Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Mark Shuttleworth Reveals Ubuntu Netbook Remix

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the would-be-nicer-than-xandros-for-me dept.

Portables 245

Glyn Moody writes "In an interview with the Guardian today, Mark Shuttleworth talks about the upcoming Ubuntu Netbook Remix, a tailored version for ultraportables, produced in collaboration with Intel." The new version of Ubuntu is barely mentioned in this interview, but it's tantalizing -- SUSE looks nice on the HP Mininotes, but for people who are used to and enjoy Ubuntu, it's an option to look forward to.

cancel ×

245 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

What is it with Ubuntu (0, Troll)

Djatha (848102) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508502)

Seriously, what is it with ubuntu that everyone feels the need to speak about it? There is a new version of Ubuntu, so what. In the summary there was also e mentino of Suse's package for the HP notebook, why don't I hear anyone about that?

And about all the other linux distributions, why not mention those as well. There are many ``yet another linux distro''s out there, but also enough interesting, unique one which ad value to the linux distribution landscape.

Diversity differs!

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (3, Interesting)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508700)

A guy on my team has the new hp mininote or whatever it is - with Suse. Out of the box wireless causes system crashes and the camera doesn't work. Maybe Novell wont mind the lack of publicity.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (3, Insightful)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508802)

Diversity differs!

Hah! Prove it!

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

Djatha (848102) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509420)

Well, we all have seen the blessings of a monoculture on the desktop.

One of the things I like about linux is its versatility: it's applied in almost every environment and situation it could be applied. Chances are there will be a version tailored for your situation and your problem.

Besides speciality it is also good at generality, Ubuntu is one of the general flavours, like man others like OpenSuse, Fedora, Mandriva, etc.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (5, Insightful)

paroneayea (642895) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508872)

One of the things that's with Ubuntu is that it's the only group with a real sense of marketing. Granted, it's viral marketing, but if you look at http://ubuntu.com/ [ubuntu.com] versus http://debian.org/ [debian.org] you'll notice that one is quite pretty and modern, and the other looks like it fell out of a wormhole circa 1996. I even tried talking about a site redesign on #debian on freenode once and got flamed by someone saying "why the hell should the look of a website matter?" Perhaps it somewhat matters because when I was a newbie and knew nothing about the merits of distros, I overlooked Debian as being a fairly amateurish distro because, well, its website looked amateurish. Yes, I know better now, but we should acknowledge at least a little that appearances do matter.

Of course, it's not just the website. Ubuntu also has an army of Diggers, and it's overall just a really easy distro to get started with when you know nothing about Linux, because the project has made appealing to that crowd one of its goals.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (2, Interesting)

Tikkun (992269) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509250)

I personally like the design of the Debian site. It's easy to get the information I need, and the format hasn't changed in years so I'm comfortable with it. Besides, Debian isn't trying to take over the world, they're trying to make a kick-butt FOSS gnu/linux distribution.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1, Insightful)

skeeto (1138903) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509726)

Agreed. The Ubuntu website is the amateurish one that breaks the rules. For example, it is fixed width and doesn't flow to fit the screen, and it fails validation [w3.org] (Debian's site passes validation [w3.org] and flows). I also feel it just isn't as functional as the simpler, cleaner Debian site.

However, I am a bit of a minimalist (use IceWM, Emacs (small by today's computing resources), play nethack, etc.), making me less likely to be interested in Ubuntu anyway (besides some other reasons).

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (4, Insightful)

satoshi1 (794000) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509978)

Yeah, but which one is more appealing to the know nothing-"ooh this is pretty" crowd? That's where Ubuntu's website has it.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (5, Funny)

kipman725 (1248126) | more than 5 years ago | (#23510008)

minimalist and EMACS.. two words I never thought could be next to each other.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23510296)

As someone that designs websites this is the frustrating argument. Design is a combination of the organization of a website's content (function) in addition to its aesthetic appearance (form).

The two websites mentioned have very different goals in mind when structuring their content. Debian opted to hit users with a lot of data and options up front assuming their visitors are more advanced. Ubuntu has restricted the information on their home page in order to channel visitors to a few of the more common tasks, or reasons people come to the site, so as to not frighten off noobs with data overload.

From a purely aesthetic standpoint I give Ubuntu's site the edge but it could be a lot nicer. Debian would be the superior site all around if they just made some better color choices, toned down the absurd over-roundedness of their corner graphics and added some more padding/margin around the page so the content wasn't riding on the edges.

Just my $0.02.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (4, Insightful)

Djatha (848102) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509304)

Maybe you are right. Ubuntu has a very good PR machine running and it is easy to install and use, even for simple users. However, I fear that, as a result of all the publicity, when people start thinking about an alternative to windows, it'll be automatically Ubuntu, not the best distribution for their situation.

Seriously, are we looking forward to milions of clueless Ubuntu users?/P

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23509410)

You have to start somewhere.

