Number of Linux Distributions Surpasses Number of Users !!!!!!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Moshe Goldfarb
  • Start date Start date
* Ignoramus22864 peremptorily fired off this memo:

> At that point I started asking questions and tried debian (on an old
> machine).
>
> Really liked debian.
>
> Then I realized that it is 3 years old, with no new release in sight,
> and does not support new hardware that I had to have set up with linux.
>
> After more looking found that ubuntu is like debian, only newer.
>
> Started using ubuntu everywhere and could not be happier.

That's cool, but just wanted to correct a misconception. Debian had a
new release not that long ago. Also, you can use the testing and
unstable versions if you want more recent versions of software.

I'm running from "unstable" right now, and thus am using fairly new
versions of software.

There are some issues. Sometimes packages come up broken, or some app
behavior changes a little.

Usually, a few days later the problem goes away (I tend to update every
day, and there's always a dozen or so new versions in the queue.) I've
been pretty happy with Debian unstable.

Anyway, if you're happy with Ubuntu, you are free to tell everyone else
to shove off <grin>.

--
Unfortunately, many programs are so big that there is no one individual who
really knows all the pieces, and so the amount of code sharing you get isn't
as great. Also, the opportunity to go back and really rewrite something
isn't quite as great, because there's always a new set of features that
you're adding on to the same program.
-- Bill Gates
 
>See here for some interesting pointers:
>http://wiki.debian.org/AptPinning

See? It's stuff like that which makes Debian so useful. They not only walk you
through how to do something, but give you examples too.

Now let's take a look at something Ubuntu specific like UpStart. Even the
UpStart FAQ doesn't contain a single example how to do anything with it, and
its answers are vague and pointless (like "consult your distro's docs). That's
Ubuntu for you.
 
* netcat peremptorily fired off this memo:

> On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 14:30:53 -0400, Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
>> Which is what you can get from many other distros.
>
> Sure, Debian can be made to look just like Ubuntu. The difference is
> that it would take a new user with no linux experience months to years
> of screaming hair-pulling effort to accomplish that, ...

Not really true, in my opinion.

> which would never
> actually happen because he'd burn the damn Debian CD's and install
> Windows first. So, to Ignoramus' list I'd add:
>
> 5) Consumer-friendly and Desktop-Ready out of the box.

Debian is actually much closer to Ubuntu than you seem to realize.

However, I would still give Ubuntu the edge for the "newbie".

--
The only problem with Microsoft is they just have no taste, they have
absolutely no taste, and what that means is -- I don't mean that in a small
way I mean that in a big way -- in the sense that they they don't think of
original ideas and they don't bring much culture into their product.
-- Steve Jobs as quoted in the PBS documentary Triumph of the Nerds (1996)
 
ysdywmf wrote:
> "gls858" <gls858@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:%231E2YzOmIHA.980@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> netcat wrote:
>>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:25:34 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:25:34 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 12:24:14 -0500, netcat wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:07:44 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course Linux has been improving, but being able to create your own
>>>>>> distribution of the month caters to a small subset of geeks and does
>>>>>> nothing but further the confusion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The vast majority of the market are USERS not geek programmer types.
>>>>>> That is one major reason why Linux does not appeal to average Joe.
>>>>> You don't have to be a geek. Under Ubuntu all it takes is one command
>>>>> to generate a LiveDVD using your current setup. You can use the LiveDVD
>>>>> on future reinstalls or if you plan to install to more than one
>>>>> machine, and you can also boot it on the same machine or a different
>>>>> one and have the same settings and applications as on your HD. Throw in
>>>>> a USB drive for persistent storage and you can even save data and
>>>>> configuration changes.
>>>> You've just proved my point.........
>>> Fortunately, the average user is smarter than a flounder...
>> Are you sure about that?
>>
>> gls858
>
> Well, in your case............
>
>

I deal with end users all the time. I know for a fact that a great
majority are clueless and wouldn't know what Linux is, let alone how
install and use it.

I've loaded Ubuntu on a VM and played with it for a while. The only
problem I had was getting the video up and going. Took a while to find
the solution and I got it working, but the average user is just going to
quit at that point and say the hell with it.



gls858
 
Jeff Glatt illuminated comp.os.linux.advocacy by typing:

> <snip>
> I actually looked for the _visible_ differences and I noted only one menu item
> had moved to the Administration menu under Ubuntu, plus Debian had a Home icon
> on the desktop. (I think that there may also have been a gnome "system
> shutdown" applet in the panel on Ubuntu). But there are shockingly few
> differences from an enduser perspective. I have no idea (other than pure
> imagination) where people have gotten this idea that Ubuntu is somehow
> different and more suitable for even new users than Debian is. They are
> remarkably similiar distros (well, Debian testing and Ubuntu, anyway).

You seem to have a maniacal downer on Ubuntu.

Here some of the bullet points regarding its existance.

1) Debian has "ad-hoc" releases. Ubuntu uses a strict 6 monthly
development cycle. This was set up by Mr. Shuttlworth because he
thought Debian was stagnating. Ironically, Debian has benefited from
this move
2) Shuttleworth saw Debian as ultimately "amatuerish" and thought
there was mileage in the system that was being lost. Canonical was
formed to offer support for business in the same way Red Hat and Suse
do. Funnily enough, Debian has benefitted here too.
3) The development team that was employed by canonical actually
supplies as much back to debian as it takes. Both distributions
develop. It is simply a "fork".

Just because you don't like "brown" and "fanbois" doesn't make it any
less of a significant development in Linux circles. If you wish to
keep your blinkers on, then feel free.

Me. I'll remain open to the good things coming from both Debian and the
well run Ubuntu fork.

I cannot understand such belligerent buffoonery as I keep reading in
your posts, dare I say, drivel. Still. You're entitled to your
"anti-brown" "Anti-fanboi" stance, if that is the way you want to
stand.

I won't argue with you.

--
Moog

"If this is gonna be that kinda party I'm gonna stick my dick in the
mashed potatoes"
 
Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> writes:

>>See here for some interesting pointers:
>>http://wiki.debian.org/AptPinning
>
> See? It's stuff like that which makes Debian so useful. They not only walk you
> through how to do something, but give you examples too.
>
> Now let's take a look at something Ubuntu specific like UpStart. Even the
> UpStart FAQ doesn't contain a single example how to do anything with it, and
> its answers are vague and pointless (like "consult your distro's docs). That's
> Ubuntu for you.

Did Ubuntu eat your first born?
 
gls858 wrote:
> ysdywmf wrote:
>> "gls858" <gls858@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:%231E2YzOmIHA.980@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> netcat wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:25:34 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:25:34 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 12:24:14 -0500, netcat wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:07:44 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course Linux has been improving, but being able to create
>>>>>>> your own
>>>>>>> distribution of the month caters to a small subset of geeks and
>>>>>>> does
>>>>>>> nothing but further the confusion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The vast majority of the market are USERS not geek programmer
>>>>>>> types.
>>>>>>> That is one major reason why Linux does not appeal to average Joe.
>>>>>> You don't have to be a geek. Under Ubuntu all it takes is one
>>>>>> command
>>>>>> to generate a LiveDVD using your current setup. You can use the
>>>>>> LiveDVD
>>>>>> on future reinstalls or if you plan to install to more than one
>>>>>> machine, and you can also boot it on the same machine or a different
>>>>>> one and have the same settings and applications as on your HD.
>>>>>> Throw in
>>>>>> a USB drive for persistent storage and you can even save data and
>>>>>> configuration changes.
>>>>> You've just proved my point.........
>>>> Fortunately, the average user is smarter than a flounder...
>>> Are you sure about that?
>>>
>>> gls858
>>
>> Well, in your case............
>>
>
> I deal with end users all the time. I know for a fact that a great
> majority are clueless and wouldn't know what Linux is, let alone how
> install and use it.
I would agree and these are the users who know that Vista is a piece of
garbage but they continue to use it. But that choice is not totally
without merit. They use the computer for work and hobbies. They
purchase a scanner, printer or some other hardware and the outside of
the box says it works and supports Vista. They hook up the hardware and
stick a DVD in the drive and the software and drivers gets installed
somewhere (they could care less) and they are not even aware of the name
but they see a choice on the desktop or in the start menu and they can
use the device.

In Linux, (much of the time) you need to chase down drivers and the
software (and then need to scrounge folders to find what ever to create
an icon or a menu item) and then only get some of the functionality.

When this changes then in Linux and when there is some degree of
standardization in the installs and the packages then you can fault the
Windows or Mac user.

The basic truth is they do not want to know and they should not have to
know. Knowing is for those who have an interest in the process as well
as the result. Most of the posters here (except ...LOL who does not
have the intelligence to know) are in that category.
>
> I've loaded Ubuntu on a VM and played with it for a while. The only
> problem I had was getting the video up and going. Took a while to find
> the solution and I got it working, but the average user is just going to
> quit at that point and say the hell with it.
>
>
>
> gls858
 
>You seem to have a maniacal downer on Ubuntu.

I have a "maniacal downer" on Ubuntu hype, and the people it comes from,
especially when it's a disservice to other entities of equal merit. My "beef"
isn't with Ubuntu itself. It's with Ubuntu hype, and the folks who conjure it
up.

I wish more people would share that, because otherwise, it's a real disservice
to the great many other distros that have _as much to offer_, but are
shortchanged whenever Ubuntu is specifically cited as "the user-friendly
distro" -- as if none of the others aren't equally as capable. They are.

>Debian has "ad-hoc" releases.

There is nothing wrong with releasing software only after it has been
sufficiently developed and tested. That being said, Debian does set some goals
for release dates, even if they are extended for whatever reason the devs see
fit. Furthermore, the existence of "official" release dates is no guarantee
whatsoever that Ubuntu will be more uptodate at any given moment than Debian
testing. In fact, it really can't be since Ubuntu is based upon testing.

Anyway, the fact that Debian sets no rigid pattern for release dates is no
basis for suggesting that it is any less capable for any particular linux user
than Ubuntu, and therefore is not a valid reason for the amount of overhyping
that Ubuntu receives.

>Shuttleworth saw Debian as ultimately "amatuerish" and thought
>there was mileage in the system that was being lost. Canonical was
>formed to offer support for business in the same way Red Hat and Suse
>do. Funnily enough, Debian has benefitted here too.

It's allowable to sell services to support GPL software. If your point is to
imply that my "beef" with Ubuntu is due to that, you're mistaken. Anyway, this
is irrelevant to why Ubuntu is overhyped (unless what you're suggesting is that
it _deserves_ to be overhyped simply because this helps Canonical sell more
services. Following that reasoning, why shouldn't Fedora, Suse, Mandriva,
Xandros and other distros get as much hype? I'm not implying that they should,
just because they're from commercial companies. I'm just following your
apparent reasoning). The fact that Debian is not entangled with any commercial
model is no basis for suggesting that it is any less capable for any particular
linux user than Ubuntu, and therefore is not a valid reason for the amount of
overhyping that Ubuntu receives.

>The development team that was employed by canonical actually
>supplies as much back to debian as it takes.

Some Debian folks have gone on record as complaining about the inadequacy of
Ubuntu's downstream contributions. There has been no strict accounting of what
Ubuntu has given back versus what it has gotten, and I do not see evidence to
support that as much Ubuntu coding has made it back to Debian versus what
Ubuntu takes away.

Indeed, just recently some Ubuntu contribution toward the "triggers" package
was rejected, and the Ubuntu contributer had his commit privileges revoked for
the way he handled that contribution. There may not be as much equal symbiosis
as you suggest.

[The rest of your post was an irrelevant personal attack, and has therefore
been deleted without further comment].
 
>Linonut
>I'm running from [Debian] "unstable" right now, and thus am using fairly new
>versions of software.
>
>There are some issues. Sometimes packages come up broken, or some app
>behavior changes a little.

>Usually, a few days later the problem goes away (I tend to update every
>day, and there's always a dozen or so new versions in the queue.)

Yes. I experienced that once myself. That can happen with the testing branch
(which is why Debian also offers the stable branch).

So is Ubuntu better in this regard? Absolutely not. As is typical in my posts,
I like to cite specific examples and evidence to support my views, so I'll give
you an Ubuntu example:

Gutsy Gibbon broke the MidiSport driver package that still appears in the
repository for Gutsy Gibbon. The drivers used to work in the previous version
of Ubuntu, but the Ubuntu devs monkeyed with the way that StartUp and udev
interoperate, and the udev entry for those drivers no longer works. Obviously,
they didn't test those drivers before they released the final version of Gutsy,
nor did they update them to work. That happens. It doesn't make Ubuntu worse in
the larger sense (well, unless you need support for a MidiSport), but it sure
as hell doesn't make Ubuntu more "user friendly" than other distros, despite
the Ubuntu hype otherwise. Ubuntu can adopt all the release schedules it wants,
hand out all the free CDROMs it can, get as many fanbois to knock it up to the
top of the distrowatch charts, spin it any way you want... but in the end,
Ubuntu offers nothing that you can't get from most other distros out there
(including problems).
 
Moog <efcmoog@gmail.com> writes:

> Jeff Glatt illuminated comp.os.linux.advocacy by typing:
>>>You seem to have a maniacal downer on Ubuntu.
>>
>> I have a "maniacal downer" on Ubuntu hype, and the people it comes from,
>> especially when it's a disservice to other entities of equal merit. My "beef"
>> isn't with Ubuntu itself. It's with Ubuntu hype, and the folks who conjure it
>> up.
>
> Do you want to know something?
>
> Probably not.....
>
> Well I'll tell you anyway.
>
> Your ridiculous stance against Ubuntu actually promotes it.
>
> Work it out for yourself. If you're capable.

I'm surprised at you Moog. It appears you do not read what he is
saying. He is right about the fan boy element. He is right about the
differences being minor. He does not say "Ubuntu is rubbish" but rather
that it does not merit it's iconic status on a technical basis.
>
>> I wish more people would share that, because otherwise, it's a real disservice
>> to the great many other distros that have _as much to offer_, but are
>> shortchanged whenever Ubuntu is specifically cited as "the user-friendly
>> distro" -- as if none of the others aren't equally as capable. They are.
>
> So. What you're promoting is freedom to "do as you will" unless of
> course, you disagree with it.
>
> Nice work.
>
> Free and open souce, on *your* terms.

Oh no. You obviously dont think too much dilution is a bad thing. Many
of us do. See the mess in sound sub systems previously discussed for a
reason of choice not being a good thing.

>
>>>Debian has "ad-hoc" releases.
>>
>> There is nothing wrong with releasing software only after it has been
>> sufficiently developed and tested. That being said, Debian does set some goals
>> for release dates, even if they are extended for whatever reason the devs see
>> fit. Furthermore, the existence of "official" release dates is no guarantee
>> whatsoever that Ubuntu will be more uptodate at any given moment than Debian
>> testing. In fact, it really can't be since Ubuntu is based upon testing.
>>
>> Anyway, the fact that Debian sets no rigid pattern for release dates is no
>> basis for suggesting that it is any less capable for any particular linux user
>> than Ubuntu, and therefore is not a valid reason for the amount of overhyping
>> that Ubuntu receives.
>
> Sorry. I completely disagree. Debian has *no* structure with releases.
> It gives the impression of....
> "We'll release when we want to".

When it works.

>
> If you see that as a Ubuntu failure....then fine. Keep thinking what
> you want, I don't own your mind
>

It is a failure if its broken. And you know as well as I do that many of
the upgrade paths bork the system.
 
Moog <efcmoog@gmail.com> writes:

> Hadron illuminated comp.os.linux.advocacy by typing:
>> Moog <efcmoog@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Jeff Glatt illuminated comp.os.linux.advocacy by typing:
>>>>>You seem to have a maniacal downer on Ubuntu.
>>>>
>>>> I have a "maniacal downer" on Ubuntu hype, and the people it comes from,
>>>> especially when it's a disservice to other entities of equal merit. My "beef"
>>>> isn't with Ubuntu itself. It's with Ubuntu hype, and the folks who conjure it
>>>> up.
>>>
>>> Do you want to know something?
>>>
>>> Probably not.....
>>>
>>> Well I'll tell you anyway.
>>>
>>> Your ridiculous stance against Ubuntu actually promotes it.
>>>
>>> Work it out for yourself. If you're capable.
>>
>> I'm surprised at you Moog.
>
> Why?
>
>
>> It appears you do not read what he is saying.
>
> I read everything he said and responded to it.
>
>>He is right about the fan boy element.
>
> Do you think? Do you think I am a fan of Ubuntu or a fan of a
> distribution that actually promotes linux. Do you think I would
> support Gentoo, Ot Slackware, ot Debian, or Suse? or Mandirva before
> Ubuntu? What *i* want is for a user to actually embrace linux. Whatever
> form it may come in.

We're not talking about you.

It's the general element. I would have thought you could see the
difference. You are a good advocate with a growing knowledge and a sane
approach to issues. You are not the element.

But he is right. The Ubuntu "hype" is detrimental to the others in many
ways and almost disrespectful to the Debian heads who created 99% of
what Ubuntu is. It became apparent to me a while back the the "fanboi"
element was starting to drag Ubuntu down - hence my migration to
Debian. It wasn't a hard thing to do - they are basically pretty much
the same thing but Debian being better monitored IMO.
 
Moog <efcmoog@gmail.com> writes:
>
> Grow up. FFS.
>
>> [The rest of your post was an irrelevant personal attack, and has therefore
>> been deleted without further comment].
>
> Figures.
>
> In fact, it wasn't an attack against you. But if the cap fits.

This:

,----
| I cannot understand such belligerent buffoonery as I keep reading in
| your posts, dare I say, drivel.
`----

was not a personal attack against him? Crikey Moog, bad day at the
office?

It was as personal attack as can be. Did you share a glass with NoStop
or something recently?
 
>Moog
>It appears you do not read what he is
>saying. He is right about the fan boy element. He is right about the
>differences being minor. He does not say "Ubuntu is rubbish" but rather
>that it does not merit it's iconic status on a technical basis.

Absolutely. Has there been anything ambiguous whatsoever about what I'm saying
such that anyone couldn't sum it up that very same way? I mean, you've almost
lifted parts of my posts verbatim to get at the above.

He's employing a debating tactic known as "arguing with a straw man". I'm not
going to rant and rail at him, and call him a moron, or whatever. I'm just
going to point out that he is not directly countering the points I raise with
his own evidence/examples, but rather employing questionable tactics (and
definitely engaging in some personal attacks).

I don't know. Maybe he doesn't like long posts. Maybe he thinks I'm too
long-winded, and he got bored/distracted, never finished reading, and responded
based upon all his own assumptions about what I said. Maybe if I was the Mac
user he thinks I am, I'd be able to use Finder to discern an explanation.

>>> I wish more people would share that, because otherwise, it's a real disservice
>>> to the great many other distros that have _as much to offer_, but are
>>> shortchanged whenever Ubuntu is specifically cited as "the user-friendly
>>> distro" -- as if none of the others aren't equally as capable. They are.

>> So. What you're promoting is freedom to "do as you will" unless of
>> course, you disagree with it.

>> Nice work.

>> Free and open souce, on *your* terms.

>Oh no. You obviously dont think too much dilution is a bad thing. Many
>of us do. See the mess in sound sub systems previously discussed for a
>reason of choice not being a good thing.

I don't think he's talking about the proliferation of distros above, Hadron.
(I'm not talking about that either. I'm talking about Ubuntu being overhyped,
which is not at all what Moog is obviously talking about). I'm not sure what
he's alluding to above, but I believe that it may be setting up a straw man
argument to me. It sounds like he's accusing me of being against open source. I
don't know where he's getting that from, but it may just be the establishment
of a straw man argument, upon which to base some future personal attack. (ie,
Maybe I'll someday post something he doesn't like, and he'll say "This is
coming from the same guy who is against open source", or something, instead of
having to write some long, studious, serious reply to whatever point I raise).

Strange place you have here. It's sort of the open source version of Alice In
Wonderland.

>>Debian has *no* structure with releases.
>> If you see that as a Ubuntu failure....then fine. Keep thinking what
>> you want

>It is a failure if its broken. And you know as well as I do that many of
>the upgrade paths bork the system.

Of course. I cited a specific example with the Gutsy Gibbon MidiSport drivers.
(I'm not sure if he'll respond with a "That's it?? You base it all on one
example?" which of course would be incredibly disingeuous because we know that
there hasn't been just one example of that sort of thing. The citing of one
example does not preclude the existence of other examples. That should be
logically evident). Just because there was a hard timetable for the final Gutsy
Gibbon release at 6 months from the previous Ubuntu release did not prevent the
existence of a broken package in GG's repository. It happens. Just like in
other distros... those other distros that Ubuntu has nothing over, despite the
hype (in this case, the hype that its release schedule makes it "better". It
certainly wasn't better that a piece of my hardware stopped working. And who
knows who else had other troubles? Thank god I didn't have a wireless card
because I heard about those poor folks). I had to research the problem (and I
found the correct answer on a Gentoo forum -- not the Ubuntu forums). I had to
run gedit with administrator privileges to edit a udev config file and rewrite
a udev rule. Does that sound "user friendly"?? Debian testing didn't break
those drivers. It may not always be that way. But it certainly was this time...
once again... altogether now... despite the fanboi hype that Ubuntu is so much
more "user friendly" than all those other distros, especially the stuff that is
claimed not to be user friendly such as Debian. Bah. Hype. Ptooey. (Quick!
Duck, Hadron)
 
Hadron wrote:
> Moog <efcmoog@gmail.com> writes:
>> Grow up. FFS.
>>
>>> [The rest of your post was an irrelevant personal attack, and has therefore
>>> been deleted without further comment].
>> Figures.
>>
>> In fact, it wasn't an attack against you. But if the cap fits.
>
> This:
>
> ,----
> | I cannot understand such belligerent buffoonery as I keep reading in
> | your posts, dare I say, drivel.
> `----
>
> was not a personal attack against him? Crikey Moog, bad day at the
> office?
>
> It was as personal attack as can be. Did you share a glass with NoStop
> or something recently?



Well to me it does beg question as to why you complain on a Ubuntu
newsgroup about Ubuntu. Then I remembered that this is cross posted from
COLA. That does answer a lot.
caver1
 
measekite, the dumbest jackass ever, wrote:

>
> I would agree and these are the users who know that Vista is a piece of
> garbage but they continue to use it.
----------------------------------------
You're a known idiot who also just happens to be a real moron!
Frank
 
Hadron wrote:
> Ignoramus22864 writes:
>> Hadron wrote:
>>
>>> Google up pinning and stable, testing and unstable.
>
>> I don't know, maybe I missed something, but I did not think at the
>> time that "testing" was appropriate for applications where money is at
>> stake.
>
> Thats a bit of old rhetoric. The fact is that what is viewed as "stable"
> in Ubuntu is in the distro/repository known as "testing" in
> Debian. Google it up.
>
> "stable" does not mean it works - it means nothing much changes except
> for security updates. HPT made this mistake too and ended up looking a
> bit of a clot.

http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/01/hadron-quark-troll.html

[citaat]
Debian Stable is one of the most widely used distros for mission
critical applications and where one wants minimal impact to production
work. Very few require bleeding edge software to be productive.

Yet Hadron insists that Debian Stable is full of bugs and too backward
for usage:

Subject: Re: [News] Sister OS to Linux, OS-X Has Better TCO than
Microsoft Windows
Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2008 09:50:07 +0100
Message-ID: fr08c1$9e1$2@registered.motzarella.org


> Hadron has an apparent inability to recognise how more consistent usage
> of Debian Stable will only help his usage of the product, preferring unstable
> versions of Debian if not for the only reason as an opportunity to
> attack Linux/OSS.

