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

Thank you, Ubuntu

psung.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 133 posts

Re: Thank you, Ubuntu

#121

Post by robgough »

swies wrote: post #69
IgorPartola wrote: post #17

I keep try to evangelize the fact that things like apt are one of the biggest wins for the various UNIX-like OS's. In Windows world installing software takes both finding it and configuring the installer. On a Mac you have to at least find it. On Ubuntu/Debian/etc you just have to know the name (or you can search a central database). Also no more Java/Flash player/Acrobat Reader "needs to be updated" messages. You up…

http://ninite.com is getting close to apt-get for Windows. We're working on a Mac version too. Things are better on Linux, but not all rosy. Installing Dropbox, for example, is a surprisingly crappy experience (windows popping up, separate proprietary daemon download, etc). That, and way more user requests than you'd imagine, is why we have http://ninite.com/linux now too.

I use ninite all the time (it's brilliant!), but only ever for initial installation. Does it handle updating apps?

Re: Thank you, Ubuntu

#122

Post by meric »

IgorPartola wrote: post #77
mdwrigh2 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OS X has a package manager, it just isn't installed by default. Checkout MacPorts or Homebrew.

Yes, I am aware of these projects. They, however, don't have the advantages that things like apt have. For example you cannot use them to update your entire OS. Instead you must order DVD's from Apple, and then boot from them. Yes, installing certain software this way is easier, but it is not nearly as convenient as having the entire OS built around it. On the other hand, existence of these projects indicates that Ma…

The existence of these projects is necessitated because users want to use unix-y programs but they don't know how to compile themselves. I don't use either of homebrew or macports anymore. I used to have them but then when I want to make something that depends on something I got from homebrew or macports it doesn't quite work and I end up downloading the source and compiling it into a framework using XCode myself anyway.

I've done this so many times it doesn't take me more than a few minutes to get all the dependencies in order. (I can re-use frameworks I've made before). The frameworks are embedded into the application bundle and can be used on any other computer that can run universal binaries. That makes the app portable, too. The beauty of all this is that other computers don't even need a compiler installed and they can still use the same programs I built. Of course it'll never beat apt... but it's the easiest in terms of getting that DVD to ipod video converter onto my aunt's computer.

I believe you're right. If you want package management the OS has to be built around it, otherwise it won't work quite right (unless you put time into it, of course).

I still will use macosx though, it needs less configuration and everything just works; or maybe I'm just too used to it to use anything else. Mac OS X is built for consumers and developers who develop for consumers who use Apple products. For these consumers and developers Mac OS X is the best there is. Unfortunately I think that's it. Terminal is still good, though.

To upgrade your OS, you only need to click "Restart" when software update tells you to. The only time you need the DVDs is when there is a major version out, i.e "Leopard", "Snow Leopard", etc.

Re: Thank you, Ubuntu

#123

Post by technomancy »

_delirium wrote: post #66
thristian wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth, I'm an ex-Mac user who went back to Linux because I missed apt. Of course, I do a lot of hobby programming and general messing around with open-source software; if your use-cases tend more towards pre-packaged software, you might get on perfectly well.

I do sort of both by running Debian inside Virtualbox on my Macbook as a dev environment. I especially like being able to install -dev packages to get header files/libraries into the right places, whereas on OSX, if you want to compile software that depends on anything that didn't come with XCode, it's a mess of manually extracting things and passing pathnames. I don't go the whole way and just install Debian on the…

> I don't go the whole way and just install Debian on the machine mostly because having OSX handle things like the touchpad driver, hibernation, wifi, etc., is less hassle

Have you tried this recently, or do you just say that because it's the stereotype? Because it's been over three years since I had any hardware trouble with Ubuntu. These days I have more issues on my friend's OS X Macbook (no drivers for 3G modems out of the box) than I do on Ubuntu where everything just works.

Re: Thank you, Ubuntu

#124

Post by kylec »

Raphael_Amiard wrote: post #27
kylec wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all hardware. I couldn't even get the install disc for 10.04 to boot on my 2010 13" MacBook Pro. I'll give it another try when 10.10 comes out, but Ubintu definitely does not "just work" on all hardware.

Well the way OSS drivers developpment works means that you're far more likely to experience problems with new hardware than with old hardware. That, plus the mac pro, even if it is an intel based machine, is the most closed hardware you could find on this platform. So, "couldn't even" may not be the right choice of word for your situation .

I wasn't expecting it to work 100% flawlessly out of the box. But not even able to boot? I feel sorry for Canonical as 10.04 is an LTS release, so they're now stuck with this rather glaring incompatibility for years.

Re: Thank you, Ubuntu

#125

Post by swies »

robgough wrote: post #121
swies wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://ninite.com is getting close to apt-get for Windows. We're working on a Mac version too. Things are better on Linux, but not all rosy. Installing Dropbox, for example, is a surprisingly crappy experience (windows popping up, separate proprietary daemon download, etc). That, and way more user requests than you'd imagine, is why we have http://ninite.com/linux now too.