Ubuntu has the advantage of being easy to try, so people aren't immediately put-off. It also has enough standard features that, over time, someone who is comfortable with Ubuntu could realize what suits their needs best, and seek the appropriate distro. This approach would in many cases be less of a shock than picking the "most appropriate" distro with zero Linux knowledge.

I see nothing wrong with using Ubuntu as a stepping stone for those who are interested in learning more, and an end-point for those who are satisfied with Ubuntu.

To answer your question: "Seriously, are we looking forward to milions of clueless Ubuntu users?/P" My answer, is yes.

I would prefer millions of clueless semi-secure Ubuntu users with the potential to become more Linux-minded to the current millions of clueless XP users.
For no other reason than the security flaws which cause their actions to affect us all.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23509436)

are we looking forward to milions of clueless Ubuntu users?
Better than millions of clueless Windows users I suppose.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1, Troll)

m.ducharme (1082683) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509494)

Probably for most users, Ubuntu is the best distribution for their situation (if they've fixed the wi-fi hassle, that is), or at least as good as any other options. Expert users will have a better idea what distro they need, but they're probably not looking for an alternative to Windows.

Since Ubuntu seems pretty serious about ushering in the Year of the Linux Desktop, yes, we may be soon seeing millions of clueless Ubuntu users.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

strabes (1075839) | more than 5 years ago | (#23510004)

We already are; have you read ubuntuforums.org lately? Half the threads sound like they were posted by 12 year old AOL children, acronyms and horrid grammar included.

Luckily when there are hundreds of threads on the same exact problem it generally gets fixed in the next version of ubuntu. (Case in point - you hardly ever see "I can't fix my screen resolution" or "X won't start on my ATI card after a fresh install" threads anymore.)

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

mhall119 (1035984) | more than 5 years ago | (#23510146)

Think of Ubuntu as a gateway drug, uh, distro. The switch from Windows to Ubuntu is a major change, but from there user can go to any gnome-based system with ease, even Fedora and Suse will have most of the same, familiar apps. Even if the Apps differ, they will use the same protocols and formats. Anything produced on Ubuntu can be used by other Linux users.

Yes, monoculture is bad, the recent issue with Debian's OpenSSH package proves that point painfully enough. But an Ubuntu monoculture will be short-lived, because once people get used to choice, they'll start making their own choices, and it won't always been Ubuntu.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

strabes (1075839) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509872)

This probably has to do with the goals & philosophies of the different distros. Debian's goal isn't to create the most marketshare for desktop linux as possible; ubuntu's is (sort of - see ubuntu launchpad bug #1).

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (2, Insightful)

foobsr (693224) | more than 5 years ago | (#23510240)

but if you look at ubuntu.com versus debian.org you'll notice ...

Alternatively, one may as well realize that there exist different target groups with different attitudes, needs, (and average age, (and knowledge), presumably).

CC.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (3, Insightful)

goltzc (1284524) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508970)

I think Ubuntu is a fine OS. I know there are other distros that are great and if you like them you should use them. However, Ubuntu provides two things a decent user experience with a great community for both novices and power users and more importantly momentum for "non traditional" Operating Systems. Any exposure people get to alternative platforms is a good thing. It's really nice to show people that there is alternatives to the crazy M$ way of things.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (2)

ubrgeek (679399) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509640)

I decided to re-purpose a G4 powerbook that I wasn't doing anything with and decided that it was a decent time to give a newer *nix ditro a shot. I had recently used Ubuntu to create a headless fileserver [bit-tech.net] and was pleased with it. On the laptop, not as much. Airport Extreme support - from the OS, _NOT_ the Ubuntu support forums - was really, really painful. I tried YellowDog, SuSE and a few others but no love from any. I went back to Ubuntu (actually Xubuntu [xubuntu.org] ) and spent a number of hours working through the Support Forums, which are really well categorized into different topics. I ended up getting wireless to work with _a lot_ of help from the numerous posts responding to Ubuntu beginners like myself. Was it easy? Nope. Was it doable? Yup, thanks to the great community support. I think that's the best answer to "What is it with Ubuntu." But as always, YMMV.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

alan_dershowitz (586542) | more than 5 years ago | (#23510176)

I have installed Ubuntu on multiple macs, a B&W Powermac, a G4 Mac Mini, a couple of different models of G3 iMacs, and an Intel Powerbook pro. Almost none of them went smoothly, there was always a major problem just getting it installed.

I like Ubuntu, I use Ubuntu, but one of the reasons I got into Linux was because it didn't have mysterious problems that kept things from working all the time. Ubuntu has re-introduced this into my life and I don't like it :-( but, take the bad with the good I guess, it really is a superior Linux breed overall in terms of usability.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

nawcom (941663) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509772)

I think Ubuntu is a fine OS.
You just proved a point. Ubuntu is making people forget that they are using GNU/Linux with gui tools.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 5 years ago | (#23510172)

1) No, they're using Linux. "GNU/Linux" is a term applied solely by people who have no appreciation for what a horrible, awkward-sounding mess of a name that is.

