Yes.

It will run, but it won't get any updates (some of which might be important security updates) and the package manager won't work.

I personally think the disabling of root login is madness. You can do just as much damage with the sudo command (out of the box) as you can with root access - what's the difference between sudo "rf -rf /" and running the same as root? Ok, so there is the argument of "if I type sudo then I know it's root, otherwise I might not", but is there really such need for the OS to hold the users hand? Are they admitting that their distro is aimed at novices?
It's just unfortunately another way in which Ubuntu is picking up some of those old windows "features" which were the reason many of us moved to Linux in the first place. Linux is meant to be about freedom anyway.

here here.

devnull10 From Winxp on back windows had a wonderful search engine that you could use to find any file on any drive. They replaced it in win 7 with a broken search feature that doesn't find a thing. Would you believe the die-hard Win enthusiasts tried to claim it worked perfectly, even to the point of creating websites that explained how to work it. Funny, though, if you tried to follow along, their method didn't work either!

I'm with you, I think Ubuntu is aimed at novices, even though it has a lot of good features for anyone. They are paranoid about losing the novices which is why they are deprecating the feature. I for one am spoiled. Even though I can use the terminal, I prefer the GUI. I wasn't always that way. It took a couple of years for me to move from DOS to Windows 3.2. The Fonts and how they printed without jaggies were my downfall. Remember dot-matrix printers?

Yeah that sounds an awful lot like Bill Gates to me!

How do you come to that conclusion? Canonical is not charging you for new Ubuntu versions, it is simply a lack of man-power, that causes this. Assuming that the Ubuntu repository is as large as Debian's repository, there are more than 30000 packages in it. So for the supported versions of Ubuntu (currently 4) Canonical has to maintain 120000 packages. This needs a tremendous amount of work. It is much easier to make this with, for example, Slackware, which has a rather small repository and is still supporting security fixes for version 8.1 (released 2002). By the way, even Windows XP (released 2001) has security support til 2014.

Thats true of all forums I've seen in the last 10 years or so.

This is the reason why I quit the ubuntu forums, the moderators dont seem to be that moderate, and as time goes on the 'subjects' that are allowed on the ubuntu forums get narrower and narrower, and the mods (in general) get more pushy.

The final straw for me was a multi-page 'discussion' with a large number of admins/mods (over shutting down linux mint support help threads). I kept going for a little while after that, but in the end I realised that I dont like canonical, I dotn trust caonical, and cannot support them in anyway.

If ubuntu was made by some organisation that wasnt based in a tax haven, put out factual press releases and didnt have a dodgy contributor agreement I might have a different position, but as it stands....I cant stand them.

Which is BS. I can understand a warning, possibly an infraction for postign the question (though I think an ifraction is going too far). Banning should NOT happen until you've got an infraction and have posted the same question a 2nd time IMO.

Tried debian?

Once you are used to ubuntu, its pretty easy. There will be a bit more manual work, but nothing that an experienced ubuntu user cant fix (though in the worst case you might need to get help from a forum, but you've got the wits to know how to use them, obviously).

Sure, that manual work will include some non-GUI stuff, but once you've changed your sources.list (which IIRC there is a GUI program for but IIRC it can be buggy) and got your ATI/nVidia drivers (if needed) you should be able to do everything synaptic, or even software centre.

+1, good advice.

BTW, silly prediction- at some point after ubuntu moves to gnome 3 they will disable 'fallback' mode and force users who lack the hardware to run unity/gnome3 to use unity 2D (or use xubntu, etc). It might not happen with 11.10, it might not even happen with 12.04, but I think its something that canonmical will be trying.

Yes. End of life (end of support really) is list on this page-

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases

Bsicly, LTS (long-term support) releases get 3 years support (for the desktop). LTS releases are 'even number'.04 (eg 8.04, 10.04, 12.04 will also be an LTS).

All other releases get 18 months support.

I disagree. Its not just 'lack of man-power', its the whole system. But IMO the ubuntu release shedule was created to keep ubuntu in the tech writers pages.....

