by ahmicro on 10/29/11, 10:39 PM with 172 comments
by div on 10/29/11, 11:54 PM
Anything I ever wanted is just an apt-get away and is mostly installed in a sensible way.
Ubuntu simplifying desktop features and changing defaults to be easier for users like my mom sounds like a great thing to happen to Linux.
That stuff is mostly orthogonal to developers who, you know, know how to deviate from the standard configuration and tools.
by Zak on 10/30/11, 12:42 AM
I think Ubuntu may be trying to move too fast. Moving fast is great if you can pull it off, but it's not worth breaking the basic functions of the OS to get a more flashy UI. If Ubuntu does want to copy Apple, there's one major thing they need to learn: Apple releases features when they're done.
by sofuture on 10/30/11, 12:03 AM
I, for one, applaud what they're doing, as much as it terrifies all the half-power-users (I don't mean that as a slight, I do think it's a little silly to get upset about Ubuntu's default WM and claim to 'understand UNIX').
by methodin on 10/30/11, 2:39 AM
by notatoad on 10/30/11, 12:29 AM
you can't please all the people all the time. at some point you have to make a decision that some use cases can't be supported, for the sake of progress. in those cases, i think dropping support for the people who need support the least is the only logical way to go.
personally, i use ubuntu (and unity too!) every day as my primary development machine (python programming and database admin), and when i come home i have it on my primary play machine too. it does what it needs to do if you are willing to adjust your workflow a little bit. and if you aren't willing to adjust your workflow at all, ever, then maybe preconfigured DEs are not for you.
by lsc on 10/30/11, 4:02 AM
The problem is that unity is, well, it's garbage. If I wanted a mac, I'd buy a mac. I liked the old gnome defaults; they were pretty good. Right now? I'm on ubuntu 11.10, and I'm considering another distro.
Unity is simply unusable; It's annoying for all the reasons that the mac interface is annoying, only the whole thing is done, well, worse. Just finding a program is a huge pain in the ass. So I'm running gnome-legacy, which is okay, but still pretty annoying compared to older ubuntu versions.
So yeah; I'm pretty irritated. Not irritated enough to buy a mac, mind you, but likely irritated enough to spend some time looking at other distros, if I'm going to have to spend effort on my X setup, I'm going with a distro that is supported for more than three years.
by LVB on 10/30/11, 12:40 AM
Please, phrase, go away. You're not profound anymore.
by vacri on 10/30/11, 2:46 AM
Ubuntu has specifically stated that they're aiming for the layperson, not the power user. If you cut your teeth on ubuntu and want more power in your linux box... try out another distro.
by phzbOx on 10/30/11, 4:38 AM
Soooo, I find it weird that the author complains about Ubuntu saying it's not the right direction. We all know there are dozen of distributions and dozen of window managers. By all means, if you don't like the new updates, just take a WM more lightweight (For instance, fluxbox, awesome, stumpwm, xmonad, etc.) As for the distro, I'm using ArchLinux for a couple of years and I'm loving it.
It's not that I don't like beautiful intuitive UI; it's just that it's not for me (At least on my computers). However, I've got an iPhone and I love the fact that everything just work. But please, don't force me to use GUI everywhere on my desktop; let that for people who enjoys the everything just work.
But then, maybe I'm wrong. I assumed that Ubuntu always was axed for beginners.. Was I wrong with that assumption?
by Cieplak on 10/30/11, 1:03 AM
My interpretation of the article: it would be more prudent to compete with Apple's weaknesses (developer friendliness) than to compete with their strengths (UI, zero configuration).
by ceol on 10/30/11, 12:22 AM
Plus, as div said, developers live mostly in the terminal, so there isn't much that Canonical can do to cater to us. I'd rather have everything hidden from the end user but easily available to the power user via the command line.
by rhizome31 on 10/30/11, 4:36 AM
I've spent way to many hours helping fellow developers, friends and relatives to debug their Apple. Apple does not make things that just work irrespective of prior computer usage. People get totally lost with Apple just as they do with other environments and that is indeed irrespective of prior computer knowledge, which means so-called developers also get lost (MySQL-python anyone? Or maybe you'd rather have another slice of RMagick?)
by TiberiusJones on 10/30/11, 1:38 PM
Fact of the matter is, if you don't like Unity don't bloody use it. I've never found a single thing I couldn't do in Ubuntu that would force me over to another distro. I mean sure, we could all build our own Gentoo installs from the ground up but who the hell has that sort of time on their hands?
To indicate that Ubuntu is inherently a newbie only system because of eye candy smacks of both arrogance and a complete lack of understanding. It's like calling a mansion a shack because you don't like the colour of the window frames.
by hippich on 10/30/11, 12:15 AM
If you are unix power user - you should not care much about default desktop. You should customize it right away from the moment you installed _any_ distro to fit your needs.