2) Ubuntu is most certainly an OS. It's a flavor of Linux. Windows XP, Windows Vista Home Premium and Windows Vista Ultimate are all different flavors of the Windows OS, however, each of them can be correctly called an OS. The fact that it isn't a completely separate OS does not make it any less an OS.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

mhall119 (1035984) | more than 5 years ago | (#23510276)

Ubuntu is an OS in the sense that most people use it. It is the kernel, the GNU system tools (it's misleading to call them userland for most users), and the GUI applications they use to do what users today do, browse the web, read/write email, chat, write document, etc. Most new Ubuntu users will rarely ever touch a GNU program.

Gnu/Linux alone may be an OS for geeks and command-line aficionados, but the vast majority of computer users include the desktop and GUI applications for standard tasks as part of their "OS".

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

Uncle Focker (1277658) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509016)

And about all the other linux distributions, why not mention those as well.
Because they aren't the topic of the article?

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23509028)

Do you really want to know Ubuntu's plan? [geekz.co.uk]

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

contrapunctus (907549) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509062)

Seriously, what is it with ubuntu that everyone feels the need to speak about it?
no rpm

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

Djatha (848102) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509342)

To be honest, I have had similar problems using deb packages and rpm packages: as long as the sofware you want to install is available in the repositories, there is no problem at all. Once you need ``exotic'' software or start fiddling with the system both packaging systems break down.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (5, Insightful)

lytles (24756) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509080)

I'm on the bandwagon. I've been using linux for 12 years, longer if you include machines administered by others. Ubuntu isn't perfect, but from what I've seen it's the best thing out there - it just works.

Everything is easy. Install a new package. Get the source for that package that isn't quite working right. Configuration. Update packages. Upgrade to the new version. It's all trivial, and just works. /etc is simple and clean.

And my folks are running it. When i visit I f with things. But when I'm not there, they can still upgrade packages, etc. And they're on dialup, and it still just works :)

We run suse on the servers at work, and i needed a very recent gcc with fortran and gomp. Ended up building from source, including a half dozen dependencies. On my workstation (ubuntu) "apt-get install gfortran libgomp". done. 5 hours vs 5 minutes. Actually, I think it took several iterations, maybe spent 2 full days installing it on suse.

Great for the power user.
Great for the beginner.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

cptsexy (948021) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509152)

Seriously, what is it with ubuntu that everyone feels the need to speak about it? There is a new version of Ubuntu, so what.

Come on now, there are at least 10 stories everytime Windoze releases a new OS.

Don't confuse diversity with diffusion (4, Insightful)

flattop100 (624647) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509176)

For the vast majority of Windows users, Linux needs an identity. They see Windows, OS X (Apple), and the great confusion and diffusion that is Linux. If Ubuntu is putting a face on Linux, then more power to Shuttleworth et al. For most new migrants, Ubuntu gives them the impression that Linux is fast, easy to use, and (more and more) friendly. These are tremendous inroads. Perhaps they can be starting points down other Linux paths.

Re:Don't confuse diversity with diffusion (1)

armanox (826486) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509488)

Ubuntu is not fast, nor is it friendly to me.....

here's my (brief) SuSE experience on the 2133 (4, Informative)

nguy (1207026) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509258)

There is a new version of Ubuntu, so what. In the summary there was also e mentino of Suse's package for the HP notebook, why don't I hear anyone about that?

The version of SuSE that ships with the HP 2133 has big problems: it's slow because it's burdened with inappropriate packages like Beagle, its wireless connectivity is poor, if you try to install packages, it asks you to insert a non-existent DVD into a non-existet DVD drive, external screen configurations are limited, and there's something wrong with the touch pad driver causing it to "stick". In addition, I found the administrative menus and preference menus to be cluttered and pretty obscure at times.

I used to be a SuSE user. I was going to give SuSE another try with the 2133, but it was such a miserable experience that I just blew it away and installed Ubuntu.

So, now you heard about SuSE on the 2133.

Could it be ... ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23509384)

Could it be because all the good developers bailed from Novell after selling out to M$? Those that are left are busy injecting M$ Patented Technology into as many SuSe packages as possible in as short a time as possible. That leave precious little time and staff for actually making stuff work. Thanks Miguel.

Re:Could it be ... ? (1)

nguy (1207026) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509552)

I think the reason that HP ships such a poor installation of SuSE is that they probably also view SuSE as a way of exerting pressure on Microsoft; shipping a good Linux system is secondary. Furthermore, for people who only want to use the machine for note taking and web browsing, the SuSE installation is sufficient, and that's all that these machines are intended for. HP may well not want you to be able to upgrade the software easily.