+1. I find it funny that threads about loggin in as root are jailed at the ubuntu forums, but they are allow people to post the work-arounds (though to be fair, I dont think I've seen anyone explicitly say 'you can login as root by doing this *insert directions*).

No, canonical actually think that its the best way. That dicision has come directly from Shuttleworth AFAIK.

You can accuse Shuttleworth of all sorts of things, but 'lack of vision' and 'lack of ego' and not on that list at all.

I haven't read all the messages. I have about 10 more to read and will probably make another comment.

As far as your comment about Linux or Ubuntu going into the direction of Windows, I believe it's the other way around. By default everyone on the Windows system was always unrestricted user. This is why viruses and other exploits have always been so easy to affect and plague the systems. Windows is trying to go toward Linux and have normal users by default and elevated user access for maintenance.

I think it should be a concern of the developers to have some type of default safe guards on the OS. I'm slowly getting a lot of my Windows clients to move over to Linux. I'm glad there are some safeguards built into the systems for the people I recommend Linux to. It there weren't I wouldn't recommend it. Most of the people I know, except for the peers online are computer novice. They want to have a tool where their information is secure and retrievable. If they were required to be more than a novice, they wouldn't have time for the other things they have chosen to do with their time such as their careers such as doctors, lawyers, bankers, merchants, pilots, judges, etc.

I'm glad for the opportunity of Linux to lose the stigma that it's an OS for computer hobbyist and computer professions. I hope it will become more and more a tool that someone can use and not have to spent cycles of restarting over and over again because they lose everything.

Window Vista disabled the real administration account. You have to go through a complicated procedure to activate it. Even when activated it still doesn't have full access to the system. They are trying to go toward the direction of Linux. But there are lots of gaps.

Linux has this safeguard. It's good to have a foundation that will expound upon it. And yes, there are lots of variations where people can go where the concern for security and ease might not be such an important issue. I'm just glad that in this wide area of diversity it’s permitted that such a foundation as the Ubuntu project can exist.

-- L. James

--
L. D. James
ljames@apollo3.com
www.apollo3.com/~ljames

Sorry, I gave up on Ubuntu about half way through 11.04 testing cycle and have confused myself.

The point is that Gnome has changed their default DE and the panels have reached the end of their support.

There are a lot of alternatives out there and it is time to be looking at them. Unity (+ Unity 2D) and Gnome Shell (+Gnome Fallback) are pretty much going to be the options for Gnome.

It could be that someone will fork Gnome and put out a panel version too. I some doubts that this would happen and more doubt that it would be reliable in the long run. Could happen though.

KDE went from version 3 to 4 and had a similar problem. I do not see a KDE fork continuing KDE3. KDE4.? (don't know the current version) is quite popular. This is a more likely outcome with Gnome3. It will change with time and become more what people like.

I like Xfce4 a bunch. Haven't tried Xfce for some time and must say that they have changed things very much for the better.

I am on my Gnome DE right now after rebooting to here last night. Can't wait to get back to Xfce later today as I seem to have come to prefer it.

Lxce is also a very interesting DE that I have used (Lubuntu). It is coming on fast and light.

There are also a number of other DEs out there, less well known, usually for niche use or just very minimal. Usually a little harder to configure but once set the way you want very stable.

It is already done, called Mate Desktop, but their website is currently down, so I can't tell how it is going.

http://www.trinitydesktop.org/

Wow! Busy buggers aren't they.

Real small group. I think the Lubuntu dev team is about that size though and they seem to be putting out a pretty good product.

For some reason, I thought the "Mate Desktop" died in the organizational stage. Obviously missed something there. Hope they can get things rolling.

I just think that there is too much competition out there for something like that to really last. The KDE3 folks have to make me think about that though. They had to start quite a while back and they are still with it.

The Mate Desktop dev (solo) is an Arch user and the forum there hasn't heard from him since 7-26-11. Hope the bugger is alright.

