Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fix Ubuntu

fixubuntu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 304 posts

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#291

Post by tzury »

csmuk wrote: post #43
nisa wrote: post #29

My personal fix Ubuntu: Be careful, this is pretty rude and may break stuff - it is also not complete but some dependencies are too entangled. Only geoclue and indicator-datetime still annoy me. The idea to poll the internet regulary to check for the timezone of the machine is beyond me. apt-get purge ubuntuone* # I don't use it apt-get purge unity-lens-music unity-lens-video unity-lens-photos # I don't need the inte…

My personal one: # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=4M Then I go and find another distribution that doesn't treat its users like cattle. Ubuntu, after shuttleworth being an asshat to the community and the whole amazon and NIH Mir and upstart crap, is now the Ryanair of Linux distributions. incidentally, don't type the above.

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    !!! ALERT !!!

    Do not type or paste the above, unless you wish to 
    destroy your partition!

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#292

Post by jebblue »

Thrymr wrote: post #260
jebblue wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I understand it right, Unstable doesn't get security fixes: http://www.debian.org/security/faq#unstable And Testing doesn't get fixes for contrib and non-free: http://www.debian.org/security/faq#testing

It means that unstable isn't specifically tested for security, but security fixes will go to unstable first, before they propagate to testing.

Thanks for the clarification but reading the FAQ again for both Unstable and Testing in the context of your comment I'm still struggling to compare it to how Ubuntu gets security fixes for example.

I checked the security site listed in the Testing area in the Debian FAQ and don't see the recent SSH fix or the recent Linux kernel fix.

http://www.debian.org/security/

I do see them on the Ubuntu site:

http://www.ubuntu.com/usn/

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#293

Post by csmuk »

tzury wrote: post #291
csmuk wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My personal one: # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=4M Then I go and find another distribution that doesn't treat its users like cattle. Ubuntu, after shuttleworth being an asshat to the community and the whole amazon and NIH Mir and upstart crap, is now the Ryanair of Linux distributions. incidentally, don't type the above.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * !!! ALERT !!! Do not type or paste the above, unless you wish to destroy your partition! * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Thanks for making it even more obvious :)

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#294

Post by [deleted] »

orionblastar wrote: post #257

Canonical is using people and organizations who use Ubuntu: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/11/canoni... I had recently made Blastarix: http://blastar.in/linux/ I am now scared that I'll get sued, just because I modified Ubuntu, renamed it to Blastarix, and removed the Amazon search and ads feature with some other tweaks. I do not know how to remove the Ubuntu logo and startup screens and I used uc…

[deleted]

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#295

Post by danielweber »

J_Darnley wrote: post #250
danielweber wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really haven't noticed a big difference between XP to 7. The control panel things moved around a bit, but the settings were all still in the Control Panel (and you could get the classic view back easily), and I had to figure out how to right-click on things "run as Admin". My son just hopped from XP to 7 and he's been having zero issues. I admit I haven't gone to Windows 8. I owe myself a new laptop and I just have…

As someone who recently had little choice but to start using 7, I can say that the differences between XP and 7 are vast, many, and annoying. Some can be fixed with Classic Shell, some by a few choice changes to settings and appearance, but some are just features that were removed.

As I get more experience in 7, I am finding it more painful. It might be one particular implementation where any attempt to bring up network settings resulted in nothing happening, not even an error message.

Also, clicking on the "volume" icon should not bring up a spinning blue circle, not even for a millisecond.

I just might get chased into a MacBook or whatever they are called these days. And I don't like Apple very much right now so that's something.

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#296

Post by ashazar »

donpdonp wrote: post #143
rlpb wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or use Xubuntu, Lubuntu, Kubuntu or Ubuntu GNOME. None of these use Unity as their default desktop, whose default behavior is really what this complaint is about.

If Unity is the problem, Ubuntu has the Gnome Shell already in its repo. Its quick and easy. $ sudo apt-get install gnome-shell You keep the benefits of the Ubuntu package repo, kernel patches, etc.

I tried this and run startx.

What i get is only a black screen. Even though i restarted my laptop, still black screen.

How can i return back to Unity?

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#297

Post by SkyMarshal »

MrZongle2 wrote: post #215
nowarninglabel wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it's quite sad to me, I thought I would never move on from Ubuntu, it was really great until Unity and all this other crap they started piling on it. And now with the corporate fear-mongering over their trademark, that's the last straw for me, I'm going to try moving upstream to Debian and recommend companies I work to do the same.

Same here; I was a huge fanboy of Ubuntu for years, but Canonical seems hellbent on introducing change for change's sake. At first, it was mildly annoying but easily corrected: the nonsensical decision to move window maximize/minimize/close buttons from right to left is an example. But Unity was a bitter (and buggy) pill to swallow. I've moved on to Linux Mint and Crunchbang. Can't say I miss Ubuntu at this point. If…

>the nonsensical decision to move window maximize/minimize/close buttons from right to left is an example

Haha, fwiw I actually love that move. I work on a laptop 99% of the time and just maximize all my windows and alt-tab among them.

Moving the window buttons as they did saved an entire toolbar worth of vertical space and enabled them to create a highly responsive top left menu area:

Normal use: Window Title & Description

Holding Alt or Mousing Over: Switches to window buttons and menus

Saves space, works seamlessly. Of course, I keybind literally everything to Vim binds so I almost never use the mouse, which I think is where a lot of hate is coming from - right-handed mouse users feeling like they have to move the mouse further now to hit the window controls.