But, yes, I also think that the connection between Novell and SuSE contributes to SuSE's problems; I'm sure that the Mono developers push their stuff aggressively into SuSE. I have to correct you, though: Microsoft may have a patent on .NET (whether that's valid is an open question), but .NET packages do not usually ship with Mono and aren't usually needed. There are no known Microsoft patents on Mono as it usually ships with Linux systems like SuSE.

Re:here's my (brief) SuSE experience on the 2133 (1)

PeterKraus (1244558) | more than 5 years ago | (#23510360)

MONO heritage.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23509330)

*pssst!* over here, in the AC section!

Stop and think about it. Do you really want the Windowtards bussing into all of the Linux distros, spreading their pollution and flamage wherever they go? Do you want Debian and Slackware dumbed down to the Fischer-Price toy that Ubuntu is so the Windows converts can comprehend it with their tiny little minds?

Keep it like it is. Ubuntu makes a great asylum.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

nawcom (941663) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509824)

Keep it like it is. Ubuntu makes a great asylum.
If I could mod, I would mod you "Speaks the truth" a thousand time over.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

icke (661710) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509936)

Please keep this quiet. Who want's to be Mainstream? It's where all the hassle is.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

PeterKraus (1244558) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509556)

Yeah, and when you get an article about Exherbo (that Gentoo fork), which really is interesting in the concept, people are "OMG another useless distro" / "another useless package manager" / "another useless init-replacement".

Diversity differs.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

debatem1 (1087307) | more than 5 years ago | (#23510382)

I don't mind useless distros, having set a few of them up myself, but the package management madness needs to stop. What we really need is not a new PM, but a way for PMs to interoperate reliably.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (0, Troll)

nawcom (941663) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509730)

yeah i know. i've setup slackware for a ton of people young and old, but i guess people prefer the windows feeling or something. The biggest problem is that people expect to install ubuntu and things will just work. I install slackware, compile the needed drivers, and everything is ready to go in under 5-10 minutes. People stuggle with Ubuntu getting wireless to work, and updating kernels and modules and all the modules that the new kernel needs so that it supports the wireless driver module that it takes them hours. they don't even want to see a command line. then they post on ubuntu forums and struggle to get useful responses. Linux isn't the Desktop that people want it to be yet.

I feel the same way as you. I want to know what happened to GNU/Linux. "Huh? what's GNU/Linux? when I type in GNU in google it sends me to sum website wer i cant dl the dvd?!!111" I dunno. It's like distributions with good commericial advertising are completely different OSs. They're all the same. I'll continue to install "linux" via the slackware distro, and install it with all the added GUI goodness included that new users want. It's simple, not bloated with shit, and with a well compiled kernel.

I don't think Linux will ever leave it's development stage for a while. However, preinstalled OSs, and specific hardware is something different.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23509792)

Maybe because it's the only distro of Linux that's managing to make it into mainstream PC sales for the computer-illiterate? You can buy a PC with Ubuntu pre-installed, plug it in, and it just works. And you don't get shafted with an over-inflated software price!

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

mac1235 (962716) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509880)

The repositories nearest to me, (in South Africa), are updated first.

Why does everybody talk about Ubuntu...? (1)

AnomaliesAndrew (908394) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509992)

It's because the word Ubuntu is so damn fun to say!

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

wattrlz (1162603) | more than 5 years ago | (#23510060)

Seriously, what is it with ubuntu that everyone feels the need to speak about it? ...

Regular updates, good marketting, and it's just plain fun to say out loud.

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

BigJClark (1226554) | more than 5 years ago | (#23510204)


two words: System tools.

On a default installation of 8 (Hardy Heron, I believe) 'system tools' was not visible by default. Combined with the fact that it didn't accept my nvidia drivers. took me a bit longer before I was able to get the bloody thing up and running. I'm no linux noob, and Ubuntu isn't quite ready for mass desktop distribution. I'll stick with my tried and true RH9 :)

Re:What is it with Ubuntu (1)

Fri13 (963421) | more than 5 years ago | (#23510264)

Because for some people the Distribution = Operating System. They believe that everything what gets installed from CD/DVD disk to computer, is part of THE Operating System. For them it's hard to understand that Operating System stands between hardware and applications (HW - OS - Applications). For normal people, KDE or GNOME (any GUI) is THE Operating System and you have different OS if you change GUI, name or you get technical support from different company.

Many non-technical person believe that Ubuntu is different Operating System than OpenSuse, Mandriva, Fedora or any other distribution. Actually many technical person even believe that those are different OS like Windows and Linux (GNU/Linux) are.

And there are technical persons who believe that: Distribution == Operating System and "Distribution" is just a "nerd talk" to confuse normal users and it should not be used, instead using phrases like "You change Operating System if you delete Ubuntu and you install Debian".