Ubuntu do a great job of turning more people into nix environment. And it is good for you and for nix developers.
by comex on 10/30/11, 12:35 AM
As does OS X's, in addition to Perl, Ruby, PHP...
by achiang on 10/30/11, 5:21 AM
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2011/05/mark-shuttleworth-deliver...
Also, re: screensavers -- upstream GNOME removed that ability, and Ubuntu inherited the behavior. From what I understand, we're putting it back.
[canonical employee, speaking on my own behalf]
by trimbo on 10/30/11, 12:27 AM
The size of Xcode annoys me too, since I never use it. So I've been using this GCC install on my Mac: https://github.com/kennethreitz/osx-gcc-installer
Couple hundred megabytes. It's still a lot larger than Orca/C was on my Apple IIgs (1 or 2 3.5" floppies?), but then again, compilers come with a lot of libraries these days.
by ricardobeat on 10/30/11, 12:46 AM
by jsz0 on 10/30/11, 12:07 AM
The big problem with Ubutunu is still that it is, no matter how much nicer they make it look, a collection of inconsistently designed user interfaces for mediocre clones of better applications on other platforms. It has no soul. It just stumbles forward feebly copying whatever else happens to be popular on other platforms. It's always going to be playing catch-up to ever moving goal posts. Unless you have some religious zeal to use OSS software there is no good reason to even consider Ubuntu over Windows or OSX.
by freshhawk on 10/30/11, 3:07 AM
Power users should not be using it, it's not built for them.
by tuananh on 10/30/11, 12:03 AM
by RK on 10/30/11, 4:41 AM
by cageface on 10/30/11, 1:44 AM
A hefty download, perhaps, but free and once it's installed you have a good, modern, IDE with extensive documentation and perhaps the richest and most mature UI toolkit there is to play with. Getting something into the app store for sale may require crossing more speed bumps than necessary but if you want to learn systems or UI hacking it's far easier on a Mac now than it was on an Apple II.
Ubuntu may have taken this simplification strategy too far but catering primarily to the power user and developer is what earned Linux its minuscule market share in the first place.
by 2muchcoffeeman on 10/30/11, 3:03 AM
by magnethy on 10/30/11, 7:13 AM
Why?
* X doesn't automatically set up my nvidia graphics card. Sure, I can manually install the driver and set up Xorg.conf, but I just don't want to do that. Luckily there's also an integrated Intel graphics card.¨
* VGA port does not work (no presentations using the projector for me) because of previous point.
* The wireless keeps freezing. At least 10 times a day I have to (using the physical switch on the side of the laptop) turn off the wireless card and turn it on again. Wow. This also is something I'm sure can be fixed by jumbling around with drivers, but again - I just don't want to do that.
* Gnome is horrible. I might be spoiled (lets face it: I AM spoiled) by Apple and their 'everything just works' - which it pretty much does as far as UI goes. Currently I'm running Xfce, which I found to be pleasantly simple. I found Gnome to be buggy and annyoing. Just like in the old days.
Of course there are a lot of positives, like apt being great (my main reason for the switch), and all the available GNU/Linux tools. As others have pointed out, if you use the terminal a lot it's great - but that goes for pretty much any distro.
As far as Ubuntu goes I totally agree with OP. It just doesn't cut it. It's supposed to bring Linux to the people, isn't it? Well, it's not doing a good job of that. I installed Ubuntu to have a system that just works. It doesn't.
If Apple were to bring in a customizable packaging system like apt it'd be a dangerously perfect match. Don't see that happening though.
by daedalus_j on 10/29/11, 11:59 PM
I do agree though, and I do hope Canonical takes this advice and succeeds at it. They're possibly one of the only groups both big enough and organized enough to pull it off and do it well.
by barumrho on 10/30/11, 12:20 AM
When Ubuntu first came along, I was a Linux user, and I tried Ubuntu on a few different occasions, but I never liked it mostly for the same reasons why people seem to be complaining. It just felt like eye candies tacked onto Debian. There are many other good distributions that are geared toward power users. Why are so many complaining?
by aufreak3 on 10/30/11, 2:13 AM
by cmars232 on 10/30/11, 2:43 AM
by jroseattle on 10/30/11, 6:33 AM
by jebblue on 10/30/11, 5:17 PM
I'm going to try out KDE for a while, it's heavy or it used to be, Gnome 2 was just right. I've tried XFCE and it feels like an older Gnome (which isn't a bad thing), down the road it might be the better option until they get a wild hair and go nutts too.
by drdaeman on 10/31/11, 2:39 AM
This leads to a problem that one just can't have easily co-existing multiple approaches to work and configuration (i.e. "Ubuntu newbie" vs "seasoned GNU/Linux guru" ways). You have either one or another, and switching between is a pain.
by ashishgandhi on 10/30/11, 2:07 AM
I see that kind of stuff said from time to time. But I don't quite understand. How is it growing?