I use ninite all the time (it's brilliant!), but only ever for initial installation. Does it handle updating apps?

Yes, just run the installer again (they always get the latest versions, regardless of when they were made). We're looking into building some sort of dedicated update checker too.

Glad to hear you like it.

Re: Thank you, Ubuntu

#126

Post by docgnome »

rbanffy wrote: post #8
1tw wrote: post #2

"it runs on every piece of hardware you throw at it" That's what continues to impress me about Ubuntu - I've installed it on everything from PPC-era Macs to dodgy little netbooks and it invariably 'just works'.

There was a time when you had to carefully choose your hardware to work with Linux. These days, you have to carefully choose your hardware in order to experience problems. I am surprised by how many people do the latter.

The only bit of hardware I've had problems with recently is Broadcom wireless cards. Worse Drivers ever. I still won't ever buy one intentionally and when I find one will replace it with an intel or something else that works with out a giant hassle.

Re: Thank you, Ubuntu

#127

Post by etal »

kylec wrote: post #124
Raphael_Amiard wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well the way OSS drivers developpment works means that you're far more likely to experience problems with new hardware than with old hardware. That, plus the mac pro, even if it is an intel based machine, is the most closed hardware you could find on this platform. So, "couldn't even" may not be the right choice of word for your situation .

I wasn't expecting it to work 100% flawlessly out of the box. But not even able to boot? I feel sorry for Canonical as 10.04 is an LTS release, so they're now stuck with this rather glaring incompatibility for years.

LTS versions have stable patch-level releases every 6 months while they're supported (e.g. 10.04.1 was released in July, and there will probably be a 10.04.2 in January), so they're able to add drivers to the installer when they become available.

Re: Thank you, Ubuntu

#128

Post by _b8r0 »

Andys wrote: post #31
_b8r0 wrote: post #19

It's weird. I used to love Ubuntu, but after 8.04 I just stopped liking it. The little things niggled away at me. The bloat, the fear of upgrades breaking things (this is why my main home file server still runs 8.04, something I'm not happy about) if you have a slightly nonstandard install. I switched to Arch for my main home laptop and breathed new life into a PIII-850 with 128mb of RAM. Ubuntu would've killed it. I…

Weird. Its since 8.04 and onwards that upgrades STOPPED breaking things for me. Its been a golden era for Ubuntu.

Yeah, I set up disk encryption for all my partitions except for /boot which If I remember from the install (6.06 LTS) wasn't a standard option at the time, upgrading to 8.04 caused me a whole load of grief.

I know I should rebuild it and it'll probably be fine, but if I was going to rebuild I think I'd use Arch instead (just a personal choice).

But the VMs of Ubuntu that I use of newer versions, yeah they're great.

Re: Thank you, Ubuntu

#129

Post by rwl »

lmz wrote: post #111
rwl wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? The "average computer user" is precisely the kind of person who is likely to have commodity hardware that is supported by Ubuntu. Would you not recommend it because you can't guarantee that Ubuntu will work with all her hardware? If that's the problem, then what would you recommend? Can you guarantee that some other OS supports every piece of hardware she owns? Or are you holding Ubuntu to a higher standard? If…

Hardware can be expected to work on Windows. If they don't, it's the hardware manufacturer's fault. There might be nothing you can do about it, but it's their fault. They manufacturers are expected to support Windows. If hardware doesn't work on Ubuntu, it's your fault for installing an unsupported system.

> Hardware can be expected to work on Windows. If they don't, it's the hardware manufacturer's fault.

Sorry, this is an unreasonable expectation, and one that should be corrected, not reinforced. The "average user" has no right to expect that an operating system should work with any and all hardware, simply because one operating system has a monopoly position with respect to users and a monopsony-ish position with respect to hardware makers. It hurts all computer users, and Free software users in particular, when we allow such companies to set our expectations.

Re: Thank you, Ubuntu

#130

Post by Scott_MacGregor »

wazoox wrote: post #14
MisterWebz wrote: post #11

I've been having a lot of problems with Ubuntu. First of all, wireless on Ubuntu sucks. I can't be bothered reading tons of articles on how to fix wireless, i just want it to work like it does on Windows. Ubuntu doesn't detect a few of my webcams. I can't even install Ubuntu 10.04 on my new laptop (though it seems they're busy fixing it), so i'm stuck with 9.04. I'm also having some trouble with Chrome on Ubuntu, but…

The drivers problems are a manufacturer problem, not Ubuntu's. Complain against the manufacturer, so that they know that people actually want linux drivers. Vote with your wallet, buy linux compatible hardware. Don't blame Ubuntu for others' mistakes.

That is correct. No hardware will work with every OS. Certain hardware will support certain versions of Ubuntu though. It makes life a lot easier and saves an enormous amount of time if you research what the hardware will support first, and then use the correct hardware and OS combinations. With an unsupported combination sometimes it will look like everything is ok but you will have intermittent problems such as USB ports not working sometimes, or other issues. With the correct combination of hardware Ubuntu will work fine.
Post reply on HN