Unity 2D is Qt, not GTK-

http://developer.qt.nokia.com/forums/viewthread/3214/

Sorry Larry James, my point was that Ubuntu seems to want to hold the users hand through everything which the one thing that really pissed me off about Vista the first time I ever used it. It seems to be moving more things away from the control of the user and into the control of the default setup/developers preferences/etc.
I suppose each distro has its target market though, it's just a shame that people moving over from windows will think "oh, Linux is great, I have this system which is just like windows but free!". Yes, it is free, but Linus is nothing like windows once you (are allowed to) get under the covers. Perhaps a lot of it is caused by the fact that it stuffs gnome down your throat on first login haha!?

Actually I believe my point is that having an OS that holds a novice's hand might not be so bad. I think its great to have an OS that is easy to use for a person that prefers to use the computer rather than spend a lot of time going to school for computers to learn how to use it. Idealistic you can just grab a machine, turn it on, and immediately be productive. I believe this is great for an OS concept.

Of course I don't see where Ubuntu is preventing the user from going under the hood and changing it from it's defaults for their personal taste. People do that when they buy a new car. But idealistically they can initially get a car that they can drive as a novice without having to go to get a mechanical degree to get started with it.

I believe you're making some mistakes about the Ubuntu mission. This appears to be especially the case where you have grabbed the impressing that they are shoving gnome down the user's throat. To me it appears they are trying to get away from gnome. But I understand, that might not be the case either.

I installed Ubuntu on one of my computers and wanted to use an application that it appeared was only available for KDE. I then installed the KDE desktop and it appeared to work fine to me. I'm very novice to KDE and had some problems navigating, so I created an .xinitrc file and placed gnome-session in it. I'm back to the familiar environment on the computer. KDE was too different from what I was used to, to invest the time in change, so I use gonme on that Ubuntu computer rather than the KDE that I installed on it. If I remove the .xinitrc file startx will bring up KDE.

It appears that I can go under the hood and make the environment the way I want it. If I want my environment to be unfriendly to a novice, I can do that. But I'm glad that I can install Ubuntu on my clients’ computers and be sure that they can use it without me spending a lot of time trying to set it up for them and teach them to use it.

I recently did this for someone that is a retiree. I took his windows machine to repair it, and took the liberty of installing Ubuntu on it. While plugging it in, I advised him the environment would be different, but I wanted him to give it a try. It’s my recommendation as a better and more secure environment. I took a minute to show him how to login and shutdown the system; how to bring up Firefox to browse the Internet; how to open Evolutions’ email, contacts and appointments feature; and how to play a DVD; and left him. He was all set without OS problems. That’s because it’s easy for a novice to use. I really think that’s a good thing.

It appears that you’re associating ease of use to Windows. I don’t. I also believe Ubuntu is easier to use than Windows. I still believe its Windows trying to catch up with the facility of Linux and not the other way around. But I don’t hate Windows so much that the having Linux have some resemblance would turn me off. While I’ll continue to use the terminal a lot, I’ll still use the gui for some things also, and find the gui convenient in many cases.

When I recall the way I felt when the Linux environment started coming publishing rpm files rather than linking the user with the tarballs, I was kind of turned off also. I thought they were removing the charm of allowing the user to build his system the way he wanted it from tarballs, and to put everything where he wants it, not at a specific location in /sbin or /usr/sbin, and so own. I put all the programs wherever I personally wanted them. I didn’t care about an official place to support the entire OS installation. I went to the sendmail site for the sendmail tarball and how to use sendmail. I went to the apache site for the apache tarball and how to use apache. I went to the Xwin site for the Xwin tarball and how to use it. I resisted going to a central location for over 15 years. I resisted it with a passion. It irked me when the installation started using a gui rather than text only. Whenever I did a fresh install I would try to fix the text install option, and of course, only install the minimal, which every year became more than what I wanted to install. Most of what was installed by the installation procedure would have two installs. One by the installer and one by me (placed in /usr/local/bin).