And people talk about it (App Store) as if it's terribly evil of Apple but it's okay when it gets done on say a Xbox.
by jhuni on 10/30/11, 2:18 AM
Furthermore, I personally use versions of Android on my tablets and Ubuntu on my desktops. I see no reason that Ubuntu should "make a dent in the tablet market" when Android is already doing fine for us.
by devmach on 10/30/11, 2:41 AM
1- They think users are plan stupid so they have to decide what's good for users.
2- They're just copying from Apple, don't think about why apple did like that. This will end up with a mess. When i use my friend's mac, i think "this thing can't be better" and then when i use ubuntu with unity all i can think is "What the fk they were thinking ?"
by dfc on 10/30/11, 4:25 AM
by EGreg on 10/30/11, 2:42 AM
When I think of a Linux I should install just to get things done, I think of Ubuntu. The more it positions itself that way, the more it will get users. The GPL and free software culture should take care of the rest. It is the responsibility of developers to build an ecosystem for themselves, because they know how to do it.
Don't you guys see this is why Linux's marketshare has been so small for now? If you don't like Ubuntu, by the way, there are always other Linux distros. You're welcome to install Slackware. On my server, I run CentOS. Why can't there be ONE linux distro that regular people can use without reading a manual?
by dfc on 10/30/11, 4:23 AM
by joejohnson on 10/30/11, 3:39 AM
by jiggy2011 on 10/30/11, 9:45 AM
The relative failure of Linux as a traditional desktop platform has very little to do with the UI. Sure Gnome 2 looks clunky and outdated now but it's basically a Win2000/XP Clone as far as UI is concerned (startmenu + taskbar + quicklaunch). So it will have been familiar enough to most users who come from a windows background (who are going to be the ones most wanting to try it). The UI is the not big issue here...
The problems with the Linux desktop for "normal users" (whoever they are) are and always have been:
Lack of ports of popular commercial software for many tasks and in many (not all) cases a lack of a "good enough" open source alternative.
Lack of reliable support for many consumer hardware configurations that are bundled with cheap desktops (nvidia/ATI support still isn't 100% for example), also on some netbooks you install ubuntu and the Fn + F(Key) combinations don't work unless you know to install a specific package. Also support for niche hardware for some tasks is hit/miss.
Weird intermittent issues that some people experience with power saving , wireless , flash etc..
No amount of changing the dock/menubar will fix any of these issues.
Let's face it , default unity is ugly.. it makes windows 7 look gorgeous by comparison but this has pretty much always been the way with Gnome/KDE. For many users (like me) the customisation aspect has been more than enough to make up for this however, unity pretty much kills that.
The only reasons I can think to advise anybody to run a linux desktop are:
You really care about OSS ideals and will not use any non-free software (in which case you want debian not ubuntu).
You are super paranoid and want something secure to install in a VM for using online banking etc.
You want a second OS so that you can diagnose more easily whether something is a hardware/software problem.
You develop software that will run on a Linux server so want a desktop environment that is as close to production as possible (this is me and probably most serious workplace Linux users)
Your a geek and like playing with different OSes
If somebody genuinely only wants to run facebook/youtube etc then pretty much any OS out there will suit their needs, in which case they will want to move over to something closer to iOS / Android rather than some half baked unity.
Even Microsoft have acknologed that you can't really easily build a UI that will work for the casual tablet / netbook user and the "content creator"/business user hence the seperation of metro and the standard Windows UI. I have almost 0 faith in canonical succeeding here.
Building a super simple UI on top of Linux should be left to the likes of Google/HTC, with commercial OSes being increasingly locked down a space is opening for a serious "power user" system with high customisability, this is where Ubuntu could win big.
Of course people will say to me "oh your not the target market , use another distro" Well there are a few problems with this argument:
The reason I use Ubuntu is because it is the closest thing the Linux desktop has to a defacto standard setup. Anybody who cares about distributing Linux applications will make sure they work with ubuntu and usually provide a tested .deb or an apt repo. If I switch distro there is a fair chance I lose this and end up back with source tarballs and weird install scripts. I spent a large part of the last 10 years trying different distros and this has consistently been the worst part of the experience.
Just because I am a power user does not mean I don't want my applications to "just work" and be installable through a standard simple interface, Ubuntu does this very very well (for the most part).
I think the whole idea of having different distros for novices and advanced users pretty idiotic really, a good distro should install with sensible defaults that "just work" and allow anybody who wants to customise to a greater or lesser degree. Many developers and other advanced users seem to have no problem customising the "beginner friendly" mac OS for their needs.
I could go on , but I think I'll leave it there :)
by jfricker on 10/30/11, 12:19 AM
by DannoHung on 10/30/11, 1:06 AM