while you test the system. Personally, if I wanted to replace a system, I would not bother trying to use the previous system's ~/home directory, where your personal files are.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-27-2014, 08:57 AM   #68
rtmistler
Moderator
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Distribution: MINT Debian, Angstrom, SUSE, Ubuntu, Debian
Posts: 8,904
Blog Entries: 13

Rep: Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029Reputation: 4029
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbpagel View Post
The "why everyone hates Ubuntu" thread has piqued my curiosity. I have tried a few other distros, but haven't installed any others. I probably could double boot and keep my present Ubuntu. What I am asking is if I install another version of Linux, would the installation have the option of keeping all of my files like documents, etc.? Could I migrate to another form of Linux without losing everything. I felt I lost some control when I let Unity take over.
I have a low grade netbook equivalent, some sub $200 ATOM cheapie which came with their provided Linux. I put Ubuntu on that and it has something like a 129G hard drive, therefore low percentage of that drive was taken up by the install. All my data files are on USB external flash drives. I have live booted that laptop with various distros to try them out; liked MINT a lot and installed it as an alternate boot.

So that's how I dealt with it. I first booted a live distro based off of a USB stick, verified that I could do all I needed to do with the new versus the old, and then still chose to leave the former distro there as a backup.

You can either use something like gparted or see if the installation procedure of the new distro will free up space and repartition so that you can install that new distribution and still be able to see your former data files. Just my way of doing that is to have my data files on an external drive so I can always see them. Either case, you should be able to mount your old distribution's partition and grab data files off of it. They key there would be to not re-image the whole drive but instead install the new distribution on existing free space.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-29-2014, 10:29 AM   #69
itsgregman
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2008
Location: North Carolina
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 208

Rep: Reputation: 61
Actually I don't "hate" Ubuntu, but I will never use it or any derivative.

The things that actually turned me against it were a couple things.

Mainly the "fanboys", I remember being in the forum of the distro I used at the time and someone linked to an Ubuntu blog site where a guy was ranting about the distro I used. He was going on and on about how in the forum of the distro I used all we did was rag on Ubuntu (which was entirely false) and saying that distro was a "pushbutton GUI distro for kiddies". We went back and forth for a while until I pointed out that he in effect was saying that the distro I used was to easy and user friendly while saying Ubuntu was more advanced and I wasn't enough of a power user to handle it, all while Ubuntu was trying to market itself as "the easiest version of Linux for new users". The blog owner stepped in then and put an end to the discussion, but, when I went back to show a friend I found the blog owner had deleted and possibly edited our argument to remove everything said that would have reflected negatively on Ubuntu or the guy I was arguing with.

Secondly, I tried Ubuntu in early 2007 when its initial PR campaign was in full swing, in fact it was the first version of Linux I had ever installed. If it hadn't been for the fact that I had previously used Knoppix on a live CD I could have very possibly given up on Linux without ever knowing how great it was. Ubuntu failed to deliver on its hype in so many ways, I didn't like Gnome for starters, it was nothing like the traditional desktop in my opinion and was just another example of misleading hype.

As I said before, luckily I had used the Knoppix live CD a couple of years earlier so I knew Linux had better to offer than Ubuntu and I went on to find PcLinux which at the time was flawless and like Knoppix used Kde3 which was, and still is in my opinion the best DE ever used on Linux.

Last edited by itsgregman; 08-29-2014 at 10:31 AM.
 
Old 08-29-2014, 05:49 PM   #70
Randicus Draco Albus
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2011
Location: Hiding somewhere on planet Earth.
Distribution: No distribution. OpenBSD operating system
Posts: 1,709
Blog Entries: 8

Rep: Reputation: 634Reputation: 634Reputation: 634Reputation: 634Reputation: 634Reputation: 634
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsgregman View Post
Ubuntu failed to deliver on its hype in so many ways, I didn't like Gnome for starters, it was nothing like the traditional desktop in my opinion and was just another example of misleading hype.
Whether that is good or bad depends on one's expectations. My first Linux experience was installing Debian and being greeted by the sight of Gnome 2. My reaction was; wow, this is different. And that difference immediately peaked my interest. I new I was trying something different, so I expected to see something different and was not disappointed. One of the biggest problems with Linux today is so many distributions trying to emulate Windows with the purpose of trying to attract Windows users.