Once more for the hard of brain power : I use testing. Not unstable.
And I use it for a reason - Debian Stable is simply too buggy and
backward and I cant be arsed to manage pinning or selectively
monitoring backports.
Click to expand...
[/citaat]

> The Ubuntu team dont wave a magic wand and make all this stuff work you
> know. They take it, try it and if it "works for them" its probably in.
>
> If you get a good testing/stable mix using debian pinning you can then
> lock it down and have it work for years.
>
> Don't listen to the fanboyz.

ROTFLOL! K just sprayed my monitor with coffee! You're a riot,
really!

--
HPT
 
On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:11:55 -0700, Frank <fb@osspan.clm> wrote:

>measekite, the dumbest jackass ever, wrote:
>
>>
>> I would agree and these are the users who know that Vista is a piece of
>> garbage but they continue to use it.
>----------------------------------------
>You're a known idiot who also just happens to be a real moron!
>Frank


Just for Frankie fu*k-up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRAUlK8_2VE
 
Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> writes:

>>Moog
>>It appears you do not read what he is
>>saying. He is right about the fan boy element. He is right about the
>>differences being minor. He does not say "Ubuntu is rubbish" but rather
>>that it does not merit it's iconic status on a technical basis.
>
> Absolutely. Has there been anything ambiguous whatsoever about what I'm saying
> such that anyone couldn't sum it up that very same way? I mean, you've almost
> lifted parts of my posts verbatim to get at the above.
>
> He's employing a debating tactic known as "arguing with a straw man". I'm not
> going to rant and rail at him, and call him a moron, or whatever. I'm just
> going to point out that he is not directly countering the points I raise with
> his own evidence/examples, but rather employing questionable tactics (and
> definitely engaging in some personal attacks).
>
> I don't know. Maybe he doesn't like long posts. Maybe he thinks I'm too
> long-winded, and he got bored/distracted, never finished reading, and responded
> based upon all his own assumptions about what I said. Maybe if I was the Mac
> user he thinks I am, I'd be able to use Finder to discern an explanation.
>
>>>> I wish more people would share that, because otherwise, it's a real disservice
>>>> to the great many other distros that have _as much to offer_, but are
>>>> shortchanged whenever Ubuntu is specifically cited as "the user-friendly
>>>> distro" -- as if none of the others aren't equally as capable. They are.
>
>>> So. What you're promoting is freedom to "do as you will" unless of
>>> course, you disagree with it.
>
>>> Nice work.
>
>>> Free and open souce, on *your* terms.
>
>>Oh no. You obviously dont think too much dilution is a bad thing. Many
>>of us do. See the mess in sound sub systems previously discussed for a
>>reason of choice not being a good thing.
>
> I don't think he's talking about the proliferation of distros above, Hadron.
> (I'm not talking about that either. I'm talking about Ubuntu being overhyped,
> which is not at all what Moog is obviously talking about). I'm not sure what
> he's alluding to above, but I believe that it may be setting up a straw man
> argument to me. It sounds like he's accusing me of being against open source. I
> don't know where he's getting that from, but it may just be the establishment
> of a straw man argument, upon which to base some future personal attack. (ie,
> Maybe I'll someday post something he doesn't like, and he'll say "This is
> coming from the same guy who is against open source", or something, instead of
> having to write some long, studious, serious reply to whatever point I raise).
>
> Strange place you have here. It's sort of the open source version of Alice In
> Wonderland.

Actually COLA is merely a game. Moog normally only hangs out in the
Ubuntu help group and is a good helper there to many. Unfotunately a lot
of the COLA gang have migrated there too with their "works for me", "it
was ready 10 years ago" and "you're clearly a windows or mac user" type
insults.

>
>>>Debian has *no* structure with releases.
>>> If you see that as a Ubuntu failure....then fine. Keep thinking what
>>> you want
>
>>It is a failure if its broken. And you know as well as I do that many of
>>the upgrade paths bork the system.
>
> Of course. I cited a specific example with the Gutsy Gibbon MidiSport drivers.
> (I'm not sure if he'll respond with a "That's it?? You base it all on one
> example?" which of course would be incredibly disingeuous because we know that
> there hasn't been just one example of that sort of thing. The citing
> of one

Well, I know one single update munged my dbus and I stuck with it for
ages trying to manually fix it before reinstalling. This has never
happened in debian. Ditto for their inconsistent handling with fstab and
UUIDs.