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#298

Post by Goladus »

laumars wrote: post #252
levesque wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with other distros is the lack of a design. Ubuntu was the first Linux distro I used that did not look like a donkey's ass (back in 2008~). Even today's Gnome Shell does not look as good as Unity... it also does not scale well for my display's 1600x900 resolution (top bar icons are way too small). The other distros might work well technically, but imho they don't look as good and they require more tweakin…

> The problem with other distros is the lack of a design. Not true - plenty of distros ship pretty default themes (ArchBang, Mint, ElementoryOS, etc). And themes are just that - a theme. They can easily be installed on any distro - even ones that look "ugly" out of the box. > Ubuntu was the first Linux distro I used that did not look like a donkey's ass (back in 2008~). They key bit there is "I used" - ie there's bee…

I realize you're just responding to the previous commenter but what Ubuntu did before all the other distros was get all the common desktop devices (network/wireless/video/etc.), apps(browsers, multimedia, pdf-readers, office, mailreader, etc.), and tools installed and working with no need for tinkering. It wasn't missing fonts or video codecs. The UI defaults were familiar to windows and mac users. Boot times were fast. Installing new apps was easy and since it was based on debian there were tons of packages available.

Ubuntu was the first one to really nail ALL of those problems. By 2008, others may have mostly caught up, but by then the word was already out that Ubuntu was the distribution of choice for users who just wanted good linux desktop OS but didn't want to spend any up-front time tinkering with it. This also made it the first choice for windows users switching to a linux desktop.

It wasn't just a matter of shouting the loudest. It was word of mouth that did it. Linux users (developers, sysadmins; not necessarily linux desktop power users) were chosing Ubuntu and recommending it to their peers and family.

Where the parent poster gets it wrong is that there wasn't one thing in particular that all the other distros were doing wrong (eg "design"), it's that each one had something thwarting users trying to use it as a desktop OS. Whether it was spotty driver support, strict "free software" mentality, minimal base installs missing key software, or bad default settings, there was something.

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#299

Post by laumars »

Goladus wrote: post #298
laumars wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem with other distros is the lack of a design. Not true - plenty of distros ship pretty default themes (ArchBang, Mint, ElementoryOS, etc). And themes are just that - a theme. They can easily be installed on any distro - even ones that look "ugly" out of the box. > Ubuntu was the first Linux distro I used that did not look like a donkey's ass (back in 2008~). They key bit there is "I used" - ie there's bee…

I realize you're just responding to the previous commenter but what Ubuntu did before all the other distros was get all the common desktop devices (network/wireless/video/etc.), apps(browsers, multimedia, pdf-readers, office, mailreader, etc.), and tools installed and working with no need for tinkering. It wasn't missing fonts or video codecs. The UI defaults were familiar to windows and mac users. Boot times were fa…

I've been using Linux for more than 10 or 15 years and I'm fairly sure Mandrake nailed most -if not all- of those things back in 2003. As did SuSE (things went downhill for SuSE desktops after Novell signed a deal with Microsoft which meant Novell went all purist about removing non-free and patent encumbered libraries from their repositories)

And I certainly wasn't recommending Ubuntu back in 2008. I'm sure some developers and sysadmins may have been, but I wasn't (but then by that point I'd been running Slackware and FreeBSD for a few years, so I definitely wasn't Canonicals target audience).

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#300

Post by Goladus »

laumars wrote: post #299
Goladus wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I realize you're just responding to the previous commenter but what Ubuntu did before all the other distros was get all the common desktop devices (network/wireless/video/etc.), apps(browsers, multimedia, pdf-readers, office, mailreader, etc.), and tools installed and working with no need for tinkering. It wasn't missing fonts or video codecs. The UI defaults were familiar to windows and mac users. Boot times were fa…

I've been using Linux for more than 10 or 15 years and I'm fairly sure Mandrake nailed most -if not all- of those things back in 2003. As did SuSE (things went downhill for SuSE desktops after Novell signed a deal with Microsoft which meant Novell went all purist about removing non-free and patent encumbered libraries from their repositories) And I certainly wasn't recommending Ubuntu back in 2008. I'm sure some deve…

I've been using Linux for more than 10 or 15 years and I'm fairly sure Mandrake nailed most -if not all- of those things back in 2003.

Please don't expect me to be able to list every single potential fault that might have been relevant. I used several distros during that time and have a decent memory but there's no way I can really prove my point without actually walking you through some typical user experiences and contrasting them with a typical experience on Windows and OS X.

For example: with a randomly selected machine from New Egg: install OS, configure a user, change the screen resolution, connect to the internet, install two non-developer productivity applications (musical score-writing, and audio production, in my case), configure MIDI, download some mp3s and start playing them, use a flash webpage, use a page with a java applet, download some image files, make some simple modifications (crop/resize/etc) and share them via email. Transfer them to a USB stick. Set up a printer and print a travel itenerary. Download + Install a free indie videogame from the web.

Most of that was possible with various distributions in 2003. But how many bumps could a random casual user expect along the way? Maybe I'd have no problems mounting a USB drive but maybe setting up MIDI would be a pain. Maybe there would be no driver issues but after trying to change the screen resolution I'd break the X configs and be unable start the X server on a reboot. Maybe the screen resolution configuration would work but there was no package for an app I wanted and I had to compile from source and manually track down every single dependency after reading the README. All it takes is one or two issues for someone like me to just go back to Windows and actually get stuff done.

I knew a guy who favored slackware. He had a tricked out Pontiac Grand Prix that he'd customized in his own garage and he treated his Linux machine the same way, configuring his own desktop themes various personalized features. Stuff that I just don't care about (and neither do most users).

Post reply on HN