Quote:
Mainly the "fanboys"
The fact that a website like OMGUbuntu exists says it all. No delusional fanboys there.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 09-06-2014, 09:35 AM   #71
gor0
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2014
Distribution: quad BOOT!
Posts: 549

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 65
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP8CNp-vksc

Quote:
As you, Mr. Stallman, are completely against computer business --> What about going to cry somewhere? Why can't users combine non-free programs with free programs? Why is that bad? If it happens at the users choice - like for me, Free Linux with GNU packages (i'll not be saying GNU/Linux, as Linux ain't yours) and proprietary drivers for my Camera and for my Nvidia GPU. I'm valuing freedom a lot and have killed the Unity desktop a while ago in favor of a modified Xfce desktop. But i think, computer business isn't more bad than the business of a supermarket. Or do you now want supermarkets to present you all their offers FOR FREE? You have to pay for your food, right? Okay, so why do you do it? It's not "Free Market" 
 
Old 09-06-2014, 10:22 AM   #72
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: ...uncanny valley... infinity\1975; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US( + travel,) Earth( I wish,) END BORDER$!◣◢┌∩┐ Fe26-E,e...
Distribution: any GPL that works well on my cheapest; has been KDE or CLI but open... http://goo.gl/NqgqJx &c ;-)
Posts: 4,004
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359
Processed food vs a garden? Sure a supermarket (even walmart) can sell organic but they can lie in "free trade" i.e: ¢apitali$m!
 
Old 09-06-2014, 11:00 AM   #73
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Germany
Distribution: Whatever fits the task best
Posts: 17,148
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4867Reputation: 4867Reputation: 4867Reputation: 4867Reputation: 4867Reputation: 4867Reputation: 4867Reputation: 4867Reputation: 4867Reputation: 4867Reputation: 4867
Quote:
Originally Posted by gor0 View Post
It doesn't make sense at all to compare physical goods (like the one's in a supermarket) with virtual goods (like software), unless you can show me how to copy an apple to gove it to another person.
 
Old 09-06-2014, 11:09 AM   #74
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: ...uncanny valley... infinity\1975; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US( + travel,) Earth( I wish,) END BORDER$!◣◢┌∩┐ Fe26-E,e...
Distribution: any GPL that works well on my cheapest; has been KDE or CLI but open... http://goo.gl/NqgqJx &c ;-)
Posts: 4,004
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359Reputation: 1359
"at all" really,,, their ideas (that makes sense...) would you rather (not copy in this case but (like Linux)) grow or watch a friend do so an apple or buy one?!.
http://www.doctoryourself.com/pesticides.html

Last edited by jamison20000e; 09-06-2014 at 05:14 PM.
 
Old 09-06-2014, 04:58 PM   #75
Ratamahatta
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2012
Location: Germany
Distribution: siduction
Posts: 129

Rep: Reputation: 16
In my opinion, there's good and bad about Ubuntu.
The good is, there are a lot of things explained properly in forums. By properly, I mean: If you went to a store and bought a device, then went home and tried it, didn't work, looked up the manual and all there was to see was a bloody list of options. What would you do? You'd go to the store and get your money back. (So much for RTFM. WTFM, trolls!)
In the ubuntu forums I've found tons of information that helped me to set up Ubuntu (obviously), but also SuSE and Debian systems. In an plain and easily understandable way.
Gnome certainly is on the bad side to me. Unity is even worse. (Installed Openbox; using openbox-session, Openbox is my choice after trying like 10 other graphical environments, among them KDE (too large but nice), Gnome (puke!), windowmaker, WMX and several others) In Ubuntu 12.04 the applications I needed (I'm a software engineer) were broken. Not just one. And they never got fixed with any updates. Had to add a quantal Repo to update them. That was after I did 'apt-get install synaptic' because Canonical's garbage won't even let you do it another way any more! (All of the aforementioned worked with 10.04 "lucid"). So 12.04 is just "precise"ly broken. The only reason I still use Ubuntu is that I have to at work. I can not recommend (or like) such stuff.

Last edited by Ratamahatta; 09-06-2014 at 05:04 PM. Reason: added some more info
 
  


Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: I hate Unity. I hate GNOME. I hate Windows 8. The ultimate desktop search continues. LXer Syndicated Linux News 1 11-09-2011 07:20 PM
LXer: Many Ubuntu Users Still Hate The Unity Desktop LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 08-03-2011 11:41 AM
ubuntu 11.4 -- hate the look zimbot Ubuntu 9 06-02-2011 03:21 AM
LXer: Ubuntu Unity Interface: You Might Not Hate It After All LXer Syndicated Linux News 1 02-04-2011 09:46 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:59 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration