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

Why Mark Shuttleworth is important to desktop Linux

fossforce.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 83 posts

Re: Why Mark Shuttleworth is important to desktop Linux

#51

Post by wyz9 »

Mark Shuttleworth and Canonical are important to ‘desktop Linux’ mainly because they are attempting to kill it. Note that they do not even advertise Ubuntu as a GNU or Linux distribution.

It seems the current strategy of Canonical is to change enough of the system so that developing cross-distribution will become more and more of a hassle, and trust software developers to just target Ubuntu due to its market share in Linux-land.

Unity was a step in the direction. It’s not critical to other programs, but Unity itself appears to be very hard to port to other distributions (and to be honest it was the first thing that actually made Ubuntu distinct from other Debian derived distributions).

Mir takes it a step further, now wm and toolkit developers will have to target either just Wayland, and lose out on the vast Ubuntu userbase, or target just Mir.

Canonical does its best to bring closed-source commercial desktop applications to the operating system through the Ubuntu app store. With good reason: they know the developers of these commercial applications will only target Ubuntu, since unlike open source programs where the distribution’s packagers do the work of bringing your application to their OS for you, that can’t be done very well with just binary packages compiled against x version of y library. Thus forcing users who want to use one of these applications to switch to Ubuntu.

EDIT: and let’s not forget that Canonical ships what is basically spyware with Ubuntu. Local searches on your desktop should not be used to help Amazon advertise. Shuttleworth’s reaction to the complaints were extremely cynical as well.

Re: Why Mark Shuttleworth is important to desktop Linux

#52

Post by 89vision »

SeanDav wrote: post #48
themstheones wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently you've never tried gentoo.

"Apparently you've never tried gentoo." and this right here (sorry Parent, just using this as an example) is the reason that Linux has always been consigned to the ranks of the also-rans on the desktop. Someone will always come up with a reason why flavour x is better than flavour y. No matter what aspect of Linux is discussed, there will always be a significant proportion of users that think their flavour is better.…

"usable" "gentoo"

I think I detect a hint of sarcasm

Re: Why Mark Shuttleworth is important to desktop Linux

#53

Post by general_failure »

keithpeter wrote: post #49
mkr-hn wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having the good sense to set up a system that can create Ubuntu and let it work is a kind of vision. I vaguely recall something about this being how Steve Jobs worked: he created a system where people could work on ideas, and he only acted as the gatekeeper who kept the bad ideas from reaching the market.

Yes, Shuttleworth has good leadership skills and has pushed an agenda all these years, not to mention putting quite a few $million where his mouth was. Do you think Jobs would have allowed a MacOs X update to badly break the way MS Office worked?

You mean apple and not jobs right?

Re: Why Mark Shuttleworth is important to desktop Linux

#54

Post by kapilvt »

oinksoft wrote: post #44
hack_edu wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

almost I have a ZenBook too as my primary Ubuntu machine. It's almost good enough. I also suffer all the points you list, each of which are 100% dealbreakers and perfect examples of how almost it is yet no one goes the extra mile. A little bit of effort/sway from Canonical would go a long way.

As they say, "God is in the details."

then buy certified hardware. thinkpads work great. or go pre-install with system76 or zareason.. the new system76 (clevo shell) 14.1 pro looks pretty sweet (quad core, 16gb ram, half the price of a macbook pro, ubuntu preinstalled) https://www.system76.com/laptops/model/galu1

Re: Why Mark Shuttleworth is important to desktop Linux

#55

Post by shmerl »

I disagree. The approach that Canonical advocated for Ubuntu won't help Linux desktop. It would help, well Ubuntu which only becomes increasingly isolationist with NIH syndrome on every corner. Unity, Mir etc, etc. The list will go on.

Jolla for example help Linux desktop much more than Canonical. They actually work on improving Wayland. I.e. they push mobile Linux using components which allow sharing the effort with the desktop Linux. Unlike Canonical.

Re: Why Mark Shuttleworth is important to desktop Linux

#56

Post by phaemon »

SeanDav wrote: post #48
themstheones wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently you've never tried gentoo.

"Apparently you've never tried gentoo." and this right here (sorry Parent, just using this as an example) is the reason that Linux has always been consigned to the ranks of the also-rans on the desktop. Someone will always come up with a reason why flavour x is better than flavour y. No matter what aspect of Linux is discussed, there will always be a significant proportion of users that think their flavour is better.…

> and this right here...is the reason that Linux has always been consigned to the ranks of the also-rans on the desktop. Someone will always come up with a reason why flavour x is better than flavour y.

No it isn't. The number of people who don't use Linux on their desktop, simply because someone else commented on a forum that they preferred one distribution over another, is utterly negligible. In fact, the theory is just ludicrous!

Re: Why Mark Shuttleworth is important to desktop Linux

#57

Post by mikevm »

vertex-four wrote: post #36
stinos wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes there are such environments. Never denied that. But as I said, I consider them only perfectly usable for computer savvy users who are able to fix what they break and configure what they buy and spend time on it . That last part kills it for me.

Honestly, as a current Debian Wheezy user... this isn't true any more. I haven't had to fix anything since I installed it. It's all Just Worked. If it didn't just work, I'd've bought a Windows license, as I have previously done. This is, in fact, the first Linux install that I've continued using for over a couple of months. The "it's not very usable" argument was correct in the old GNOME2/KDE3 world, but at least GNO…

> It's all Just Worked.

Try making the fonts pretty on non-Ubuntu distros. Good luck making it "just work".

Re: Why Mark Shuttleworth is important to desktop Linux

#58

Post by Shorel »

jb17 wrote: post #35
Shorel wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have tried it, it just takes a week to install, while Ubuntu takes some hours (I test several configurations until I'm happy with one).

How did it take you weeks to install? You basically just extract a small archive.

Then you set some env vars, compile a bunch of applications for hours and then realize that your env vars were wrong or you want to change them for some reason and you have to start compiling all over again.

Unless you want some console-only LFS. But that's not me.

Re: Why Mark Shuttleworth is important to desktop Linux

#59

Post by jjindev »

arkitaip wrote: post #8
Schiphol wrote: post #7

This article reads like it was written in 2006. The ideas that Linux distros lack polish, and that Ubuntu brought that to the table; that this is a capitalist world and Mark Shuttleworth understands capitalism, etc. are very, very trite.

Also, what kind of bizarro world is this where Android doesn't exist? You know, the Linux distro/interface that's leading the development on the consumer side? Smart phones, tablets and other mobile devices is the future for Linux and computing in general.

I only want Linux to succeed because I want there to be open software stacks, especially for poor and beginning developers. Android's implicit distribution of LInux core means a more secure open stack ecosystem (even if it is special purpose at the higher levels). The same is true for the fledgling ChromeOS. And actually, ChromeOS is the real next step and competition for "distros." I mean, does ChromeOS outnumber Ubuntu yet? How long will it take?

Re: Why Mark Shuttleworth is important to desktop Linux

#60

Post by wyz9 »

shmerl wrote: post #55

I disagree. The approach that Canonical advocated for Ubuntu won't help Linux desktop. It would help, well Ubuntu which only becomes increasingly isolationist with NIH syndrome on every corner. Unity, Mir etc, etc. The list will go on. Jolla for example help Linux desktop much more than Canonical. They actually work on improving Wayland. I.e. they push mobile Linux using components which allow sharing the effort with…

As I’ve said in my comment down below: I agree. Canonical isn’t very beneficial to the ‘Linux desktop’.
Post reply on HN