Dislike Ubuntu (1, Funny)

zukinux (1094199) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508506)

As a Linux user, I despise Ubuntu, I can't explain why, but I think it's too GUIsh along with other things like
Not using conventions i.e (at least in the Ubuntu versions I've used) /sbin/dhcpcd doesn't exists.
I prefer the slackware way of /etc/rc.d/rc.X instead of /etc/init.d or /etc/rc.d/rc.(level)/rc.ssh?
but there are few good things about Ubuntu, it made Linux and Open Source much better to new-comers, works almost always out of the box
It's friendly (but silly IMhO) to people who migrate from Windows, and it's the greatest achievement made in the last few years. friendly OS for Windows migrating users.

Re:Dislike Ubuntu (4, Insightful)

allanw (842185) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508572)

What's wrong with /etc/init.d? It's just a matter of preference or old vs. new. I'm not quite sure how it works in Ubuntu, but in Gentoo, there's a tool that manages the services that run with each runlevel, and I prefer using that instead of manually moving around shell scripts.

Re:Dislike Ubuntu (1)

Locutus (9039) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509614)

then update-rc.d is for you.

BTW, the Sys-V init stuff is getting replaces with something else but can't recall the name. Something "new".

LoB

Re:Dislike Ubuntu (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23508664)

As a Linux user, I despise Ubuntu, I can't explain why, but I think it's too GUIsh along with other things like

Not using conventions i.e (at least in the Ubuntu versions I've used) /sbin/dhcpcd doesn't exists.

I prefer the slackware way of /etc/rc.d/rc.X instead of /etc/init.d or /etc/rc.d/rc.(level)/rc.ssh?

but there are few good things about Ubuntu, it made Linux and Open Source much better to new-comers, works almost always out of the box
It's friendly (but silly IMhO) to people who migrate from Windows, and it's the greatest achievement made in the last few years. friendly OS for Windows migrating users.
I can tell you why you despise it. Because it's considered mainstream linux, and you are an arrogant prick who previously enjoyed looking down on the masses.

BAWWWWWWW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23509034)

BAWWWWWW! Someone expects newcomers to Linux to learn the way Linux works! I don't want to use my brain! I want to be 1337 but put no effort into it!

Ironic captcha: sicken

Re:BAWWWWWWW (1)

clampolo (1159617) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509656)

I don't get this attitude. More people move to Linux ==> Linux is more commercially viable ==> More development of Linux and more apps for Linux.

The more the merrier as far as I'm concerned. I wish I could work on Linux at work, but because of its tiny market share, I can't get the compilers/CAD tools necessary. So I'm forced to be on Windows with Cygwin.

Re:Dislike Ubuntu (1)

armanox (826486) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509418)

You know, Slackware has lasted longer then any other distrobution for a reason...

Re:Dislike Ubuntu (3, Informative)

jwkfs (1260442) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508696)

Pretty sure the placement of init scripts in /etc/init.d is a LSB requirement.

Re:Dislike Ubuntu/sbin/dhcpcd doesn't (3, Informative)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508880)

/sbin/dhcpcd doesn't exists.


Uh, that's because it's called /sbin/dhclient3. It's called that because that's what it's called in Debian.

I prefer the slackware way of /etc/rc.d/rc.X instead of /etc/init.d or /etc/rc.d/rc.(level)/rc.ssh
/etc/init.d is POSIX and SVR4 ccompliant. Additionally, all major distros that support LSB put it there: Red Hat, SuSE, etc. So, uh, it does use conventions.

Re:Dislike Ubuntu/sbin/dhcpcd doesn't (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23509150)

the point was: bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaa it was not using MY conventions. call a whaaambulance [encycloped...matica.com]

Re:Dislike Ubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23509118)

Yeah you can mock; ubuntu is like the OEM pre-installs of Windows that bundle craplets galore. I don't like it because it's heavyweight (default Xubuntu takes twice the RAM as my gentoo/XFCE) and I don't like package management that splits off development headers. Then there's the pointless bullshit like AppArmor, not to mention the fact that as you say, SysV inits suck balls.

Re:Dislike Ubuntu (0, Troll)

nawcom (941663) | more than 5 years ago | (#23510214)

what i fucking hate is how they seem to plug their logo into open source software. I've seen this with OpenSUSE and Ubuntu. wanna use OpenOffice.org? well too bad, you're using OO.o OPENSUSE EDITION (imagine seeing the OO.o splash loading but instead of the classic splash you just see a big fat gecko penis with "OpenOffice.org" tattooed into it)

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23508510)

fp

Why reading the article is important... (0, Troll)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508560)

TG: How close are you to breaking even?

MS Not close. It will require time and ongoing investment. We've positioned ourselves for what we see as the future of software - unlicensed software, people having access to the software that they want at the time that they want it. The service ecosystem around that software will fund it. And if we are the company that has best anticipated that future, then we will be best positioned to benefit from it.
The bolding, of course, is mine - however the quote is from the article. This, my friends, is dangerous thinking right there.