> example does not preclude the existence of other examples. That should be
> logically evident). Just because there was a hard timetable for the final Gutsy
> Gibbon release at 6 months from the previous Ubuntu release did not prevent the
> existence of a broken package in GG's repository. It happens. Just like in
> other distros... those other distros that Ubuntu has nothing over, despite the
> hype (in this case, the hype that its release schedule makes it "better". It
> certainly wasn't better that a piece of my hardware stopped working. And who
> knows who else had other troubles? Thank god I didn't have a wireless card
> because I heard about those poor folks). I had to research the problem (and I
> found the correct answer on a Gentoo forum -- not the Ubuntu forums). I had to
> run gedit with administrator privileges to edit a udev config file and rewrite
> a udev rule. Does that sound "user friendly"?? Debian testing didn't break
> those drivers. It may not always be that way. But it certainly was this time...
> once again... altogether now... despite the fanboi hype that Ubuntu is so much
> more "user friendly" than all those other distros, especially the stuff that is
> claimed not to be user friendly such as Debian. Bah. Hype. Ptooey. (Quick!
> Duck, Hadron)

One of the things that people will hail is something as tricky as
manually installing codecs versus Ubuntu doing it for you. This is
nice. But nice enough to stay to make Ubuntu so much better than Debian?
No. Debian has come on a lot recently - but credit where credit is
due. I think a LOT of that is to do with Ubuntu pushing their
hand. There were too many "works for me" dinosaurs in Debian too who
couldn't believe that someone wouldn't be able to edit their own
xorg.conf .....

--
If you take both of those factors together then WinXP is a flop, selling
*less* than Win 98 by a factor of two.
comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they the lunacy in advocacy
 
gls858 wrote:
> ysdywmf wrote:
>> "gls858" <gls858@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:%231E2YzOmIHA.980@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> netcat wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:25:34 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:25:34 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 12:24:14 -0500, netcat wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:07:44 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course Linux has been improving, but being able to create your
>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>> distribution of the month caters to a small subset of geeks and does
>>>>>>> nothing but further the confusion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The vast majority of the market are USERS not geek programmer types.
>>>>>>> That is one major reason why Linux does not appeal to average Joe.
>>>>>> You don't have to be a geek. Under Ubuntu all it takes is one command
>>>>>> to generate a LiveDVD using your current setup. You can use the
>>>>>> LiveDVD
>>>>>> on future reinstalls or if you plan to install to more than one
>>>>>> machine, and you can also boot it on the same machine or a different
>>>>>> one and have the same settings and applications as on your HD.
>>>>>> Throw in
>>>>>> a USB drive for persistent storage and you can even save data and
>>>>>> configuration changes.
>>>>> You've just proved my point.........
>>>> Fortunately, the average user is smarter than a flounder...
>>> Are you sure about that?
>>>
>>> gls858
>>
>> Well, in your case............
>>
>
> I deal with end users all the time. I know for a fact that a great
> majority are clueless and wouldn't know what Linux is, let alone how
> install and use it.
>
> I've loaded Ubuntu on a VM and played with it for a while. The only
> problem I had was getting the video up and going. Took a while to find
> the solution and I got it working, but the average user is just going to
> quit at that point and say the hell with it.

Pretty much the same applies for end users of other operating systems.
Only that they think that there is no alternative and, after all, they
have payed for the stuff.
Windows is usually adapted for the specific hardware it comes with: all
the necessary drivers are pre-configured so that there are no nasty
surprises when the user starts the machine. Even a re-install will only
be painless if it is done from a backup copy of the vendor-supplied
installtion or from the vendor-supplied CDs.
I very much doubt that Joe Averageuser is able to buy Windows Vista in a
shop and install it on his PC and have *everything* running smoothly.


--
These are my personal views and not those of Fujitsu Siemens Computers!
Josef Möllers (Pinguinpfleger bei FSC)
If failure had no penalty success would not be a prize (T. Pratchett)
Company Details: http://www.fujitsu-siemens.com/imprint.html
 
Back
Top