Reasons NOT to use Ubuntu?
 

Ubuntu comes up as one of the most widely used distros and seems good for a newbie...but what are some reasons not to use it? Not trying to start a flame war, just heard some people don't like it for whatever reasons they have.

What do you not like about Ubuntu? Gotta hear the cons as well as the pros!

The only reason not to use Ubuntu is if you don't like it. then what ever other reason people would come out with is pure BS.

I detest Unity and Gnome 3 but Lubuntu & Xubuntu are just fine with me. If you don't like Ubuntu - don't use it as there are a ton of choices out there....

It's often recommended by computer journalists who don't use Linux but who've heard of Ubuntu. In the beginning, Canonical sent sample disks to all and sundry and that got it established in their minds.

The only real reason for not using it is indeed if you don't like it. But it can have bad, buggy releases. It is, after all, based on Debian Unstable. The Canonical team is small and the release cycle is short, so it doesn't get tested in depth. The respins like Xubuntu, or the derivatives like Mint, will generally incorporate some of the bug fixes. It's generally better used on modern, 64-bit computers, where they get more feedback, than on older machines.

Some also feel their attitude is "not quite Linux". A lot of us avoided Windows because Microsoft seemed (as a US state attorney once put it) an ethics-free company. Shuttleworth's moving his money from South Africa to the Isle of Man left a bad taste for me. You avoid paying tax to a poor, third-world country, and then call your distro by a word meaning "humanity"? Humbug! You can make money from Linux ethically: Red Hat has made extensive contributions in cash and code development, but what has Canonical done?

I suppose one could argue they made linux a bit more popular. But that only serves their bottom line I guess. I was totally unaware of this having had happened and I do not like it one bit. Maybe back to Debian testing for me... Is a shame, I like Unity.

I was never into what's popular. I want Stable and Secure.

I used Ubu for "a minute" then switched to LinuxMint (a fine distribution).
Then OpenSUSE (a great distribution)
then Slackware (the best distribution)
</opinion>

I stopped using the 'buntu family because the third-party driver installer used to drive me mad when trying to get the latest NVIDIA drivers to work. I stayed away because of Unity.
The fact that the search function in Unity searches Amazon and other online places by default gives me pause when I install it in a virtual machine.
Ultimately though, politics aside, I find using a distribution not based upon others to be easier as there are not too any levels of seperatio from the upstream packages. I don't do compiling from scratch though so my go-to distros would be Debian, Fedora and Slackware ("the mistress I keep hinting I'll leave Debian for").

Reasons I don't use Ubuntu:

It's buggy - every other distro under the sun (even CentOS!) has no problems using wireless on any of my multitude of laptops, but I don't think Ubuntu has been able to use it reliably (aka: not dropping the connection and resetting the wifi card every 2-3 minutes) since version 8.x.

I aggressively dislike Ubuntu's approach to security (no root, first configured user is granted unlimited sudo access). It's as Windows-like as you can get without actually being Windows. Since this affects all respins including Mint, I tend to avoid them as well. When I do need to use one of them for whatever reason, the first thing I do is enable root and crack down on the first user's sudo access. I hear doing this can get you banned from Ubuntu's support forums - another reason I don't like Ubuntu/Canonical.

Unity is ugly and a resource hog.

I don't like distros with built-in spyware - it's a matter of principle.

I don't like Canonical for the reasons mentioned by others in this thread.

Really?!!! That's sad if it's true.

Personally, I don't like the *buntus because:

1. They feel too Windozy.
2. I don't like distros that install a bunch of dependencies that I know are optional when software is installed. I guess I understand why the *buntus (and others) do this, but it puts a grunch of cruft on the system. I don't like cruft. I only want required dependencies to be installed unless I choose to enable an option.
3. No root (see above). I mean, whiskey tango foxtrot?
4. Similar to #2, too much patching of upstream sources. Makes you wonder why upstream builds without patches on Slackware, but not on other distros. Why do they have to patch it? What else doesn't work "right?"
5. I find threads on the Ubuntu forums rarely end in a solution. That doesn't make the *buntus bad, per se, it's just something that turns me off about the *buntus.

My reasons?

Unity - Some people like it, I don't. I think it's a terrible UI with way too much going on. I'm also concerned about the amazon search... that 'functionality' will expand and not in a good way.

Buggy - Every release after dapper has, to me, seemed to incorporate into it more and more show-stopping bugs. Ubuntu 7 was the first Linux distro that I had ever used that brought my machine to a complete halt from the desktop for no reason at all. That had never happened to me before on a relatively clean install. The same bugginess carried on with version 8 although not as crashy... it was still prone to freezes. That was it for me.

Security - I don't like how the initial user set up is. A small complaint, but, a valid one all the same.

Cons: Unity and the top panel that you can't even "autohide", thus taking up precious space on laptop screens.

Linux is supposed to be the most "flexible" or "configurable" OS.
Well, just the two items mentioned suffice to prove that Ubuntu is no longer in the true Linux spirit.

Pros: easy to install and faster than ever (the cons put too much of a damper).

I always find at least a few annoying little (or big) bugs that just drive me nuts, but this isn't exclusive to Ubuntu. The LTS releases are usually pretty good. Not a fan of Unity, but that's easy enough to change. I've done some interesting things building up from an Ubuntu Minimal installation, which really would be the only way I would use it, I guess.

One reason?
Slackware ;)

^ And that's the best reason of all!

the main reason is ubuntu Even LTS breaks on distro upgrade. the apt-get dependency system has pretty much broke every developmental ubuntu system I have ever had.
I made slackware my main system with 10.2 and I still have that system and it runs fine it is now running slackware current and the worst thing that has happened is I had to rebuild my graphics card module . Ubuntu dependency resolving system has and will break the system. It has never failed to let me down it fails every time.

let's say I want a certain program want to build it for my cpu. such as video editing I want a build that is best for my hardware not generic.

ok so I build that system and install it. Now a week later I do a update and there is a new kernel and new libraies .with new links . these new links just broke all my hard work.
now I go to reinstall all the development stuff to build the new one I use but the ppa no longer has it now. I need to add another ppa. and it installs all the stuff it has and it breaks more of my work.
Apt-get is a joke. it was made for his girlfriend over in Indiana and trust me that Debian is High maintenance. Oh and it will never be perfect.
IN DEFFENCE OF THE UBUNTU Debian spin off.

if you need to have several people develope on a single project the apt-get and what it was designed to do be a tool so everyone can be on the same page and be
running the same system for a team or an individual coming into a team. . that's not for me. I just run GNU/Linux and KISS