The GPL **IS** a License -- It's right there in the name. Same goes for BSD, Apache, MIT, etc. They are licenses.

The notion that copyright or license don't exist or are evil is the downfall of free software, which exists only because of protection for so-called "imaginary property."

Ubuntu is unlicensed, eh? And everything that's included in it, eh? So I guess I can change some #IFDEF s, release a "new" operating system, and get rich, eh?

Free software is not "public domain," which is what unlicensed/uncopywritten means. And that means I can totally jack it and never have to admi to it -- not even in a BSDL fashion.

I'm starting to think that Shuttleworth might be moving up the "dangerous idiot" scale.

He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (5, Insightful)

XanC (644172) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508678)

He said the future is in unlicensed software. Which, IIRC, was the end-game goal for GPL. GPL is a temporary system to enforce freedom in an age of copyright restrictions. If software in the future becomes truly unlicensed, then there's no need for GPL.

Re:He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (0, Troll)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508706)

He said the future is in unlicensed software. Which, IIRC, was the end-game goal for GPL. GPL is a temporary system to enforce freedom in an age of copyright restrictions. If software in the future becomes truly unlicensed, then there's no need for GPL.
The dictatorship of the proletariat is only a temporary system to enforce freedom in an age of government and capitalism. If society in the future becomes truly Communist, then there's no need for the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Of course, we know how well that works out, too.

Re:He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (1)

Jherek Carnelian (831679) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508758)

The dictatorship of the proletariat is only a temporary system to enforce freedom in an age of government and capitalism. If society in the future becomes truly Communist, then there's no need for the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Of course, we know how well that works out, too.
So, you are saying that because a lot of ignorant people confuse Free software with socialism that any analogy with socialism is valid?

I think you have that backwards.

Re:He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (2, Insightful)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508904)

I'm saying he's making argument straight out of Marx to justify free software, he just changed the words.

Free software works more like third position distributivism, as advocated by Hilaire Belloc in The Servile State -- that is to say, there are three remedies to capitalism - socialism, slavery and property. Unchecked capitalism leads to slavery, but also necessitates socialist revolution UNLESS you take the third option - property.

That is to say that the means of production and exchange must be distributed as widely as possible, but that holdings are then privately owned. Free software is the perfect example of this. Anyone with a computer (means of production) and internet connection (means of exchange) can create value and trade for it and with it. Its generation of wealth at its purist.

However, we need a codified method of protecting our property - and that is the license. That is what allows us to exchange with each other without losing anything of our own but what we chose willingly to give up.

XanC on the other hand, chooses the Socialism path and paraphrases Marx. That is exactly the sort of argument that leads to "ignorant people" confusing what exactly it is that free software accomplishes - because many of the people who use and advocate it were confused in the first place.

However, its not really his fault that schools don't really teach Belloc or Chesterton but force Marx down your throat at every chance they get. Marx's analysis of the problem was correct -- his solution was flawed.

Re:He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (1)

Jherek Carnelian (831679) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509178)

XanC on the other hand, chooses the Socialism path and paraphrases Marx.
No, he just left out the analogy that usually accompanies that statement...
That in a free market where Free source is the de facto standard, no customer would consider a product without it. Just as no customer would consider purchasing car with the hood welded shut.

Re:He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508928)

So, you are saying that because a lot of ignorant people confuse Free software with socialism that any analogy with socialism is valid?
No. He's just saying that because he's Theo de Raadt.

Re:He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23509030)

Theo de Raadt is just a myth that we propagate so that people won't try BSD and we can remain super awesome and cool via obscurity and self-referential humor.

Unless I'm lying now.

Re:He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (1)

XanC (644172) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508792)

You're certainly right about that. But in a case like this where the "dictatorship" gives us an awful lot of software while oppressing nobody, I'm okay with letting the dreamers dream and letting the "temporary" system keep working.

Re:He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (1)

Uncle Focker (1277658) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509174)

When all else fails call your opposition communists.

Re:He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (2, Insightful)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509256)

"Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat." - Karl Marx

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/index.htm [marxists.org]

Pull your head out of your math books once in a while and read something. You might learn. I'm not making this stuff up.

Re:He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (2, Interesting)

harry666t (1062422) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509336)

It's not the idea of communism that was so bad, it was the implementation.

I like to think of Free Software as "communism done right", with real sharing, with real community, with people that are actually willing to help each other, without repressing the outstanding ones, and such. And on the long run FS seems to have less in common with communism that one might think it has in the first place. It has many of its advantages, but less of disadvantages...

And I think I know why it succeeded. The people who started the whole movement were not only speaking, but acting. And they weren't acting through any deeds of violence, they didn't lead an armed revolution, they just wrote code. All these "let's do $X, let's change the world, there should be $Y, why on earth $Z is so fucked up" people should do the same: shut up and start actually trying to improve the reality they're facing.