Now I feel different about the various teams that make distros and support channels. What used to take me the better part of a day, usually a couple of days, now take me a few minutes. Fixing things are easy also. Since so many people have a similar installation, I can quickly search the net and see how someone else resolved to problem. If enough people started out with the same install, more than one would probably have the issue and a solution.

I admit I’m probably missing your real problem. It appears that you’re going though stages that I went though. But presently you appear to be irked because the distro team wants to make the OS easy enough for a novice. As far as I’m concerned, that’s not enough to make me hate it. I can customize my environment and make it in a way where a novice can’t use it, if that’s what I want. And you also say they are pushing gnome on people. It appears they are getting away from gnome. You also say its starting to look like Windows (which I don’t agree). But I really don’t see Windows as the devil. They obvious did do some things right, otherwise it wouldn’t have been so easy for them to sell all the millions of copies every couple of years for a couple of hundred dollars. Many of the other OS’ would not have died out so quickly (Atari, Commodore, PET, Amiga, TI, Tandy, Sinclair, VIC, etc).

-- L. James

--
L. D. James
ljames@apollo3.com
www.apollo3.com/~ljames

Interesting points you make above, and whilst I do agree with some, I think it's probably me coming from a techie background that makes me think how I do. I don't really think it's a bad thing that Ubuntu is making itself easy for novices, the issues I have is that by making the OS as "novice friendly") as possible, it removes the need for users to tinker, to hit a problem, read up on a fix for an hour or so then sort it out, having learnt a wealth of information. You the have a userbase where the users don't appreciate the OS for what it's really great at - for its flexibility, power, tweakability and for the fact that you have to do the odd quirky thing here and there like type "startx" if you want a gui! Yes, the experts will carry on as they always have, however the newer "novices" will always be novices because they never have the need to do anything else - and I think that is a real shame.
As a strange analogy, it's like having a pretty box as a decoration on your mantelpiece. You have never opened it because it is nice just to look at, and the key for it is lost somewhere in the attic. It serves its purpose, and you're content with it. Only if you go and look for the key and open the box will you discover that it in fact holds some magnificent things inside!

I am sorry, not a whole lot, but I think that Ubuntu has gone way too far in thinking the new user is an idiot. I do not think they are, although sometimes I do wonder about me.

I had never used a computer before 1994. Then I learned to use MSDos on a very low power box to work with Lotus123. Where I was working upgrade a bit and we added DosShell. We even, while I was there, got to whatever version that was that had a gui, pre Win95.

My wife and I bought a computer in 98, custom built by a friend, pre installed with W98. That box was so well built that we stuck with it and 98 until 08. In that period we did need to replace the CD-rom drive. Power unit fried.

Bought this box with Vista Home Premium on it. This was, to me a downgrade as everything we did daily, at least weekly, was slower than doing the same thing on a P2 with 128ram and 98. I knew it had to go in 3 days. My wife was slower, took less than 4 weeks though.

Installed, knowing nothing about Linux at all, Ubuntu 8.04.1. There was absolutely no problem at all.

I am not in any way a geek. I am, in real life, a ranch hand. We very seldom have to boot up a cow or horse. My saddle does not even have a usb port.

The installer for 8.04 was easier to use than the current one which makes things more hidden and directs you down very limited paths.

It was easier in W98 to configure the look of the desktop than in the current Ubuntu release. Much easier than it will be in the next.

Yes the tools are all there. I can find and use them. I can go and dig up the config files and edit them. I would not have been able to do that in 8.04 and did not need to. The gui tools were there for the using, pretty self explanatory and FUN.

Most folks that think of leaving a pricy OS for something else are looking for something different. They are curious people that are willing to learn something new.

The design of Ubuntu and Gnome have been kind to that sort for a while now. They for some reason have decided that they can attract folks, now, best by imitating the MS experience. Hard to configure, for the new user, and the DE locked in one shape for all users, no matter what they are doing.

Why on earth would I leave an OS that I was used to and had paid for to use some cheap imitation. The thinking is badly flawed.