And since one's efforts to improve the world should always begin with improving oneself...

<shuts up and goes back to coding>

Re:He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (2, Insightful)

zebslash (1107957) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508794)

I know this argument is every frequently used, but even in a world where copyright would not exist, the GPL still brings another feature: it prevents a free software to revert to a proprietary one. If copyright law were completely abolished, it would still be permitted to take any source code, modify it and distribute it without disclosing the modifications. The GPL on the other hand says: ok, you can use my source, but if you redistribute to the public, you cannot close the source and you have to release your modifications. So for me the GPL is not a temporary system until copyright were abolished.

Re:He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (1)

fgb (62123) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509280)

I thought the GPL was based on copyright law. If copyright law suddenly disappeared, the GPL would not be legally binding anymore, would it?

Re:He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (1)

Uncle Focker (1277658) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509344)

If copyright law suddenly disappeared, the GPL would not be legally binding anymore, would it?
No, because you're acting as if a copyright and a software license are the same thing which they aren't. The copyright the author places on the work would go away, but the contract between the author and the user, the software license, would still be valid.

Re:He didn't say Ubuntu is unlicensed. (1)

zebslash (1107957) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509468)

You are right, and maybe I was unclear with my argumentation. If copyright law were abolished, then the GPL would not be legally binding indeed. Therefore, the actual effects of the GPL (preventing an open source software to become closed-source) would be lost. Everything would be Public Domain, and making a software proprietary would be based on the non-distribution of the modified source code. It would not be good to the GPL to resort on the abolishment of copyright laws, because in that case its intends would be also lost. Therefore the GPL is not a temporary system in my opinion, as it is very often argued.

Re:Why reading the article is important... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23508766)

I'll give him the benefit of doubt and say he probably meant unlicensed software as in you do not have purchase a license to use the software as it is given to you with it.

Re:Why reading the article is important... (1)

bheekling (976077) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508812)

You're interpreting "unlicensed" in a different way. Proprietary companies give out licenses for their software for customers to use. Using an "unlicensed" version of the software means either

a) Not following that license; by say using a personal license in a business environment for multiple machines
b) Pirating it; and hence not following the license under which the original copy (from which it was pirated) was distributed.

To be frank, I think you're nitpicking or being pedantic about how Shuttleworth used the word "unlicensed"

Re:Why reading the article is important... (5, Insightful)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508924)

Ubuntu is unlicensed, eh? And everything that's included in it, eh?

Sure. I've used an unlicensed copy of Ubuntu many times. It says right there in the GPL: If you don't want to accept the license, you don't have to in order to use the software. So I didn't. :-P

So I guess I can change some #IFDEF s, release a "new" operating system, and get rich, eh?

You could if you agreed to the GPL. If you didn't, then I imagine that the various Linux authors would take issue with your attempt to ignore copyright law.

Free software is not "public domain," which is what unlicensed/uncopywritten means.

No, unlicensed means unlicensed and public domain means public domain. Just because public domain software is unlicensed doesn't make all unlicensed software public domain. (i.e. A car stays in a garage. Is everything in a garage a car?) Unlicensed means exactly that: You didn't agree to a license to obtain the software. I don't agree to a license to obtain a book, either, but copyright law is still in full effect.

Mod parent back up (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509052)

Look, I use kubuntu and occaisionally develop for it (well actually kde). And I think that Mark is normally right on. But calling OSS unlicensed IS dead wrong. It is FULLY licensed and that is what makes it OSS. Mark almost certainly made a screw up in how he phrased it and I am sure will change it once it is pointed out to him. But to mod down bsDaemon over his last line is ridiculus. The entire rest of his comment IS the point of the license.

Re:Mod parent back up (1)

Uncle Focker (1277658) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509274)

But calling OSS unlicensed IS dead wrong. It is FULLY licensed and that is what makes it OSS.
Please quote where he said that OSS is unlicensed? Oh you mean he didn't? This is what he actually said:

We've positioned ourselves for what we see as the future of software - unlicensed software
Other than by purposefully misinterpreting his statement, I see nowhere in there where he says any current piece of OSS is unlicensed. Is there some omission that isn't being shown?

Re:Mod parent back up (2, Insightful)

Sancho (17056) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509322)

Others have pointed out the flaw.

I don't have to accept the GPL in order to use Linux legally. I do have to accept whatever Microsoft's EULA of the day is in order to use Windows legally. GPL software is generally unlicensed for use.

I think that the problem is that lots of people believe that "unlicensed" somehow means that you're running afoul of the law. It's bad PR to call Ubuntu "unlicensed", but that doesn't mean that it's technically inaccurate. License-free would probably be a better term.

Re:Why reading the article is important... (1)

Afecks (899057) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509428)

Ubuntu is unlicensed, eh?
Work on your reading comprehension. I don't know which is worse, your complete misunderstanding of a simple sentence or the snippy self-righteous attitude in which you demonstrate it.

MS (1)

SonOfSengaya (582624) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508686)

In the article Mark Shuttleworth only talks about his space trip. MS answers all the other questions. Conspiracy!

More games for Linux : Jack Keane (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23508688)

http://www.linuxgames.com/archives/10283

For those saying they support Linux, please prove it !

ZOMG ANOTHER UBANTO *FAP FAP FAP* (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23508708)

That's great. I don't get why ubuntu needs to release a new "distro" for every single configuration. How many 'buntus are we up to now?

It would be good if ubuntu would have a barebones installer and require at least SOME user input to determine the machine's role. There's no need to make a new distro for someone who chooses KDE over Gnome, for example.

Re:ZOMG ANOTHER UBANTO *FAP FAP FAP* (3, Insightful)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508982)

They do that because they get better integration that way. For example, when you install Ubuntu, it installs OpenOffice with GNOME support, but when you install Kubuntu, it installs OpenOffice with KDE support. Plus all the art differences, etc. Plus, problems with KDE packages won't hold up an Ubuntu release and vice-versa.

Re:ZOMG ANOTHER UBANTO *FAP FAP FAP* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23509078)

ubuntu = Linux for Dummies

Re:ZOMG ANOTHER UBANTO *FAP FAP FAP* (3, Insightful)

nguy (1207026) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509332)

That's great. I don't get why ubuntu needs to release a new "distro" for every single configuration.

Because it's easy for end users. And that's what should count. One reason Ubuntu is so popular is that they understand this.

Re:ZOMG ANOTHER UBANTO *FAP FAP FAP* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23509540)

If, for example, a user doesn't know how to choose which DE they want during installation, they should seriously rethink their choice to switch to Linux.

I understand that Canonical wants to make Linux user-friendly, but the extent that they go to achieve that is ridiculous at times. I don't think it's asking too much of someone to learn a bit about Linux before switching. If someone really wants to switch to a *nix OS and give it no thought whatsoever, then OS X has been a great choice for years, and it doesn't come with the problems that plague ubuntu.

Re:ZOMG ANOTHER UBANTO *FAP FAP FAP* (1)

nguy (1207026) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509700)

If, for example, a user doesn't know how to choose which DE they want during installation, they should seriously rethink their choice to switch to Linux.

I know how to do it, I just don't want to bother. With Ubuntu, I stick the right CD in the drive, boot up, see that everything works, and click on "install", and I get a predictable installation. I can give a CD to others, and they get the same installation. It's easy. It's good. It's user-friendly.

I understand that Canonical wants to make Linux user-friendly, but the extent that they go to achieve that is ridiculous at times.

Good. That's the right attitude.

latest version of ubuntu (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23508784)

= EPIC FAIL
by far the worst release ever

Re:latest version of ubuntu (1)

thereofone (1287878) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509096)

You know, when people see the abbreviated version of your troll it reads:

Anonymous Coward = EPIC FAIL

Intel who? (1)

YourMotherCalled (888364) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508806)

MS: "We're working with Intel, which produces chips custom-made for this sector."

Oh, *that* Intel! I was thinking of the other one.

Netbook remix on Launchpad (3, Informative)

LotsOfPhil (982823) | more than 5 years ago | (#23508818)

There isn't much on the project's website: here [launchpad.net]

Will they fix the HD issue? (0, Troll)

HomerJ (11142) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509354)

Will they stop pointing fingers and actually attempt to fix Ubuntu killing hard drives on laptops?

I boot Ubuntu on this laptop, and it sounds like there's a midget inside of my laptop with a Nintendo Zapper. "clicka clicka clicka" every other minute.

The "fix" of just turning off all power management isn't a fix.

DJ Mark? (2, Funny)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#23509530)

Aww, you mean it's not "Ubuntu Castlevania Goron Temple Remix?" Damn.

It's about time (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23509674)

I'm running Ubuntu 8.04 on my Lenovo X61 and had to go back to XP until linux catches up with things or until I have time to fix all the problems.

Problems = No hard disk protection, bad power management, rotation only works if you disable DRI (and therefore OpenGl), pen input is problematic. Fan control = broken. Basically, everything that makes a portable or a tablet work on a hardware level is at version 0.1. Sure XP is broken on many things, but, the basic stuff seems to be there, and, XP's handwriting recognition is outstanding. Too bad it's on XP.

Other than that, Ubuntu 8.04 makes a fine desktop OS.

Re:It's about time (1)

satoshi1 (794000) | more than 5 years ago | (#23510156)

Other than that, Ubuntu 8.04 makes a fine desktop OS.
That's the idea. I don't recall Ubuntu ever being designed or targetted for tablets.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?